SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the should-really-be-in-space-or-undersea dept.
When Apple finishes its new $5 billion headquarters in Cupertino, California, the technorati will ooh and ahh over its otherworldly architecture, patting themselves on the back for yet another example of "innovation." Countless employees, tech bloggers, and design fanatics are already lauding the "futuristic" building and its many "groundbreaking" features. But few are aware that Apple's monumental project is already outdated, mimicking a half-century of stagnant suburban corporate campuses that isolated themselves—by design—from the communities their products were supposed to impact.
In the 1940s and '50s, when American corporations first flirted with a move to the 'burbs, CEOs realized that horizontal architecture immersed in a park-like buffer lent big business a sheen of wholesome goodness. The exodus was triggered, in part, by inroads the labor movement was making among blue-collar employees in cities. At the same time, the increasing diversity of urban populations meant it was getting harder and harder to maintain an all-white workforce. One by one, major companies headed out of town for greener pastures, luring desired employees into their gilded cages with the types of office perks familiar to any Googler.
Rockstar coders don't do suburbs?
(Score: 2) by iamjacksusername on Thursday October 20 2016, @05:33PM
I agree that cities have not done their part to keep businesses from moving. But, as you said, however ahs the gold makes the rules. The long decline in civic infrastructure in cities was a deliberate policy of starvation as workers moved out and hollowed out the city cores in the 1960s. White flight took the capital and built enclaves outside the city where they could keep out people they did not like.
It is a complicated scenario with no one cause; that said, corporations have become adept at exploiting it by using public funds to subsidize their business. The pendulum has swung too far in the other direction.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 20 2016, @08:26PM
Also many of those downtown areas were simply close to train tracks or good interstate access. Thats it. You even pointed it out. They purpose built the transportation to suit them. It is what they have always done.
A few cities these areas can be 'ok' to live in. For many, not by a long shot without tons of money. Most are just warehouses or former manufacturing buildings with poor access to where workers currently live. Take for example the city I live in. It used to be a huge in the cigarette manufacturing business. Well much of it is now empty due to changing fads of health. The buildings themselves have been shown to be little more than built by the lowest bidder junk from the mid 1930s. Much of it very poorly neglected and very little will bring it back. There is no 'gehto' there, no one lives there it is just empty warehouses a few miles in every direction. Its not even white flight. There just is no reason for people to be there. This buildings are not 'with a bit of TLC' they will be fine. They are just empty warehouses with no climate controls and many possible health hazards, and many times built just for whatever they were making and have odd shapes to them. When they do knock them down. They usually put in apartment complexes.
Also dont get too mad about my 'fad' comment. It is healthier to not smoke. But for many it is fashionable to 'be healthy' not be cause it is actually better for them.