[ad_1]
FIn the coming years, a Google search on "technology" and "homelessness" in San Francisco would invariably be fueled by various complaints and open letters from founders of startups and other entrepreneurs denouncing "riff-raff" and the "degenerates" they were forced to meet. their streets on the way to work.
This group of hard-of-hearing technicians has come to define the tenor of the second Internet bubble boom in San Francisco, fueling the chilly relationship between an influx of wealth and a city ravaged by economic disparities. The usual story was that of Versailles on the eve of the revolution: anti-gentrification demonstrations against technology buses, tractants pointing fingers accusing technicians of not taking into account the suffering that surrounds them, graffiti on the sidewalk declaring that "Queers hate technicians."
"There is still a lot of antagonism and conflict between technicians and non-technicians in the city," said Jeremy Pollock, former technology technician and member of the League of Pissed-Off Voters, a group of progressive political activists in San Francisco. "You see themes of people making fun of technology for ruining the city and many technology workers are ashamed to work in technology and are uncomfortable in public. We have seen it in the past, with the league, as we try to go ahead and distribute documentation at the technical bus stops. There would be a lack of visual contact. "
As the United States prepares for crucial mid-term elections on Tuesday, a ballot measure in San Francisco has quickly become a test of whether the technology sector can locate its moral compass.
If this proposal is adopted, Proposal C will result in a tax on the largest technology companies to fund a solution to homelessness in the city.
Technology leaders such as Salesforce chief executive Marc Benioff and Twitter general manager Jack Dorsey have helped to make homelessness a matter of conscience for the industry, arguing publicly over the tax bill which would generate about 250 to 300 million US dollars. additional income for homelessness services. The fight is more than a mere measure of voting for technology and the city where it has made its richness.
For locals, technicians, and everyone who identifies at the same time, proposal C is a calculation for the technology industry as a whole. This is the question everyone, from the junior engineer to the founder of the billionaire, must find a way to answer: what is the position of the sector in terms of civic engagement and social responsibility?
"This is the issue of concern to everyone," said Evan Owski, a LinkedIn engineer who was standing in front of the Market Street office recently, displaying a sign that "the leaders do not speak for us."
"Some people in the tech sector strongly support the C application, while others are really fighting against it and spending a lot of money to make it happen," he said. "It has become this kind of problem in the technology industry. Where do you stand in this huge inequality of wealth in this city where these multi-billion dollar businesses are located? Are they doing enough to remedy the inequality we see in our streets? "
If approved by voters on November 6, Proposal C would introduce an average gross revenue tax of 0.5% for businesses with revenues in excess of $ 50 million, which, according to proponents of the measure, is negligible for the companies concerned. long term.
The additional funds generated by the measure would go directly to the provision of housing, housing assistance, mental health services and shelters for approximately 7,500 people forced to sleep on the sidewalks each night – a humanitarian crisis fueled in part by the technological boom that has contributed to rising housing costs.
"This is a critical moment where, in my opinion, the app C kind of lights the desire to become a Franciscan in San and support our local services," Benioff told the Guardian.
The Salesforce CEO led the charge, donating $ 3.5 million to the Yes on C campaign and calling his fellow billionaires to donate to the action against him. In an editorial for the New York Times, he wrote: "Companies must have a purpose other than profit" that "may, over time, benefit shareholders and stakeholders."
"I think this is the first time that the head of a big tech company talks about his civic responsibility, as an industry, to his community," said Rachel Coldicutt, CEO of Doteveryone, a think tank based in London that defends responsible and fair technology.
"It's starting to feel like a real moment of change. It's not as if Marc Benioff was talking about a product or a commercial choice. It is something that is really relatable and is really easy to handle. "
Coldicutt believes that the latest version of the technology boom was initially optimistic because it was focused on the Internet, meant to be for everyone, not just the powers that be. That's why it's particularly disappointing to see the industry behaving as usual.
Technical workers who defended the cause of application C often point out at rallies that "the new money looks a lot like old money" because corporate greed has persisted in a sector supposed to upset the old ways.
"It's not just capitalist, though," Coldicutt said. "It's a question of power. It's more a question of ego than of morality. Rather than doing normal things like paying taxes, many entrepreneurs say, "Look, I can find a more interesting and interesting way to do it." It's very individualizing. There does not seem to be much about community, a lot about citizenship. "
In San Francisco, this state of mind was flourishing when the city's supervisor, Jane Kim, took office in 2011. Kim, who represents the downtown district where most of the big technology companies have offices, began its mandate with the thankless task of negotiating a tax break. Twitter to maintain the company's headquarters in the city. The conversation had begun before taking office, and the then mayor, Ed Lee, was passionate about continuing the conversation.
"When I took office, my philosophy was the same [as today], "she said," people should enjoy paying their taxes, they are funding the city services, it keeps the lights on, it pays for the schools, but at the time I knew I had to fix the past.
"At first it was tough," Kim said. "In the beginning, many technicians did not understand the role of the government and did not care about the role of the government. In general, they did not understand that they were part of a larger community and everyone respects a set of rules, including these. There was no question of curbing innovation, that's what I heard all the time. "
The stereotype of the technician without being engaged appears with anecdotes that "ruin" San Francisco and consider the city as a personal playground that persists to this day.
But in the years following Kim's intense introduction into the world of technology, she said, she has witnessed the maturation of many players in the sector. They are now part of this city, just like their employees, and they now have every interest in what society thrives and what it thrives on.
"They realize that they are now more important players and that they have to play nicely in the sandbox, like everyone else, and be part of the community in which their employees eat, live, work and work. play, "said Kim.
This thinking goes beyond the leaders of the industry. Owski, Team C LinkedIn LinkedIn engineer for Approach C, says, "There are more and more people in the technology industry who are starting to get more involved."
"There are those in the tech industry who care and try to do something about it," he said.
Andrew, 32, an engineer at Synopsis who refused to give his last name, explained that one of the reasons he stood up against Owski this morning holding a sign saying "Technical Workers for Prop C" was because his stay in San Francisco had allowed him to face one of his biggest challenges: the exorbitant rental market.
"A homeowner moves in," he said, describing a phenomenon in which an owner evicted a tenant so that he or a family member could move in. The tenant groups claimed that some homeowners used it as a way to bypass rent control. "It happens to a lot of people. This helped me understand, since it concerned me personally, that it would be much more difficult for someone who has fewer resources to deal with these problems. "
Although Prop C is the lightning rod, Pollack, of the League of Pissed-Off Voters, said that in his view, this trend of civic engagement was an inevitable and natural progression that consists of living in a certain place for a while.
"These companies originally wanted to settle on the peninsula, but the workers wanted to live in San Francisco and were forced to follow their employees here," he said. "Now, the workers are somehow forcing the San Francisco values on these businesses, to some extent."
And because talent retention is a constant concern in Silicon Valley, technology leaders must ensure that their employees do not have to avoid eye contact when they say where they work.
"At this point, you have this real wealth of brilliant workers in San Francisco who have to choose where they want to work," said Jennifer Friedenbach, executive director of the Coalition on Homelessness, one of Prop C.'s architects. And they will want to work in places where they will feel proud. "
Source link
