Hacker News Reader

No, it's saying that concentration of wealth geographically is harmful to economic development. The reality is though, that distributed wealth grows much more slowly.

View on HN

That's not even close to what it's saying. It's saying people in places like SF don't want others coming in/and or want to maximize their home value, so they stop new housing being built, which keeps supply of housing down and thus less people can live in areas where there are lots of work opportunities.

You're thinking too narrowly. Your point is correct, but the broader point is that there should be those same work opportunities spread out around the country so that you don't have to move to SF or wherever to get a good job. That is what hurts the economy on a broader scale.

Employment is "sticky" in that personal mobility can't move as fast as capital mobility and that seems to have led to concentrations of wealth.

Network effects generally mean that the sort of work opportunities you see in SF or New York or Boston can't be spread around the country.

EDIT: Heck, industrial network effects of the sort you saw in Pittsburgh and Detroit and now see in Shenzhen can't be spread around either.

Right, and stated as much in my original reply.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com