• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Chitchat 6-figure dream job at facebook but cannot afford the bay area

Is Oakland and San Jose considered bay area? Part of silicon valley?
both are. the bay area covers at least 6.9 counties - sf, san mateo (south of sf), marin (north of sf), santa clara (includes palo alto, san jose, los altos, mountain view, sunnyvale, cupertino, [city of] santa clara, saratoga, campbell, milpitas, gilroy), alameda (where largest city is oakland), contra costa, napa. solano and sonoma counties are also considered part of the bay area. sillycon valley, however, is confined to the south bay, mainly from palo alto to san jose. the original sillycon valley was within the "tech triangle" of u.s. route or highway 101, california state route or highway 237, interstate 880. that was where fairchild, national semiconductor, intel, amd started. it was named for the concentration of semiconductor companies but was hijacked later for all tech startups.
 
most of the staff in palo alto and menlo park are in software in both user app, targetted advertising and network analytics. for new server software, they need a server farm to test it, do friendly trials, run through regression and exhaustive debugging, quality control, and finally operate it as in production release before replication or farming out (no pun intended) to all their data centers all over the world. the prototyping in data and net ops has to happen inhouse where all the software creators and debuggers reside. and then there are rows of dev op labs. because dev op labs are physical and capital intensive besides the talent required, it's not easy and cost effective to replicate them all over the world. this is especially true for apple as they also design chipsets, hardware, and test rf, analog, baseband and digital components.

Though I don't deny any of this, both FB and the Goog also enjoy sucking in talent just to starve out any potential startup competition.
 
Though I don't deny any of this, both FB and the Goog also enjoy sucking in talent just to starve out any potential startup competition.
yup, that’s defensive hiring. they scour the top universities and grab the top 6.9% of comp science, data analytics, math, and engineering students with hefty sign on bonuses.
 
there's no point "fleeing". if every conservative flees, californicate will be irredeemable. some must stay and fight on. we are the "some". ultimately, the liberal and leftwing youths will graduate from schools and colleges and find jobs. when they start working for corporations, get paid monthly with "set-asides" for federal taxes, state taxes and social security, have to pay rents that eat into 69% of their income, repay their education loans, and are responsible for utility bills, auto loans, yoga class payments, credit card bills, etc., they will moderate to the center. when they start a family and are faced with increasing expenses and responsibilities including higher taxes as a result of joint filing, they start moving center to right. when they buy a home and are faced with mortgages, parcel tax, local taxes (property taxes), embedded taxes in the form of "measures" and "bonds" to improve schools, parks, neighborhoods, roads, etc., they will begin to move to the right. when they have paid off their mortgages, sent their kids to college, saved some money for retirement, become fully responsible for the safety, security, soundness of their families and extended families, they will become conservatives. political affiliations evolve with time, wealth, and age. the long term problem with californicate is not with californians left or right within the state. it's illegal immigration. their children born in californicate will perpetuate their parents' desires for state sanctuary status, welfare, handouts, dumbing down, race to the bottom. "if i cheat the law by jumping the line because i'm destitute and desperate, everyone should cheat, break the law, and be destitute and desperate like me." their reproduction rate is higher, and it's a matter of time when they become the majority and sexploit the democratic system.
U in LA?

 
there's no point "fleeing". if every conservative flees, californicate will be irredeemable. some must stay and fight on. we are the "some". ultimately, the liberal and leftwing youths will graduate from schools and colleges and find jobs. when they start working for corporations, get paid monthly with "set-asides" for federal taxes, state taxes and social security, have to pay rents that eat into 69% of their income, repay their education loans, and are responsible for utility bills, auto loans, yoga class payments, credit card bills, etc., they will moderate to the center. when they start a family and are faced with increasing expenses and responsibilities including higher taxes as a result of joint filing, they start moving center to right. when they buy a home and are faced with mortgages, parcel tax, local taxes (property taxes), embedded taxes in the form of "measures" and "bonds" to improve schools, parks, neighborhoods, roads, etc., they will begin to move to the right. when they have paid off their mortgages, sent their kids to college, saved some money for retirement, become fully responsible for the safety, security, soundness of their families and extended families, they will become conservatives. political affiliations evolve with time, wealth, and age. the long term problem with californicate is not with californians left or right within the state. it's illegal immigration. their children born in californicate will perpetuate their parents' desires for state sanctuary status, welfare, handouts, dumbing down, race to the bottom. "if i cheat the law by jumping the line because i'm destitute and desperate, everyone should cheat, break the law, and be destitute and desperate like me." their reproduction rate is higher, and it's a matter of time when they become the majority and sexploit the democratic system.
Part 2. Many are fleeing California..u still there Ah Sai?

