Board leader can tell you about Savannah, Charleston, etc. And that's just his neck of the woods. Places endowed with beauty as well as natural harbors that can be transformed into large commercial ports. There are reasons that they (and many other places) did not become a world beating technological wonders. And those reasons have nothing to do with beauty and other natural characteristics.
Oh I'm not saying she can't do anything about it. Local governments in blue states tend to be overly restrictive with permitting and zoning laws. They can certainly change those laws to increase the supply of housing and lower living costs. And they should. Remember I'm a big fan of YIMBY. My point about retired people leaving is it is unlikely that she can lower costs enough to get more than a few to stay. Old people don't want to be slipping on icy sidewalks in mid-January. So most of them are going to retire elsewhere.
Trade with China was an asterisk as recently as 1980. By then the supremacy of Silicon Valley was already established. I don't think trade with China has much to do with the area's technological supremacy. It has mainly to do with a superb secondary educational system and a culture of risk-taking and entrepreneurship that is unmatched.
which political policies were in place back then?
Even when run by Republicans California has always been in the progressive vanguard on matters such as the environment, secondary education, consumer protection. Republicans served as a useful check on Democratic excesses but did not reverse course on the basic progressive thrust of California politics. Ditto for other blue states such as Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey. They have all had talented Republican governors that made great contributions. They were more conservative than their Democratic counterparts. But they did not reverse the basic thrust of policy in their states, which made aggressive use of the tools of government to advance the public good. It is a very different concept of government than exists in most red states.
ahh, so republicans oversaw the establishment the titanic Silicon Valley, and Democrats oversaw the reduction in congressional seats.
Its all too easy
At least in northern California folks are not eager for population growth. So NIMBY (as misguided as I think it is) reflects the popular will.
Anecdote alert: my son does standup as a side hustle. This happens after 7 and not at his home. He even goes to the big bad scary Tenderloin District after dark.
This is an interesting take from a putative libertarian on the role of government in establishing a world beating industry. And you're generally correct. Activist government as opposed to laissez-faire was very important to its rise. Silicon Valley is a publicly-subsidized and nurtured ecosystem. It relied heavily on defense spending during its early period. Then the ARPANET project (a government project) helped create the internet. The Cal university system and Stanford were indispensable parts of this ecosystem. As was an immigration system that provided a steady flow of often spectacular talent.
If my choices are to choose from one governing strategy that helped establish silicon valley, and a different one that is currently destroying it, I'll choose the former
Long Island is thriving!
