‘Where ambition goes to die’: These tech workers flocked to Austin during the pandemic. Now they’re desperate to get out.::Drawn by the promise of an emerging tech hub, some tech workers who flocked to Austin found a middling tech scene, subpar culture, and scorching heat.

    • intelati@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Even that headline image is Jesus Christ. Temporally closed ramp onto a packed full outer road from a freeway that’s sitting squarely in the E rating. (Can’t move without major effort)

    • SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      When you are at the point where you are building roads from hell like that maybe it is time to start looking at alternatives. It smells like a sunk cost fallacy in the works.

      I see the article addresses something I saw firsthand. I remember they expanded rt 3 (a popular route to access rt 95/128 into Boston) because it was getting jammed during commutes. I said to myself “That will be jammed again in a few years”. Sure enough, everyone moved to places fed by it and started switching to it and it was jammed up again.

      • steltek@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        People moved there because anything inside 128 costs a million dollars. I have friends with pretty good jobs who can’t hope to afford to live closer to Boston. MA has their “MBTA Communities” upzoning push but it doesn’t go far enough, IMO. We need to eliminate single family zoning entirely.

    • solstice@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I feel like for $7.5 billion they could build a city wide monorail system with tons of stops. Charge a few bucks a ride and it pays for itself. Or make it totally free and see what happens when your city suddenly has total freedom of movement. Bet it would have huge economic benefits for everyone. (So of course it’ll never happen.)

      • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        The issue with Austin is most of the traffic isn’t Austin residents. A shitty Austin house will cost $300,000 more than the exact same house 30 miles away.

        Austin is quickly becoming one of the most expensive cities in the county. Which, by the way, is another reason it’s being abandoned. Companies came here on the promise of cheap housing, and house prices in the area tripled in 5 years

        So it’s super expensive, hot, has shitty traffic, and it’s a liberal island trapped in a state run by land developers and fascists.

        • solstice@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I was hoping to flip Texas blue in 2028 or 32 but I guess not. It’s extra frustrating because you know all this insane shit they pull is specifically designed to discourage liberals from moving in.

      • Cynoid@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m not sure. Public transportation infrastructure is insanely expensive. Where I live (France), there was a project to add a new subway line. A single one. Estimated cost was more than 2 G€. And that’s before taking into the numerous issues of another subway line modernization program…

        • DreamButt@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          People forget that transportation has an amplification affect across your entire economy. It takes all of the friction caused by traffic and removes a percentage of that. Helping not any one individual but everyone. It’s understandable that it’s harder to wrap our heads around something that isn’t directly profitable when we’re raised that way… but all the evidence and research is clear. Public Infastructure not only is the right way to help people, but is the best long term economic solution to transportation.

          Further, who do you think pays for roads? Or their repair? Road infastructure is heavily subsidized and far more expensive than any public transportation project. The big difference? You won’t hear politicians making a stink about it

          • Cynoid@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I don’t disagree with you on the principle. But at this price tag (a significant part of the budget of a major Metropolitan area), you don’t only need to know it’s good : you need to know by how much it is better ; when the payoff is going to begin ;and how to you make sure you don’t create issues which will persist for up to a century. Granted, large road projects aren’t cheap either.

            It also tie a significant amount of money each year to pay for continuous operation of these transportation, and for the moment, there is a significant number of transportation jobs which can’t be filled. Roads are costly too, but can withstand these employment issue… for a time.

            US cities probably should invest much more in this area, but there are limits to the ability of these project to solve transportation issues.

      • SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        charge a few bucks a ride and it pays for itself. Or make it totally free and see what happens when your city suddenly has total freedom of movement.

        This NEVER happens. It is always subsidized and traffic is still a mess.