 
Oregon, washington? Entire west coast is communist. And where most start up incubated and became successful giants.
 
Elon Musk says Tesla will move headquarters from California 'immediately' over coronavirus restrictions - ABC News
Posted 5h
A man in a dark suit and white shirt walks in front of an illuminated dark-coloured car.
Mr Musk threatened to sue over coronavirus restrictions that have stopped Tesla from restarting production.(Reuters: Aly Song)
Share
Tesla has sued local authorities in California as the electric carmaker pushes to re-open its factory there and chief executive Elon Musk threatens to move Tesla's headquarters and future programs to Texas or Nevada.

Key points:
An order forced Tesla to close the Fremont plant in March
Mr Musk called coronavirus restrictions fascist
Competing US automakers are starting to reopen factories
Mr Musk has been pushing to re-open Tesla's Fremont, California, factory after Alameda County's health department said the carmaker must not reopen because of local lockdown measures to curb the spread of the coronavirus.

Tesla filed a lawsuit against the county on Saturday, calling the continued restrictions a "power-grab" by the county since California's governor had said on Thursday that manufacturers in the state would be allowed to reopen.

The company said Alameda was going against the federal and California constitutions, as well as defying the governor's order, in the lawsuit filed in San Francisco federal court.

Alameda County, where the Fremont factory is located, is scheduled to remain shut until the end of May, with only essential businesses allowed to reopen.

County officials did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the lawsuit.

The outspoken Mr Musk also took to Twitter on Saturday to complain and threatened to leave the state.

"Frankly, this is the final straw," he tweeted. "Tesla will now move its HQ and future programs to Texas/Nevada immediately."

He wrote that whether the company keeps any manufacturing in Fremont depends on how Tesla is treated in the future.

A 'serious risk' to US business
A Tesla employee bends down to work on the motor of a Model S at the front of a line of cars.
Tesla builds more than 415,000 cars per year at the Fremont plant.(AP: Jeff Chiu)
Mr Musk has been complaining about the stay-home order since the company's April 29 first-quarter earnings were released.

He called the restrictions "fascist" and a "serious risk" to US business and has urged governments to stop taking people's freedom.

An order in the six-county San Francisco Bay Area forced Tesla to close the Fremont plant starting March 23 to help prevent the spread of the novel coronavirus, and it was extended until the end of May.

Public health experts say the orders have reduced the number of new coronavirus cases nationwide.

California Governor Gavin Newsom allowed the Bay Area counties to continue restrictions while easing them in other areas of the state.

The coronavirus causes mild or moderate symptoms for most people, but it has killed more than 77,000 people in the US, with the death toll rising.

Alameda County said on Saturday it had been working with Tesla to develop a safety plan that "allows for reopening while protecting the health and wellbeing of the thousands of employees" that work at the factory and that it looks forward to coming to an agreement on a safety plan very soon.

Elon Musk smiles while holding a phone to his chest, he is wearing a suit
Mr Musk has urged governments to stop taking people's freedom.(AP: John Raoux)
Mr Musk had told employees on Thursday that limited production would restart at Fremont on Friday afternoon.

Mr Musk's tweets come as competing automakers are starting to reopen factories in the US.

Toyota will restart production on Monday, while General Motors, Ford and Fiat Chrysler all plan to restart their plants gradually on May 18.

Tesla is the only automaker with a factory in California.

Tesla builds more than 415,000 cars per year at the Fremont plant and moving the entire production facility would be a massive undertaking.

Dan Ives, a Wedbush analyst, on Saturday estimated it could take the company 12 to 18 months to relocate production.

The threat to relocate the facility comes as Tesla aims to ramp up production at Fremont of its Model Y sport utility vehicle, the carmaker's most profitable vehicle to date.

Mr Musk, who sparred with California officials in March over whether Tesla had to halt production at Fremont, had criticised the lockdown and stay-at-home orders, calling them a

Earlier this month, Mr Musk posted a series of bizarre tweets including one that said Tesla's stock price was too high.

Mr Musk also posted parts of the US national anthem and wrote that he would sell his houses and other possessions.

ABC/AP
 
Oregon, washington? Entire west coast is communist. And where most start up incubated and became successful giants.
oregon yes. washington only parts of it. seattle downtown, bellevue, redmond is not commie...
 
