Matthew Yglesias, the upstart economics bloggers for Slate, has penned a column arguing that the tech giants of Silicon Valley ought to relocate to Cleveland en masse. Yglesias contends that the San Francisco Bay area is no longer a happy or economically compatible host.
"The Bay Area is sick and tired of the antics of entitled techies," writes Yglesias, "and the nouveaux riches want a place where they’ll be appreciated."
Someplace exactly like Cleveland, he says. Obvious upgrades in office space and housing are Yglesias' key selling points, but the logistical benefits of a major airport and the ever-growing amenities downtown are touched on briefly as well.
"All you need is a city that has bigger problems than douche-y Facebook posts, creating plenty of room for local housing investment to become a win-win rather than an engine of displacement," Yglesias writes.
In his imagination, Google, Apple, Facebook and Twitter would migrate at the same time, creating an instant tech hub on the North Coast and allowing the Bay Area's economy to "cool down considerably."
Sounds like a pipe dream, sure, but existing infrastructure (economic development agencies, small-scale start-ups, huge anchor institutions with ties to medical technology) makes this seem sort of viable.
What do you think? Could Cleveland, a city without a daily newspaper, which has been sluggish and resistant to things like alternative transportation, really become a tech hub?