Interesting, and I think Seattle is at least vaguely aware of this. It's worth noting that in recent years tons of other companies have been setting up shop in the area.<p>I know Facebook's second largest office is here, Palantir just opened an office, and it seems every week or so I hear of another SV company opening a satellite. That's not to say this isn't a real problem, but Amazon's success (and how frickin' awesome Seattle is) is attracting other people to cushion the blow.<p>An important note here is that the revenue sources and the markets for these are very diverse. The 5-10 notable companies with notable presence have probably 5-10 mostly discrete markets driving their growth.<p>Silicon Valley, on the other hand, has hundreds of companies but 90%+ are entirely dependent on ads (or the ad bubble, depending on which side of that fence you're on).<p>Any thoughts on how this plays into the risk calculus?
This brings up an interesting question: how should city planners make decisions about long term infrastructure if their populations are unstable?<p>Will the trend of working for many companies for shorter periods of time, and therefore perhaps moving more often, make certain city populations less stable than others?