The 'Affordable Housing' Fraud
By Dr. Thomas Sowell
September 29, 2015 5 Min Read


A- A+
Nowhere has there been so much hand-wringing over a lack of "affordable housing," as among politicians and others in coastal California. And nobody has done more to make housing unaffordable than those same politicians and their supporters.
A recent survey showed that the average monthly rent for a one-bedroom apartment in San Francisco was just over $3,500. Some people are paying $1,800 a month just to rent a bunk bed in a San Francisco apartment.
It is not just in San Francisco that putting a roof over your head can take a big chunk out of your pay check. The whole Bay Area is like that. Thirty miles away, Palo Alto home prices are similarly unbelievable.
One house in Palo Alto, built more than 70 years ago, and just over one thousand square feet in size, was offered for sale at $1.5 million. And most asking prices are bid up further in such places.
Another city in the Bay Area with astronomical housing prices, San Mateo, recently held a public meeting and appointed a task force to look into the issue of "affordable housing."

Public meetings, task forces and political hand-wringing about a need for "affordable housing" occur all up and down the San Francisco peninsula, because this is supposed to be such a "complex" issue.
Someone once told President Ronald Reagan that a solution to some controversial issue was "complex." President Reagan replied that the issue was in fact simple, "but it is not easy."
Is the solution to unaffordable housing prices in parts of California simple? Yes. It is as simple as supply and demand. What gets complicated is evading the obvious, because it is politically painful.
One of the first things taught in an introductory economics course is supply and demand. When a growing population creates a growing demand for housing, and the government blocks housing from being built, the price of existing housing goes up.

This is not a breakthrough on the frontiers of knowledge. Economists have understood supply and demand for centuries — and so have many other people who never studied economics.
Housing prices in San Francisco, and in many other communities for miles around, were once no higher than in the rest of the United States. But, beginning in the 1970s, housing prices in these communities skyrocketed to three or four times the national average.
Why? Because local government laws and policies severely restricted, or banned outright, the building of anything on vast areas of land. This is called preserving "open space," and "open space" has become almost a cult obsession among self-righteous environmental activists, many of whom are sufficiently affluent that they don't have to worry about housing prices.
Some others have bought the argument that there is just very little land left in coastal California, on which to build homes. But anyone who drives down Highway 280 for thirty miles or so from San Francisco to Palo Alto, will see mile after mile of vast areas of land with not a building or a house in sight.


How "complex" is it to figure out that letting people build homes in some of that vast expanse of "open space" would keep housing from becoming "unaffordable"?
Was it just a big coincidence that housing prices in coastal California began skyrocketing in the 1970s, when building bans spread like wildfire under the banner of "open space," "saving farmland," or whatever other slogans would impress the gullible?
When more than half the land in San Mateo County is legally off-limits to building, how surprised should we be that housing prices in the city of San Mateo are now so high that politically appointed task forces have to be formed to solve the "complex" question of how things got to be the way they are and what to do about it?
However simple the answer, it will not be easy to go against the organized, self-righteous activists for whom "open space" is a sacred cause, automatically overriding the interests of everybody else.


Was it just a coincidence that some other parts of the country saw skyrocketing housing prices when similar severe restrictions on building went into effect? Or that similar policies in other countries have had the same effect? How "complex" is that?
Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305. His website is www.tsowell.com. To find out more about Thomas Sowell and read features by other Creators Syndicate columnists and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.
 
The 'Affordable Housing' Fraud
By Dr. Thomas Sowell
September 29, 2015 5 Min Read


A- A+
Nowhere has there been so much hand-wringing over a lack of "affordable housing," as among politicians and others in coastal California. And nobody has done more to make housing unaffordable than those same politicians and their supporters.
A recent survey showed that the average monthly rent for a one-bedroom apartment in San Francisco was just over $3,500. Some people are paying $1,800 a month just to rent a bunk bed in a San Francisco apartment.
It is not just in San Francisco that putting a roof over your head can take a big chunk out of your pay check. The whole Bay Area is like that. Thirty miles away, Palo Alto home prices are similarly unbelievable.
One house in Palo Alto, built more than 70 years ago, and just over one thousand square feet in size, was offered for sale at $1.5 million. And most asking prices are bid up further in such places.
Another city in the Bay Area with astronomical housing prices, San Mateo, recently held a public meeting and appointed a task force to look into the issue of "affordable housing."

