Has anyone bought a property in New York City?

Look at the legal framework with things like home ownership over yhere vs here ...more risk averse here. Its in the business framework as well. Govt over thete covers a lot of mistakes made in business as lonh as you meey certain conditions, unlike here where you are mpre on your own and if you make a mistake you are stuffed...as a natural result, peoplr dony take as many business risks here.

 

So who takes more risk then?

 

it works both ways- by allowing individuals to take more risk, it opens them to stuff like what caused the GFC...ie taking on mortgages that are based on flawed assumptions ( house prices rising in perpetuity etc)...but also allowing individuals to take on risk and backing them up allows stuff like microsoft, apple, google, etc to form and also flourish. It generally though that the total value created by the second group outweighs the value lost by the first group.

 

That was precisely my point. It is a total misconception that the behavior of people somehow created Microsoft and Apple, Google etc. It is the behavior of markets which created these companies. Google might have been started in Australia, who knows, the problem is the small population which cannot provide a big enough market for a startup business to sustain the initial few years and build the basis it needs to then go and conquer the world. For a business to grow out of Australia (and other countries) it has to be exceptionally good, for the US it has to be good enough.

Which other country has a literate, urbanized population as big as US? The difference is manifolds. The euro zone probably? They have the comparable market and the GDP hence the big corporation owned by eu countries. The only thing they lack is media and Hollywood to gold plate everything which will never be comparable to USA because of so many different languages spoken in the zone

 

Which is why companies like Atlassian chose to float on the US market. Also why so many local tech startups relocate to SF or get acquired & shift their IP over to the states.

the other thing that I believe is understated is the availability & quality of talent. Because there is so much tech in relatively small areas, you get access to much better talent & its easier to scale up quicker.

 

Which is all the more reason then the aust govt should encourage more here than they currently do.
I think you are somewhat right. But not fully. Thr markwt size is definately important no doubt. In the last 20 years or so, globalisation forces have effectively made the world a smaller place and easier to access different markets. This is especially ao with the internet. ..yet, we still dont see pureplay internet based world-class leaders over here. There has gotta be more to it.

 

The first, best and most important thing the govt should do is deploy an all fibre NBN.

We were so close....but now even the current day Labor NBN proposal sucks........until then enjoy mining.

 

Again, this has been discussed so many times in the past and nothing has/will change. Australia is a small country (by population size) and it takes good care of its citizens at the same time. The government cannot take care of the tech entrepreneurs alone, just not going to happen in this market. Tech entrepreneurs should have a voice but that is one voice among many... a lot of people do not have the problem you and I have.

IMHO, the entrepreneurs in this country are asking for something which is not possible. With limited funding you have to cut funds in project A to fund project B. The least government can do is to have FTAs to create markets of scale for Australians...