How is the economy hitting Silicon Valley?? (San Jose, Sacramento: house, layoffs)

[mysticaltyger]

Originally Posted by bigdumbgod

Mother Necessity has arrived. Now that even high-flying yuppies have to come back to earth and actually think about how they live in order to get by, we'll surely see more heads coming together to come up with solutions, as opposed to spending inordinant amounts of time on free-wheeling excess and self-congratulations ruling the day.

Down from Camelot, they now must dwell with the peasants. For now.

I hope you're right!!!

[mysticaltyger]

I agree with you, except for the comment about restaurants. I think SJ has plenty of decent restaurants. But maybe that's because I don't have the wallet for expensive places. Also, I live downtown, so that helps. When I moved form Willow Glen to Downton, I felt like I moved to a new city...even though I've worked downtown for years. It's a different feel when you live downtown (and I like it).

[mysticaltyger]

I tend to agree with Ludachris on this one. SJ is boring for a city it's size. That doesn't mean there's "nothing to do". But it just doesn't have that vibrant feel that other large cities do. I know the city is working on that. But fundamentally, I think SJ's and SV's general problem is that techies are well...kind of boring. This is not really a well balanced area like other large metro areas (Denver being a good example). We're too much of a one industry town which attracts too many people with the same mindset.

[Ludachris]

Originally Posted by mysticaltyger

I agree with you, except for the comment about restaurants. I think SJ has plenty of decent restaurants. But maybe that's because I don't have the wallet for expensive places. Also, I live downtown, so that helps. When I moved form Willow Glen to Downton, I felt like I moved to a new city...even though I've worked downtown for years. It's a different feel when you live downtown (and I like it).

I'll give SJ credit on diverse cuisine. They do have plenty of little hole-in-the-wall places that I did enjoy, that's for sure. I just found that a number of restaurants that we enjoyed were not in SJ. And more planning should have gone into putting more places to eat throughout SJ, not just in downtown.

I think San Jose is simply too dependent on the fact that the surrounding areas have a lot of attractions (or maybe that's simply what is preventing it from becoming a more attractive big city). For instance, there is no aquarium because people go to Monterey for that. SJ doesn't put much of an effort into a zoo (unless you think Happy Hollow is nice) because SF has a good one. SJ isn't a huge destination for concerts mainly because Mountain View has a more popular venue. The nightlife isn't all that vibrant because most people choose to go to SF for that vibrant nightlife experience.... see what I'm getting at? There are simply better places to go in the Bay Area for many things you'd want to do in SJ. Turns out SJ is just average at best in most areas. That's why it seems like just a big suburb of SF in some ways - which is what everyone in SF sees it as anyway.

They do have a nice Jazz festival though (and some other festivals downtown). And I give them credit for working on giving people reasons to visit SJ. They just have a lot more work to do. That's all I'm really trying to say. For being such a large city, there are more reasons for people living in SJ to venture out of the city than for people living around SJ to venture in.

[krudmonk]

San Francisco's zoo and aquarium are both out-shined locally, but that doesn't stop them. They have no arena for when big acts come to play (in Oracle and HP). Are they a suburb? Their biggest industry is tourism in a region rich in computers and biotech. Valley companies have their own buses to fetch people from San Francisco. Are they a suburb? No, not really.

Your argument seems to rest a lot on image so you pick and choose points to support it. I personally have not met people who regularly go to SF for anything except maybe baseball games. In a couple years, even that could be available here (which does nothing to dispel notions of "boring"). Proximity should not be a hangup. If SJ continues to work away from family, NIMBYs and boring tech folk, then it should be just fine.

[Ludachris]

Originally Posted by krudmonk

San Francisco's zoo and aquarium are both out-shined locally, but that doesn't stop them. They have no arena for when big acts come to play (in Oracle and HP). Are they a suburb? Their biggest industry is tourism in a region rich in computers and biotech. Valley companies have their own buses to fetch people from San Francisco. Are they a suburb? No, not really.

Your argument seems to rest a lot on image so you pick and choose points to support it. I personally have not met people who regularly go to SF for anything except maybe baseball games. In a couple years, even that could be available here (which does nothing to dispel notions of "boring"). Proximity should not be a hangup. If SJ continues to work away from family, NIMBYs and boring tech folk, then it should be just fine.

We're just going back and forth with different opinions. You're one of the few people I've come across to disagree with the point that SJ simply lacks a lot of the ingredients most big cities its size have. Obviously SF is unique, but when you compare SJ to other large cities in the west like Seattle, San Diego, Denver, etc. it doesn't stack up well in many areas. It's almost as if it just doesn't seem to have a clear identity. And having lived there for so many years we grew tired of its short comings.

