It's hard to imagine the bay area going the same way as Detroit, if only for the fact that it has excellent geographic advantages. It's one of America's biggest Pacific shipping ports, and having access to the Asian markets will always be a huge strategic advantage. On top of that the very stable Mediterranean climate will always be a draw for Americans looking to live somewhere that's not too hot and not too cold.
Besides, many of the current problems of the bay area could be solved by building denser housing and better public transportation. The whole region would be improved if so many of the NIMBYs weren't opposed to "Manhattanization".
Venezuelans had similar access to natural beauty, and control over oil. Internal strife dispensed with their civil society in a matter of years. It’s now a humanitarian disaster.
> Besides, many of the current problems of the bay area could be solved by building denser housing and better public transportation. The whole region would be improved if so many of the NIMBYs weren't opposed to "Manhattanization".
High crime and political instability are California’s biggest issues. Fixing “the markets”, be it the housing market or Wall Street, is unlikely to be a panacea for this. America’s problems go much deeper than markets, and it may already be too late to course correct.
I can’t claim to know much about Venezuelan politics, but wasn’t the crisis in that country largely a result of over-dependence on natural resources? That might have described California in the gold rush days, but the state’s economy has since become extremely diversified.
Basically I think as long as Northern California is a relevant political and economic entity the bay area will stay vital
Besides, many of the current problems of the bay area could be solved by building denser housing and better public transportation. The whole region would be improved if so many of the NIMBYs weren't opposed to "Manhattanization".
reply