Is it time to just give up on Boston? (Worcester: sales, 2014)

[timberline742]

Originally Posted by msRB311

Most places in the US have quality internet access these days. This isn't Africa. The talent will go to where the jobs are. They dont have to be in Cambridge MA.

Eli lilly is HQ'ed in Indianapolis. Walmart is HQ'ed in Bentonville, AK. Somehow this country bumpkin places manage to make it work without bring in Cambridge, MA.

You ignored all the other components (they're all generally needed), and you're wrong. Giant swaths of the U.S. have poor internet coverage. Heck, there are Commonwealth of Mass State Government Offices in the CT Valley and Western Mass still using DIAL UP internet. Big geographic swaths of Mass have poor internet. The jobs go where the talent / R&D and funding is more than the other way around.

Eli Lilly has a big lab, where? Kendall Square. Walmart is a retail company, yeah, they're all over, and it started in 1962. If it started today, it wouldn't be located there. I have no idea why you are focusing on Headquarters. They're not relevant.

[id77]

Originally Posted by OutdoorLover

I don't agree with the idea that the economic standard is binary - if that's what you're proposing, but it is true, that like anything else, when you have big changes impacting a large, heterogenous population, there are going to be winners and losers. If you get better restaurants and people are taking better care of their homes, and property values increase, then not all people will welcome that. Property owners will have their taxes go up with new assessments and property renters will have their rents increase. Of course higher tax revenues will allow the city/town to take better care of infrastructure and spruce up parks, etc, which is good, but it is still more $$$ out of pocket. At least in some cases, if there was a crime problem, then some of the perpetrators may be forced to move out because they can't afford to live there anymore. The people left behind and those moving in would welcome that change, but those forced out, would not.

It doesn't by definition have to be binary, but it will be because nobody's figured out how to solve income inequality. In an ideal world, the influx of money would bring everyone up, but we don't live in an ideal world and the real world kicks out the poor to make more room on the couch for the rich.

Gentrification and income inequality has happened in countless cities and even nations and none of them have created a solution to solve it. New York couldn't figure it out, San Francisco and Los Angeles couldn't figure it out, Boston's got it bad given the number of threads around here screaming about cost of living in the area. Austin and some other up-and-coming cities are watching it spiral out of control in real-time.

What I'm proposing is that doing the same thing in Springfield isn't going to suddenly bring forth a different result.

EDIT: Before it's mentioned, Denmark has come close but it took measures that would never fly in the US.

[msRB311]

Originally Posted by timberline742

You ignored all the other components (they're all generally needed), and you're wrong. Giant swaths of the U.S. have poor internet coverage. Heck, there are Commonwealth of Mass State Government Offices in the CT Valley and Western Mass still using DIAL UP internet. Big geographic swaths of Mass have poor internet. The jobs go where the talent / R&D and funding is more than the other way around.

Eli Lilly has a big lab, where? Kendall Square. Walmart is a retail company, yeah, they're all over, and it started in 1962. If it started today, it wouldn't be located there. I have no idea why you are focusing on Headquarters. They're not relevant.

Oh ok, I guess you know it all huh?

So what if Eli lilly has a lab in Boston? they have labs all over the world.

I dont know of a soul in MA who has dial up internet. you're really reaching now to try to be right.

[timberline742]

Originally Posted by msRB311

Oh ok, I guess you know it all huh?

So what if Eli lilly has a lab in Boston? they have labs all over the world.

Yes, they have labs where the talent is. Where they can attract the talent. Where the R&D. Ding ding.

Originally Posted by msRB311

I dont know of a soul in MA who has dial up internet. you're really reaching now to try to be right.

I do. I know people who work in offices with dial up. More people in homes with dial up I suspect though you don't know a lot of people in places like Heath or Washington.

You keep saying things that make zero sense. If a company could locate in a low cost area like Speculator, NY, and have as much success as they would locating in Cambridge MA, THEY WOULD. They don't for very good reasons. The reasons have been explained, multiple times, by multiple people. You seem to think that all you need is a computer and zoom, and most work can be done anywhere; and people will go there for those jobs. NOPE.

