Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

San Francisco’s Slow-Motion Suicide

nationalreview.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 312 posts

Re: San Francisco’s Slow-Motion Suicide

#51

Post by api »

Finnucane wrote: post #39
api wrote: post #13

San Francisco is a bonsai kitten. It wants to grow into a major world city like NYC, LA, or Tokyo, but its older residents are steadfastly opposed and want to keep it in a jar so it stays cute. The result is a painful deformed mess. I don't really think city planning boards can control how cities grow. A city is a living thing. If it "wants" to grow, let it grow. If it doesn't, I don't think it can be forced. Detroit…

I've lived in New York. Why would anyone want San Francisco to become like that? Is NYC cheap, clean, free of homeless people? No, it is crowded, smelly, expensive, and only livable for the extremely wealthy.

The mistake here is assuming that if SF grows it must become NYC. What if it could be better? There are many other even higher density cities than NYC in the world with much better policies and quality of life. Look to those.

Re: San Francisco’s Slow-Motion Suicide

#53

Post by asveikau »

dawhizkid wrote: post #10

Having lived in SF for a number of years now, I 100% agree that SF is just dystopian as hell. Trash everywhere downtown, human feces/needles/smell of urine all over downtown & SOMA, depressing mix of aggressive and zombie-like homeless, very few kids/families, very few minorities (especially African-Americans), barely functioning public transportation system, high rents forcing six-figure earners to live with 2 roomm…

> very few kids/families,

I am raising my kids here and disagree with your assessment. There is a pretty good community of families here.

Re: San Francisco’s Slow-Motion Suicide

#54

Post by bluejekyll »

dev_dull wrote: post #33

Here’s what I don’t get. The real struggle seems to always be against local governments and the residents. The residents all know how jacked up it is and have good ideas for fixes, but constantly butt heads against their city. Somehow everybody knows this, but votes in people who increase the power, scope, and responsibility of the local government which works against their interest?

Not sure what you mean exactly. A lot of the issues are people “protecting their neighborhoods” from development and preserving the “feel”. People generally are voting against policies that would raise inventory of housing, which is really the only way to reduce its cost.

Re: San Francisco’s Slow-Motion Suicide

#55

Post by WhompingWindows »

atom-morgan wrote: post #22
dawhizkid wrote: post #10

Having lived in SF for a number of years now, I 100% agree that SF is just dystopian as hell. Trash everywhere downtown, human feces/needles/smell of urine all over downtown & SOMA, depressing mix of aggressive and zombie-like homeless, very few kids/families, very few minorities (especially African-Americans), barely functioning public transportation system, high rents forcing six-figure earners to live with 2 roomm…

How is it that so much aggressive political rhetoric related to race and the tech industry is coming from this area if there are very few African Americans there in the first place? I live in Atlanta where the minority population is much higher all around and I don't get the sense at all that there's rampant racism or discrimination. Is this problem unique to the Bay Area or is this largely white guilt?

Can you give examples/evidence of this "aggressive political rhetoric" coming from "this area"?

Re: San Francisco’s Slow-Motion Suicide

#56

Post by cljs-js-eval »

api wrote: post #44
atom-morgan wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is it that so much aggressive political rhetoric related to race and the tech industry is coming from this area if there are very few African Americans there in the first place? I live in Atlanta where the minority population is much higher all around and I don't get the sense at all that there's rampant racism or discrimination. Is this problem unique to the Bay Area or is this largely white guilt?

[flagged]

I'm guessing the lust billboard guy made their sign as a response to the adult entertainment billboard guy, and the two don't share that much in common.

Re: San Francisco’s Slow-Motion Suicide

#57

Post by closeparen »

dawhizkid wrote: post #10

Having lived in SF for a number of years now, I 100% agree that SF is just dystopian as hell. Trash everywhere downtown, human feces/needles/smell of urine all over downtown & SOMA, depressing mix of aggressive and zombie-like homeless, very few kids/families, very few minorities (especially African-Americans), barely functioning public transportation system, high rents forcing six-figure earners to live with 2 roomm…

Not to dismiss this completely, but there are neighborhoods with lots of kids around. SOMA just isn’t one of them.

Re: San Francisco’s Slow-Motion Suicide

#58

Post by [deleted] »

api wrote: post #44
atom-morgan wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is it that so much aggressive political rhetoric related to race and the tech industry is coming from this area if there are very few African Americans there in the first place? I live in Atlanta where the minority population is much higher all around and I don't get the sense at all that there's rampant racism or discrimination. Is this problem unique to the Bay Area or is this largely white guilt?

[flagged]

[deleted]

Re: San Francisco’s Slow-Motion Suicide

#59

Post by _jal »

perpetualpatzer wrote: post #37
_jal wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they would enact a land-value tax and establish a redistributive policy They can't bring themselves to mention Proposition 13, somehow.

Sorry, not familiar with CA politics ... is the subtext here that a land-value tax would be impossible without a constitutional amendment? Or that California already enacted a 1% ad valorem tax in the 70s? From what I can tell, Prop 13 seems generally popular[0], but could see an argument that it exacerbates the housing shortage in the Bay Area, so not sure which way you're pointing. [0] https://www.ppic.org/wp-conte…

That is my point, yes. And doing so is essentially impossible. It is popular among property owners, who have a huge interest in defeating any attack on it. (It was also slightly amusing to see a history-free call for more taxation in that particular rag, given tribal affiliations.)

It does drive up housing costs. It also distorts commercial transactions weakens, local control, and generally casts a large shadow over, well, any conversation about taxation and anything taxation touches (like real estate) in California.

Re: San Francisco’s Slow-Motion Suicide

#60

Post by dawhizkid »

closeparen wrote: post #57
dawhizkid wrote: post #10

Having lived in SF for a number of years now, I 100% agree that SF is just dystopian as hell. Trash everywhere downtown, human feces/needles/smell of urine all over downtown & SOMA, depressing mix of aggressive and zombie-like homeless, very few kids/families, very few minorities (especially African-Americans), barely functioning public transportation system, high rents forcing six-figure earners to live with 2 roomm…

Not to dismiss this completely, but there are neighborhoods with lots of kids around. SOMA just isn’t one of them.

SF has one of the lowest % of kids of any major US city.

https://www.sfgate.com/mommyfiles/article/Many-families-leav...

Post reply on HN