Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I get your point, but that is not what we was talking about. He was referring to specifically innovation (Which SF trumps NYC at) and GDP Growth.
Now... the question begs... will the 2010s economy of SF flow into the 2020s? NYC seems a lot healthier and more stable in 2023. Development in NYC is staying stable, construction in the MSA (ie., Jersey City, North Jersey, FFC CT, etc) are wayyyy up. NYC Metropolitan Area has made an amazing comeback in the past 5 years, even more so after COVID. I would say as of now, NYC is healthier than SF.
Yeah - No, I understood clearly. Not to reveal myself too much, but I work in the innovation/tech sector and find this notion that SF is the primary center of innovation in this country to be a bit overblown (this really belongs to SJ and NYC - which these companies much engage with anyway because the major public markets are here). One needs to look at the methodology and longitudinally to make such a claim, especially with comparing a regional economy with NYC’s. Wall Street is forcing “innovative” companies to be more efficient (turns out many weren’t leveraging good R&D build sustainable businesses) and that innovation in SF isn’t really jumping over to other sectors such as the arts, government and non profits.
Yeah - No, I understood clearly. Not to reveal myself too much, but I work in the innovation/tech sector and find this notion that SF is the primary center of innovation in this country to be a bit overblown (this really belongs to SJ and NYC - which these companies much engage with anyway because the major public markets are here). One needs to look at the methodology and longitudinally to make such a claim, especially with comparing a regional economy with NYC’s. Wall Street is forcing “innovative” companies to be more efficient (turns out many weren’t leveraging good R&D build sustainable businesses) and that innovation in SF isn’t really jumping over to other sectors such as the arts, government and non profits.
SF/SJ Bay Area, then Boston area, then NYC for innovation, in broad sense.
Yeah - No, I understood clearly. Not to reveal myself too much, but I work in the innovation/tech sector and find this notion that SF is the primary center of innovation in this country to be a bit overblown (this really belongs to SJ and NYC - which these companies much engage with anyway because the major public markets are here). One needs to look at the methodology and longitudinally to make such a claim, especially with comparing a regional economy with NYC’s. Wall Street is forcing “innovative” companies to be more efficient (turns out many weren’t leveraging good R&D build sustainable businesses) and that innovation in SF isn’t really jumping over to other sectors such as the arts, government and non profits.
I think this is spot on for the tech sector. But are you considering bio and pharma and robotics and other major "innovation" arenas?cSF is the epicenter, with Boston a relatively distant #2, per capita.
When you look at Global indexes and rankings, biopharma and R&D and tech and higher education and progressive policies are always called out as criteria, if not THE criteria. Because, the output makes a huge impact on the "new" world.
How wrong you are.... investors are requiring tougher ESG benchmarks and it's becoming a highly competitive market. Cities with real plans for sustainability and ESGs are considered less risky and more attractive for capital.
"Davos nonsense" lol...
Personally I feel the continued push from US citizens to near-shore and decouple from the global economy will eventually push these globalist clowns to the fringes of influence.
While I think there should be some pushes to more renewable ways of doing these things, the Davos set is going about it all wrong, in a controlling and tolitarian manner. It's not going to fly with a large chunk of people in the US and it's already getting increasingly large backlash.
How wrong you are.... investors are requiring tougher ESG benchmarks and it's becoming a highly competitive market. Cities with real plans for sustainability and ESGs are considered less risky and more attractive for capital.
"Davos nonsense" lol...
Bingo.
That's a matter of fact, not a matter of opinion.
Sustainability = Risk Reduction, in the eyes of those in power. Whether you and I agree or not, doesn't make this less of a reality.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