[msRB311]

Well they should get with the program then

You are not making sense either. There is no reason for companies to set up shop only in Boston anymore.

[timberline742]

Originally Posted by msRB311

Well they should get with the program then

You are not making sense either. There is no reason for companies to set up shop only in Boston anymore.

They don't "only" in Boston.

It amazes me that you know more about where a company should place their facilities than the leadership of those companies.

[mdovell]

Originally Posted by timberline742

Yes, they have labs where the talent is. Where they can attract the talent. Where the R&D. Ding ding.





I do. I know people who work in offices with dial up. More people in homes with dial up I suspect though you don't know a lot of people in places like Heath or Washington.

You keep saying things that make zero sense. If a company could locate in a low cost area like Speculator, NY, and have as much success as they would locating in Cambridge MA, THEY WOULD. They don't for very good reasons. The reasons have been explained, multiple times, by multiple people. You seem to think that all you need is a computer and zoom, and most work can be done anywhere; and people will go there for those jobs. NOPE.

Actually Washington does have high speed internet. Most of the Berkshires does as part of the last mile. Wired west was interesting.

https://www.whipcityfiber.com/washington/

Even Mt Washington
https://mountwashington-ma.gov/mount...dband-network/

Satellite internet does work as well.

https://broadbandnow.com/Massachusetts

89% of stare household have internet access
89% of that is broadcast, cell data is 9%

[timberline742]

Originally Posted by mdovell

Actually Washington does have high speed internet. Most of the Berkshires does as part of the last mile. Wired west was interesting.

https://www.whipcityfiber.com/washington/

Even Mt Washington
https://mountwashington-ma.gov/mount...dband-network/

Satellite internet does work as well.

https://broadbandnow.com/Massachusetts

89% of stare household have internet access
89% of that is broadcast, cell data is 9%

Some of Washington does. Some. Its not available to everyone/everywhere. It's not available to the family I know living there. Total non option. The government standard for "broadband" is 25 mbps. That bleeping sucks. Not good enough for many work from home tech jobs.

Having a utility in a town does not mean everyone/everywhere can access it.

You people keeping cherry picking one little thing in a big list of needs. ALL is needed for an area to thrive. Great, you have the internet? OK. Oh, no VC funding? Out of luck. Or no top talent being produced? Out of luck. Or no amenities that talent want? Out of luck. Relatively few places have the critical mass of it all to thrive. Boston, luckily, does.

Springfield does not. No matter how much the Commonwealth invests in it, like they do with it being an opportunity zone, it's not going to thrive.

The government offers incentives for businesses to locate in places like Springfield, Brockton, Fall River, etc already. They have a program just for that. If companies aren't picking those locatioins, with these economic incentives, they have their reasons.

[GeoffD]

Originally Posted by OutdoorLover

I don't agree with the idea that the economic standard is binary - if that's what you're proposing, but it is true, that like anything else, when you have big changes impacting a large, heterogenous population, there are going to be winners and losers. If you get better restaurants and people are taking better care of their homes, and property values increase, then not all people will welcome that. Property owners will have their taxes go up with new assessments and property renters will have their rents increase. Of course higher tax revenues will allow the city/town to take better care of infrastructure and spruce up parks, etc, which is good, but it is still more $$$ out of pocket. At least in some cases, if there was a crime problem, then some of the perpetrators may be forced to move out because they can't afford to live there anymore. The people left behind and those moving in would welcome that change, but those forced out, would not.

Err. We have Proposition 2 1/2. If average valuation goes up, the tax rate goes down proportionally. You could have an increase of more or less than 2 1/2% per year on an individual property but the average for the city/town is capped at a 2 1/2% increase without a vote for an override.

For places like Springfield, this is moot. The labor force is a disaster. The Hartford metro has a good talent pool but Springfield doesn’t.

[msRB311]

Welp looks like the good ol south shore plaza will be getting some lab space:

https://patch.com/massachusetts/brai...come-lab-space

' the suburbs are becoming increasingly attractive to life science companies that are turning away from core industry communities such as Boston and Cambridge because of skyrocketing real estate prices. One example is Moderna, which is moving its headquarters from Cambridge to its expanding Norwood campus.'

Sweet.