I'm picking and choosing the points that I noticed having been born and raised in the area. Again, I liked living there early on - it was when I got older the story changed. When you move away from an area it makes it much easier to evaluate it and make comparisons with less bias. There's always the natural reaction to be defensive when someone makes negative comments about the area you live in. That's understandable.

In any event, I feel I've made my point and you've made the point that you disagree. No need to keep saying the same things over and over.

[sonarrat]

Originally Posted by Ultrarunner

Just saw a story on NBC 11 where 1000 people showed up for 200 positions at a new Hotel/Spa in Menlo Park. Some of the on camera job seekers seemed to have advanced degrees

Do you think the valley can support a new Spa/Hotel?

I'll be sure to give them a visit so I can be served by some of the fatcats for a change.

[krudmonk]

- Where did I say San Jose wasn't lacking certain elements? Of course it is. I simply took issue with your very simplistic assessments. If SJ does not meet a particular criteria threshold, then it's categorized with Fairfield as opposed to San Diego. To me, that displays a gross inability to think critically. You drag San Francisco into the debate because you, like many people, bow to some sort of fame hierarchy.

- Your views are, by your own admission, based on your experiences in suburban neighborhoods several years ago. I don't see anyone moving to the Excelsior and saying "San Francisco is boring." That mysticaltiger guy said that moving from Willow Glen to downtown was like "another city." I imagine Blossom Hill to downtown is an even greater contrast, no?

- I told you that I grew up in Evergreen but that I don't like it much at all. If I am defensive in regards to SJ simply because I am native, why would the same principle not apply to a particular community within? Should I not also blindly propagate good views of Evergreen, too? By your logic, I would. Yet, I am not.

I'm sure this elaboration/clarification of my stance will be met with more diplomatic brush-offs. "Let's agree to disagree" and not analyze the situation beyond the surface.

[mysticaltyger]

Yeah, for the most part I agree with you. I would personally love to see the end of the car culture, and people doing more things closer to home. As much as I hated it, $4 gas helps with that becaue people think twice about driving an hour just to go out.

[Ludachris]

Originally Posted by krudmonk

- Where did I say San Jose wasn't lacking certain elements? Of course it is. I simply took issue with your very simplistic assessments. If SJ does not meet a particular criteria threshold, then it's categorized with Fairfield as opposed to San Diego. To me, that displays a gross inability to think critically. You drag San Francisco into the debate because you, like many people, bow to some sort of fame hierarchy.

I drag SF into the debate because it's right next door to SJ and it's a big city. And because it has a lot of what SJ lacks. I don't bow to any sort of fame hierchy (yet another subtle jab). Believe it or not, SF is a very popular city and many in the Bay Area enjoy spending time in the city. You don't tend to see that same sentiment being expressed for SJ. It just doesn't have the same draw. I don't think you'll argue with me there.

Originally Posted by krudmonk

- Your views are, by your own admission, based on your experiences in suburban neighborhoods several years ago. I don't see anyone moving to the Excelsior and saying "San Francisco is boring." That mysticaltiger guy said that moving from Willow Glen to downtown was like "another city." I imagine Blossom Hill to downtown is an even greater contrast, no?

Yes. My view of San Jose is based on living in Evergreen, Blossom Hill, and Berryessa areas for a few years at a time, with short stints in the Cambrian and Santa Teresa areas. However, you make it sound like I never ventured out of those areas. I spent a great deal of time downtown at various bars, clubs, restaurants, etc. A good friend of mine used to live near downtown. I know what downtown has to offer, and though it wasn't bad, it wasn't as good as say, what Denver has to offer (in my opinion). And I've only experienced Denver for a few short years - while living in a suburb of Denver. If SJ has changed dramatically in the 3.5 years we've been gone, I apologize.

Originally Posted by krudmonk

- I told you that I grew up in Evergreen but that I don't like it much at all. If I am defensive in regards to SJ simply because I am native, why would the same principle not apply to a particular community within? Should I not also blindly propagate good views of Evergreen, too? By your logic, I would. Yet, I am not.

I never said anything about being native. You no longer live in Evergreen, yet you still live in San Jose - which means my point could still hold true in this case. However, I don't necessarily think you're blindly propogating good views of SJ. You're just looking at it from a different point of view. That viewpoint being from someone who is content with the things we were not content with. We just found SJ to be lacking in terms of its amenities with it's size and population when compared to other cities in the west that we've spent time in.

Originally Posted by krudmonk

I'm sure this elaboration/clarification of my stance will be met with more diplomatic brush-offs. "Let's agree to disagree" and not analyze the situation beyond the surface.

I did all the analyzing I needed to do when we chose to move away. And I got well beyond the surface. I just don't see the need to take it any further, as some of your comments show that you've already formed an opinion of me and I don't feel like being insulted because I have a "simplistic view" of San Jose or because I'm a "prude" that "bows to some sort of fame hierchy".