Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Having lived in NYC too, the greed there trumps the greed in Silicon Valley. The greed in NYC is money for it's own sake. The greed in Silicon Valley at least has the pretense of creating good products. The greed in Silicon Valley requires creation of value in addition to capturing it. NYC is all about capturing in.

A $4,000/month apartment in Silicon Valley gets you a good school. A $5,000/month apartment in NYC gets you a public school where 90% of the kids fail the state exams.



Two observations:

- Plenty of 4k/month San Francisco apartments get you into terrible public schools.

- Inverting your point, at least people in NYC / finance are generally honest and upfront about their desire to make lots of money for its own sake; many in the SF area go around preaching nonstop about how their only motivation is to reshape society with their paradigm-shifting value-adding "wearable social network for dogs app" that will end all hunger and global poverty, and pick up your drycleaning, too.

After the wildly successful IPO, they still rehash this line; only now it's from the deck of their custom yacht moored on a private dock by their much nicer house.


Well, SF runs a lottery system, so your rent was largely irrelevant until recently (the system is changing to give some preference to people who reside in a school district).

That said, you really should investigate SF public schools a bit more. There are a large number of very high performing public schools, as well as some terrible ones. That's actually no different from the 'burbs, it's that if you live in the Gunn district in Palo Alto, you get to go to Gunn. If you live in a particular school district in SF, you aren't guaranteed a slot in that school.


Having a large chance to have your kid land in a poor quality school is reason enough not to live someplace. (Unless you can afford private)


We probably disagree about the extent to which the chance of a bad placement is "large". I have two kids in SFUSD, and I really do believe that if you do your research and create a balanced list of good schools (without focusing on the "trophy" schools, your odds of getting a good school placement reasonably close to home (certainly closer than you'd get with a local school in the burbs) is good. That said, yes, there is a chance you'll be disappointed and need to look for other options, and this simply doesn't happen in well off suburbs, where you can convert a high mortgage payment into a guaranteed spot for your kid in a high performing school.

So even though I disagree with you that the odds of a bad placement is "large" (I'd say it is non-trivial rather than large, but I don't have numbers either) this process appeals more to poor or middle income people than wealthy ones. If you're poor or middle income, you're choosing between no chance of a good school (you can't afford the top districts in the burbs) and a decent chance (SF). For a rich person, you're choosing between a guarantee (burbs) and a decent change (SF). Again, we disagree about "large".

One thing - have you looked at greatschools.net and checked out the number of elementary schools in SF with high test scores? SFUSD a very high performing urban district. It's fine to disagree, but if you haven't done this yet, I really do urge you to review the data before forming your opinion. I think the notion that SF schools are mainly bad is an incorrect myth. There are problems, but the notion that good elementary schools are few and far between is false.

High schools aren't quite as good, but they aren't nearly as bad as people make them out to be (it's not just Lowell - check out the data. Balboa high, in a relatively low income southern part of SF, scores as high as many reasonably good suburban districts).

Middle schools seem to be the weak link right now, though again, please review the data before forming your opinion - the conventional wisdom is almost always more dire than the reality where it comes to sfusd. Middle school is a tricky one - you may notice that the private model rarely splits out 6-8 grades, going with the k-8 model, so the entire approach may be flawed here...


My comments and data are more on NYC. (I moved to Silicon Valley in part based on the terrible public schools in NYC, and picked my new location based on zoning)

The school I was zoned for had ~90% of the kids failing the state math and reading exams, with ~50% getting the poorest scores possible. When I publicly questioned the education department officials, they said, "The tests might not be measuring the learning that's occurring." I applied to 20 non-charter public schools, and we didn't get into any. I applied to 20 gifted and talented programs, and 40 charter schools as well. It's insanity.

To the point of SF... There is a very high switching cost whether you buy or rent. If you move somewhere and don't get into the right school, there are costs ($ and hassle) for changing your mind a year later. This is why people lock in.

And I'll throw out the question - why shouldn't the majority of the schools in large cities be good? It's not easy making it happen, but the awful quality is a societal failure.


The strange thing is when you recruit into the Wall Street jobs, you are supposed to pretend that the reason is anything but the money.


Manhattan is not NYC. You can rent a 1 bedroom for $1600 a month with a 20 minute train commute to Manhattan (and even less rent further away) in a great school district in Queens. I've lived in NYC my whole life, and worked in Manhattan my whole school and working life, and never paid more than $1400 a month in rent for 2 bedrooms - living with my wife and in only completely safe neighborhoods.


Somewhat off-topic, but if you don't mind sharing, what would you say is the optimal Queens neighborhood for proximity/price/schools?


Closer but more expensive: Astoria/LIC, Flushing/Jackson Heights

Farther but cheaper: Ozone Park, Forest hills, elmhurst, kew gardens

cheapest but farthest: glen oaks, floral park, douglaston


Check out Woodside and Maspeth.


The greed in Silicon Valley does not require much more than an idea, a good network and some luck. Very few start out wanting to change the world, their companies just might end up doing it.

At least New York is honest.


Huh? High schools in NYC are merit-based. If a kid is in a school where kids can't read, it's not the city's fault.


High schools are. K-8 are of dubious merit. It's based on IQ testing of 4 year olds, a very weak science, especially in the backdrop of prepping. It is very much a system of haves and have nots.


Why are you comparing the suburbs (SV) to the city (NYC)? You know NYC has suburbs with great public schools too?


I would say very good in NY suburbs - I wouldn't go as far as great. (Without going into too much detail, I've done quite a bit of research)

The difference is that Silicon Valley has a lot of jobs, and is the area of the original story. If you're in the NYC suburbs, you are likely commuting into NYC for a good job.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: