Amazon says "Bah to NYC"

[BeauV]

...and I was on about the political, economic, and cultural barriers to the acquisition of skills, as the meritocracy becomes hereditary. I am much more worried about the deteriorating environmental and sociopolitical climate my daughter will inherit than her economic prospects.

The entire area of hereditary privileges is quite complex, to me at least.

First, I will do anything to help and protect my kids and grand kids - full stop. But, a side effect of that is that if I've been successfull financially or militarily (like I conquered a country and I'm now King), then my "helping and protecting" turns into making sure that my growing family is set up to inherit the privileges I have gained. I don't see a way to easily reconcile the very real desire to help and protect my family with a weaker desire to make the country a fair playing field. This is particularly difficult, given there are so many actors within every country who have almost no desire to have the country be a fair playing field.

Second, it's really hard to figure out how to actually make a meritocracy work. For example, a skill I just seem to have been born with is getting to know people and helping them by connecting them with others who can be of value. This skill produces no product, creates to ideas, builds nothing of value, but enables the existence of a very powerful loosely knit group of capable people. As a result, I've literally been elected to be the "dear leader" of various organizations by the people who can create ideas and produce products. Exactly who has the merit here? Those who screw together computers? Those who program them? Those who find buyers for the product? Or, this guy who just makes all that stuff work well together? It's really hard to sort out what sorts of "merit" deserve reward and which sorts of merit (like having a grandfather who was King) are unfair and non-meritorious.

Finally, for the vast majority of human existence, heredity has been much more important to being safe and rich than any sort of merit. Indeed, for many cultures it wasn't just heredity, it was being lucky enough to be the first born male. Given this, I think it'll take centuries to actually change human culture to even get close to being genuinely merit based; provided we can actually define which sort of merit we're talking about.

Simply put, our culture is like making sausage; it's messy. It has always been messy. It will always be messy; in my opinion.

Much more like a bar fight than a refined debate.

[Panope]

There are similar storys for most large cities Steve, especially those on the Pacific Rim.

It’s the same story down here in Oz, in Enzed, in BC, and many Asian cities.

Everyone wants to live on the coast within walking distance of a large CBD.

Ya, progress is inevitable. I guess it would be easier for folks to take (adapt) if it happened at a more reasonable pace. Seattle was doing fine in the 90's - early 2000's. The place already had some big players and was cleaning up fine (the peep shows on 1 st ave. were giving way to internet porn). The Amazon jolt was a real shock. 100,000 more people and doubled housing costs in a few short years.

Steve

[BeauV]

Steve,

San Francisco has had a series of these jolts. This current one is just the latest. Obviously, it happened in 1848-1850 with the gold rush. The population went from about 2,500 people to 25,000 in two years. It happened again right after world war 2. Then in the '70s the economy took a massive downturn as folks moved to the suburbs and businesses (EG: Bank of America and TransAmerican Insurance) moved out of town to the burbs. Now, we have massive growth. New jobs at over 40,000/year for the last five years, with growth in local housing limited to less than 4,000 units/year.

All that said, life is almost always better for the vast majority of a city when it's booming vs when it's dying. Having lived in SF during both conditions, there's no comparison. Yes, poor folks are being pushed out. No, there aren't any more blacksmith shops in SF anymore. But we also don't have anything like the mortality rate we used to have amongst the poor, etc..... There's no free lunch. We can't have quaint and funky and also have great schools and hospitals. It just doesn't work that way.

Santa Cruz is right in the middle of a massive battle about this. One group wants single family homes in a 1950s style small town, which none of them are old enough to actually remember. It's a fantasy. One group wants space for their rapidly growing labor demands; which means apartments and condos, not SFH on 1/4 acre lots. Another group wants high-density housing so they can walk to work. Another group doesn't really know what they want but they print bumper stickers that say "Keep Santa Cruz Weird". Then there are the 2,000 homeless folks who have moved here because we're pretty nice to them. They've literally demanded free housing. Ah me......

[Olaf Hart]

...and I was on about the political, economic, and cultural barriers to the acquisition of skills, as the meritocracy becomes hereditary. I am much more worried about the deteriorating environmental and sociopolitical climate my daughter will inherit than her economic prospects.

The entire area of hereditary privileges is quite complex, to me at least.

First, I will do anything to help and protect my kids and grand kids - full stop. But, a side effect of that is that if I've been successfull financially or militarily (like I conquered a country and I'm now King), then my "helping and protecting" turns into making sure that my growing family is set up to inherit the privileges I have gained. I don't see a way to easily reconcile the very real desire to help and protect my family with a weaker desire to make the country a fair playing field. This is particularly difficult, given there are so many actors within every country who have almost no desire to have the country be a fair playing field.

Second, it's really hard to figure out how to actually make a meritocracy work. For example, a skill I just seem to have been born with is getting to know people and helping them by connecting them with others who can be of value. This skill produces no product, creates to ideas, builds nothing of value, but enables the existence of a very powerful loosely knit group of capable people. As a result, I've literally been elected to be the "dear leader" of various organizations by the people who can create ideas and produce products. Exactly who has the merit here? Those who screw together computers? Those who program them? Those who find buyers for the product? Or, this guy who just makes all that stuff work well together? It's really hard to sort out what sorts of "merit" deserve reward and which sorts of merit (like having a grandfather who was King) are unfair and non-meritorious.

Finally, for the vast majority of human existence, heredity has been much more important to being safe and rich than any sort of merit. Indeed, for many cultures it wasn't just heredity, it was being lucky enough to be the first born male. Given this, I think it'll take centuries to actually change human culture to even get close to being genuinely merit based; provided we can actually define which sort of merit we're talking about.

Simply put, our culture is like making sausage; it's messy. It has always been messy. It will always be messy; in my opinion.

Much more like a bar fight than a refined debate.

We still concentrate on teaching subjects rather than skills, so kids don’t learn how to live or to work until they leave high school or college.

I am often tutoring young doctors who are four years plus postgrad about financial literacy, career planning, legal stuff, interpersonal skills, ethics, the pursuit of happiness, working in a team, turning up to work at a reasonable time and that sort of stuff.

They are the core skills now, the subjects are going to change even over doctors working lives, but the core skills remain.

[kdh]

That’s pretty cool, Jamie.

I have no worries about my kid’s chances for success. As you point out, Beau, she’s curious and loves to learn and has an awesome sense of self even at 15. But I won’t be the father of a child who doesn’t give physics and what’s now called data science a chance. Out of respect for her parents if nothing else.

[Chris Chesley]

Olaf hits on what I believe is the real key.

Skills vs subjects. As an employer, I’m much more interested in finding someone who has the ability to learn, the desire to explore and the values of integrity, hard work and continuous improvement. Knowledge is pretty easy to come by (although some may have to do it ‘on their own time’). That personal discipline and financial disciplin are also keys to and characteristics of the type of folks who will always land on their feet. I suspect most of you here all have these characteristics. They led you to success as we tend to call it. Good jobs, and enough ‘extra’ to follow their interests and passions.