central valley

Overthrow capitalism?

^ sooner than I thought

^^ False, the question and the answer cannot exist in the same universe.

The possibility exist that a new labor shortage will come of this. But for right now the only solution for these folks is to move to where they can afford to live, have decent schools and job opportunities. California may no longer be a viable option. And this will have a ripple effect on the local economy as small businesses start to close because they can not get an affordable work force for service jobs. Government jobs like police fire and teachers will also be harder to fill as these folks probably can't afford to live in Silicon Valley and commuting 80 miles one way is getting to be a bit too much.

The answer has been and continues to be long commutes. I live in the central valley and work in silicon valley. I drive 88 miles each way, fortunately I can work from my home studio a few days a week. I prefer living in the central valley...renting a shitbox apartment for $3200 a month, or $1.2 million for a crappy tract house was getting too insane.

Central Valley cities like Fresno are making some progress in becoming affordable alternatives for tech start ups,  but still, everyone wants to be in Palo Alto..

That's a terrible answer, for the environment and general quality of life.

mass public transit

the other option is to roll the clock back to live in servants.  no commute, 24/7 service for the Lord and Lady of the house.  

Quality of life in silicon valley is good for that tiny percentage that can afford it, or for a while for those who pretend to afford it. It's crazy here, and no end to the craziness in sight.

This is part a long standing problem that reflects the way resources are framed as part of "opportunity" and class.

When suburbia was all the shit decades ago, people in the inner cities were abandoned, and long range commute became the norm for those who were not "fortunate" enough to find work in a local blue collar industry. 

Now that gas is expensive, commutes are long, and urban cores are becoming "more desirable," we are seeing all this displacement occurring and those who are forced to move will face a new set of challenges finding a job that can afford them the commute back into the city core.

It's a bit different here, the bay area is nothing but a huge suburb, except for San Francisco. In silicon valley there is no urban core. Downtown San Jose is a pathetic urine stenched mess. Silicon valley tries to hip things up with fake new "urban cores" stuck out in the middle of suburbia, still suburban sprawl, but with higher density blocks creating more traffic as people drive from fake urban core to their R&D park tech jobs.

So there is no answer to gentrification and quite frankly if I had property that I could transform from low income tenants to high income tenants I would do it in a heartbeat because that is what is best for my business and family and everybody else here would to...maybe.

Maybe the answer is to pay the developers not to kick out people and redevelop. Then probably anybody that owned property would tell the city to pay up or they will redevelop if they intended to or not .

I don't know it is tough 

This has happened before so does anyone know how it all plays out? Did the service job employees get massive wage increases in order to be able to live in the area?

I will just wait until grocery stock boys are making $50.00 an hour and move out there!