Public meetings, task forces and political hand-wringing about a need for "affordable housing" occur all up and down the San Francisco peninsula, because this is supposed to be such a "complex" issue.
Someone once told President Ronald Reagan that a solution to some controversial issue was "complex." President Reagan replied that the issue was in fact simple, "but it is not easy."
Is the solution to unaffordable housing prices in parts of California simple? Yes. It is as simple as supply and demand. What gets complicated is evading the obvious, because it is politically painful.
One of the first things taught in an introductory economics course is supply and demand. When a growing population creates a growing demand for housing, and the government blocks housing from being built, the price of existing housing goes up.

This is not a breakthrough on the frontiers of knowledge. Economists have understood supply and demand for centuries — and so have many other people who never studied economics.
Housing prices in San Francisco, and in many other communities for miles around, were once no higher than in the rest of the United States. But, beginning in the 1970s, housing prices in these communities skyrocketed to three or four times the national average.
Why? Because local government laws and policies severely restricted, or banned outright, the building of anything on vast areas of land. This is called preserving "open space," and "open space" has become almost a cult obsession among self-righteous environmental activists, many of whom are sufficiently affluent that they don't have to worry about housing prices.
Some others have bought the argument that there is just very little land left in coastal California, on which to build homes. But anyone who drives down Highway 280 for thirty miles or so from San Francisco to Palo Alto, will see mile after mile of vast areas of land with not a building or a house in sight.


How "complex" is it to figure out that letting people build homes in some of that vast expanse of "open space" would keep housing from becoming "unaffordable"?
Was it just a big coincidence that housing prices in coastal California began skyrocketing in the 1970s, when building bans spread like wildfire under the banner of "open space," "saving farmland," or whatever other slogans would impress the gullible?
When more than half the land in San Mateo County is legally off-limits to building, how surprised should we be that housing prices in the city of San Mateo are now so high that politically appointed task forces have to be formed to solve the "complex" question of how things got to be the way they are and what to do about it?
However simple the answer, it will not be easy to go against the organized, self-righteous activists for whom "open space" is a sacred cause, automatically overriding the interests of everybody else.


Was it just a coincidence that some other parts of the country saw skyrocketing housing prices when similar severe restrictions on building went into effect? Or that similar policies in other countries have had the same effect? How "complex" is that?
Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305. His website is www.tsowell.com. To find out more about Thomas Sowell and read features by other Creators Syndicate columnists and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.
sowell is not entirely correct as those “vast areas of land” along interstate 280 from sf to palo alto are sitting emply not because of “open space” and environmental advocacy and policy enacted by local govs but mainly because of seismic fears as the san andreas fault runs along that stretch of the interstate. no sane developer would wish to build high density and high rise housing along that stretch. 1st, they can’t build on an “active” earthquake fault line; 2nd, even if they are allowed to, no sane home buyer would pay $2.69m for a multi-storey 1.69k sq ft pigeon hole. nonetheless, there are parcels of privately owned lands along that stretch where buildings and housing have gone up. for example, the sprawling estate and mansion of the filoli gardens were built there, albeit without knowledge of the fault line several decades ago when the owner-magnate bought the parcel there. moreover, very wealthy tycoons of sf and the peninsula own vast plots of land in that stretch, especially from stanford to woodside to hillsborough. they are mostly conservatives, sympathetic to sowell’s sometimes “simplistic” sycophantic soliloquy of selective subjects. when they sit on vast plots of land and open spaces, they want them for themselves and are not going to share it nor re-parcel them for housing for the lowly masses. wtf is he thinking? leland stanford the late railroad tycoon bought the entire plot next to palo alto and turned it into a university. the vast area is owned by the university and not a damned acre will be donated to the city of palo alto.
 
Last edited:
This guy could have lived in a van for a few years and saved tons of money, which can then be used to pay the deposit for his own property …

 
Any silicon valley big tech might consider sinkie? Low taxes, no earthquake, 4-6 flying hours to one of the biggest markets in the world, china, india, ASEAN.
 
For 170 years, people followed their dreams to California. Now they’re leaving
By North America correspondent Kathryn Diss and Cameron Schwarz in California

Posted 10h
Palm trees silhouetted by raging bushfires
As bushfires and droughts become more frequent, and the state becomes more expensive, California's population has declined for the first time. ( Reuters: Gene Blevins )
Share
California has long been America's promised land, tempting frontiersmen to take huge risks for hundreds of years, lured by the promise of gold, oil and lush farmland.

