In the meantime, you should consider setting up shop as a recruiter. You could probably place your Washington friends in jobs at startups here fairly easily. If they can memorize a few words/acronyms (Angular, MVVM, etc.) and are willing to show up to the interview with an axe for good measure, you'll be cashing checks in no time.
So it's the 1990s again? Cool, cargo pants must be coming back, too. I wonder if it has anything to do with the rise of Portland in pop culture. Portlandia's got it right: it's still the 90's in Portland (I'm from the area, it's pretty much true).
Also, lumbersexuals have fancier hair. Grunge has more spiritual similarly to t shirts and hoodies, a rejection of expensive fancy fashion, than the fancified hipsterism that chased after it.
Compare Burners who fly a helicopter into camp, vs people who go for a hike in the city park.
That's a really weird conclusion to come to. I wear hoodies and tee shirts because 1) my job doesn't require more, 2) my hoodie and tee are comfortable and easily adaptable to changing temperature, and 3) clothing shopping is a chore, an extreme annoyance.
Well-fitting "slob" clothing looks better than poorly-fitting mid-range "nice" clothing, particularly when one doesn't fit the body type of the target audience for the latter.
'Well-fitting slob clothing' not only signals that you're not subject to some sort of onerous dress code imposed by your employer (within reason), but also that you can afford to spend money on what most people could consider leisurewear. Further, while you may genuinely not be interested in clothes, picking them out in the morning, looking at other peoples', or shopping for them - and while I can sympathize with your disinterest - that very indifference is itself a mark of affluence. Most people work hard at that stuff because they feel obliged to create a certain image to get employed, get laid, and maintain their self-respect. If they don't care about clothes and they choose not to spend money on them, and they don't happen to put out certain other socioeconomic signals, then they will just be dismissed as scruffy bums.
If anything, that signifies low status. The vast majority of people in hoodies and tees are not six figure engineers and designers.
but also that you can afford to spend money on what most people could consider leisurewear.
Oh, come on. Hoodies and tees are cheap. Really cheap. And versatile.
Give me a couple of basic color tees, one hoodie, and two pairs of jeans, and that's my wardrobe. I don't need to cycle my shirt colors and patterns, monitor my tie usage, iron my clothes, etc.
I don't buy your argument at all.
Perhaps if conspicuous philanthropy found its way down to everyday people, that would be a nice addition too.
i like choco tacos but wendys and ramen cups are pretty tereible.
Conspicuous nonconsumption [0], as I call it, is all the rage in SF and among engineers. That's why everyone wears hoodies and tshirts: to show that they're different from MBAs and the suits and the bankers. But that's just another way to show your status: you are the member of an exclusive club that doesn't need suits to have high status.
And so with your blog. You're identifying as part of a group that's too good for status symbols. You're explicitly saying "I'm not like you" and implicitly saying "I'm better than you because I don't need whatever things you find valuable".
You're showing off your non-consumption for high status, in exactly the same way that they're showing off their consumption for high status. At the end of the day, you're both just showing off for high status! [1]
[0] See also "stealth wealth"
[1] No judgement here, btw: in tech, I think we all do this, me included.