But as climate change leaves towns dry and increases the risk of catastrophic fires, and big cities like San Francisco and Los Angeles become unaffordable, is the "California Dream" coming to an end?

Since the gold rush began in the 1850s, the state has been defined by massive population growth as people from all over the world sought fortune out west.

The population boomed again after World War II as the defence and aerospace industries set up shop.

Then came the tech bonanza of the 1980s and 1990s which put Silicon Valley on the map.

But for the first time in its history, California's population declined last year.

Californians give up on the dream
America's most populous state lost 182,000 people in 2020.

It might not sound like much in a state of 39 million people, but it's the equivalent of all the residents of Santa Barbara and all the residents of Santa Monica packing up and heading elsewhere.

Two people on a park bench looking out at San Francisco's skyline
San Francisco has increasingly become unaffordable after tech companies migrated to northern California. ( Reuters: Katie Paul )
More people are now leaving California than those moving in.

Over the past decade, California's population growth of 6.1 per cent was the slowest in a century and below the national average of 7.4 per cent.

Demographers attribute the decline to several factors, including stricter immigration policies, a declining birth rate and increased deaths as a result of the coronavirus pandemic. It resulted in the state losing a congressional seat for the first time in its 170-year history.

Locals will tell you people are leaving the lucky state because of high taxes, its political leaders, and the increasing likelihood of catastrophic weather conditions like bushfires and heatwaves.

And some Californians simply can no longer afford to live here.

San Francisco, Los Angeles and San Diego have become expensive, with house prices growing in line with Silicon Valley's rise.

Critics argue that has pushed out and priced out many middle-class Americans, created an ever-widening wedge between the state's poor and the uber-rich.

It has also exacerbated the state's homelessness crisis, with an estimated 161,000 people sleeping rough. That's the highest of any state in the US.

A woman jogs past a row of tents lined along a beach surrounded by palm trees
The number of people experiencing homelessness is on the rise in California. ( Reuters: Lucy Nicholson )
But California's difficulties are not just limited to cities and surrounding suburbs.

Reaping the spoils of the state's rich agricultural soils has become nearly impossible for many Californians whose families have worked the land for generations.

Locals fear 2021 might be a crisis
Francesca Marchini, 32, is the fourth generation of her Italian family to farm in California's Central Valley, the heart of the state's agriculture industry and home to some of the richest soil on the planet.

But even she's not sure if the Californian Dream, which her ancestors travelled from Italy in search of in the 1920s, will be around for her own children.

A woman crouches near a tree with two toddlers
"It's an unknown future for us, that's for sure," says Francesca, who was raised on a Californian almond farm. ( ABC News: Cameron Schwarz )
"I'm encouraging them to be diverse because I don't know about farming for my children now or my brother's children," she said.

As a little girl growing up in the San Joaquin valley, Ms Marchini's dream was to stay on the land and raise a family in the middle of an almond farm.

She now does that with her husband, four-year-old son Jeffrey, and two-year-old daughter Maggie. But she worries about the future as the state's water supplies continue to dwindle.

"It is our passion and our heart to keep farming," she said.

"We just want to grow the best product around, but water is the key to growing these products, to ship them domestically and around the world.

"It's an unknown future for us, that's for sure."

A woman holds two toddlers while smiling and standing on a farm
Francesca is encouraging her kids Maggie and Jeffrey to plan a future that does not involve the family farm. ( ABC News: Cameron Schwarz )
The effects of the last severe drought, which lasted around four years until the end of 2015, are still being felt.

Underground aquifers, heavily relied upon by farmers when there's little winter rain or snowpack on the Sierra Nevada mountains, have been severely depleted in recent years.

Many areas, sapped dry by the last drought, haven't replenished, leading farmers to drill new wells, which just go deeper into the water table.

"I definitely think we're going to have to live under this new normal of less water," Ms Marchini said.

"We're not yet in a crisis but 2021 might be a crisis."

Drought forcing tough decisions
About two hours' drive south in the Valley, the signs of drought are even more apparent.

While it's not unusual for the state's landscape to turn dry and parched as the northern hemisphere's summer approaches, it's abnormal in the middle of May.

A man in a cowboy hat crouches in a very dry creek bed
Every year gets more difficult for John, but he's not ready to give up the ranch that has been in his family for 150 years. ( ABC News: Cameron Schwarz )
On John Guthrie's ranch, which has belonged to his family for 150 years, there's about a third of the feed grass on the ground than normal when heading into the dry months.

One of his vital dams at this time of year is usually overflowing and feeding through other tributaries on his property.

In mid-May, it's already bone dry.

"It's warmer than it usually is, it's warmer sooner and it lasts longer, we have these catastrophic wildfires … so something is definitely different," he said.

A pen of dairy cows with the sun setting behind them
John has been forced to sell off cattle as his ranch dries up weeks before summer begins. ( ABC News: Cameron Schwarz )
"The part that I'm worried about is the next 10 years, the next 20 years with my family, I fear we're in a downward trend."

It has forced Mr Guthrie to sell more cattle than he'd like, move his current stock to greener pastures and buy in hay at huge expense.

If it wasn't for the family name, he'd consider packing up.

Families with long California ties consider a move
Nestled in the foothills of the spectacular Sierra Nevada mountains, Tom Mulholland's family has grown citrus fruit in the San Joaquin Valley for 60 years.

He was the largest supplier of mandarins to Australia during the off-season and worked with Woolworths to develop the 'Delight' variety.

A man with a beard in a cap and polo shirt examines a mandarin on a tree
Tom Mulholland grew mandarins on his farm for six decades, but decided to sell out last year. ( ABC News: Cameron Schwarz )
His ancestry in the region runs deep. His grandfather was the chief engineer who designed the controversial aqueduct system that delivered water to Los Angeles in the 1900s, paving the way for the city's meteoric rise.

But even his deep roots weren't enough to keep him in the game in a big way.

About a year-and-a-half ago, he made the tough decision to sell out.

"If there's no water, there's no plants. [We need] soil, water and sun," he said.

"We've got the sun, thank you. We've still got the dirt here, but without the water, we're not going to make it here."

A man in shorts, polo shirt and cap stands on a dusty plain looking out at the horizon
Tom believes Californian innovation could solve the state's issues for farmers.
Mr Mulholland believes climate change is to blame.

"Denial of that is being written up, but I think science is going to prove that there is in fact warming on this earth," he said.

While he acknowledges the effect the tech industry has brought on less fortunate Californians, he sees it as the next frontier, which could in fact bring about more sustainable farming practices.

"What can we accomplish from here? Elon Musk was able to build rockets and cars from here in California," he said.

"Look at all the significant discoveries coming out of Silicon Valley, those are all new ways of looking at this."

'I didn't know what to do, water is essential'
Decades of overdrawing aquifers to feed the state's booming agriculture industry is having a flow-on effect, particularly for low-income communities in the Central Valley.

A family stands smiling next to a big, black water tank
A charity installed water tanks on the Garcia family's property after their well ran dry. ( ABC News: Cameron Schwarz )
One day, Carolina Garcia turned the taps on and nothing came out.

For two weeks, her family went without running water, after the well they relied upon for more than a decade went dry.

"I was sad, I was desperate. I didn't know what to do," Mr Garcia said.

"Water is essential, it was hard to see our kids suffering."

Unable to afford to pay the tens of thousands of dollars for a new well, Ms Garcia went looking for help.

A woman washes a bowl in a bucket of water
Until the city's pipes are built to reach her Central Valley home, Caroline Garcia is relying on temporary water tanks. ( ABC News: Cameron Schwarz )
The family of 10 will now live off two temporary water tanks donated by a local non-profit until the city's piping reaches their home.

The organisation, Self Help Enterprises, has helped 300 other families like Carolina's across the Valley.

Since April, demand has jumped 40 per cent.

Without the donation, they would have been forced to pack up and leave the state.

"We would have probably had to move somewhere else," she said.

But ultimately, Ms Garcia is a California girl.

"I know I'm probably going to be judged by a lot of people but I don't care, I'm just happy [to stay]."

Three small children with their hands in water spilled on the ground grin at the camera
The donated water tanks mean the Garcia family can stay in their home state, rather than starting fresh somewhere new. ( ABC News: Cameron Schwarz )
Posted 10h
 
the winning touch of FB is capturing pple's mind thru emotional attachment, eg. updates from friends and loved ones. i doubt there will be any stronger contender for this in the social media arena. Linkedin is more for job and business networking, professionals use them for hunting leads.
Linkedin is like fb but with x100000 the bullshit.
 
Any silicon valley big tech might consider sinkie? Low taxes, no earthquake, 4-6 flying hours to one of the biggest markets in the world, china, india, ASEAN.
No. Electricity and rental costs will kill them. Vietnam and Indon are the hotspots now. Good, cheap talent and costs.
 
Back
Top