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

Californians aren’t leaving the state en masse but are leaving San Francisco

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 488 posts

Re: Californians aren’t leaving the state en masse but are leaving San Francisco

#331

Post by perl4ever »

rsj_hn wrote: post #108
chomp wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People of San Francisco passed a law to allow any robbery under $1000 That’s just not true at all, come on, you’re intentionally spreading misinformation. It raised the limit to $950 for the felony threshold for simple theft. Robbery is still a felony. “Prop 47 doesn’t cover robberies, theft by the use of force or fear. It doesn’t cover burglaries,” Gascón said. “If you break into a structure with the intent to com…

Gascon isn't the DA, Boudin is (the son of leftwing activists who convicted of felony murder for killing two policemen - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chesa_Boudin ). With his parents in prison Boudin was adopted by Bill Ayers, another Weather Underground leader who also made headlines for saying (in a video interview - https://daleyeagerdotcom.wordpress.com/2020/01/15/breaking-v... reminiscent of Hobsbawm) we might…

>who convicted of felony murder for killing two policemen

That seems improbable. Why would anyone be charged with felony murder if they killed someone? It seems like a contradiction in terms.

Edit: to be clear, it's easy to look up that yes, his parents were convicted of felony murder, and no, they didn't kill the police officers. That's how felony murder works, so I wonder if the comment above is preaching to people who think "felony" is an intensifier for "murder" or whether it's an honest mistake.

Re: Californians aren’t leaving the state en masse but are leaving San Francisco

#332

Post by typest »

mikeg8 wrote: post #122
typest wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cities are more efficient and sustainable. Most importantly, cities bring people together to enable cooperation, therefore acting as a multiplier on what is produced and generally making humanity better off. What’s needed are better run cities.

The connection to nature one finds residing in the countryside is pretty much impossible to replicate while living in a city. Wildlife diversity, fresh air, ability to grow and harvest a garden - all of these are much more accessible outside a city and I believe lead to much more wholesome human experience. The concrete and glass of a modern metropolis do not make me feel like humanity is “better off”. Just my two ce…

I don’t disagree with you. I am an avid backpacker and really enjoy nature. Many studies show people have better mental attitudes when they can view trees daily, etc.

I’ll just note that there are a lot of different points on the spectrum between country side and concrete/glass metropolis. Many of these points are great places I would still count as cities, and they still allow for gardens. I am NOT arguing for us all to live in high rises in midtown Manhattan. I do think that we should build nice, dense areas that still have green space, while allowing humans to live close together to gain the increasing returns that make society great. Hopefully we cut down on cars and get the fresh air as well.

Re: Californians aren’t leaving the state en masse but are leaving San Francisco

#333

Post by seanmcdirmid »

rsj_hn wrote: post #276
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And...where is NYC today? Definitely not a desolate bankrupt city with falling property values. Also, San Francisco and the Bay Area are definitely not immune to the boom-bust cycle, there have been busts before and there will be busts again, just like any other boom towns.

>Where is NYC? Mostly boarded up

You wish, maybe? Anyways, conservatives need places like NYC and California to fail to validate their ideologies, that they keep thriving and booming must be incredibly frustrating to them.

Re: Californians aren’t leaving the state en masse but are leaving San Francisco

#334

Post by maya24 »

NotChina wrote: post #292
sampo wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> SF is over 5x denser than Dallas San Francisco is also 3x less dense than Paris (Paris, France). SF could add homes for 1.5 million people and still be as livable as Paris, if it wanted to.

Paris is not on a fault line either. Or built on large portions of land that suffer from liquid faction.

SF like most American cities has suffered poor city planning and no foresight about future population growth.

Re: Californians aren’t leaving the state en masse but are leaving San Francisco

#335

Post by rayiner »

dcolkitt wrote: post #309
jake891 wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The incarceration rate of SF county is higher than any country or major city in Europe. Persecution ain’t the issue. Lack of housing, healthcare and honourable work is.

Even if you released every prisoner in America, besides the rapists and murderers, the US would still have a higher incarceration rate than Europe. I'm sure the SF specific numbers would tell a similar story. You can't simply compare European to American incarceration statistics without taking into account that the US is an extremely criminal country for the developed world. And no, this doesn't have to do with unive…

The current US homicide rate is the same as in England in the late Middle Ages. It’s been 5-10x higher than the UK the entire 20th century. https://quod.lib.umich.edu/h/humfig/11217607.0002.206/--deci...

Also, we have had Obamacare for a decade. We have a less complete social safety net than European countries, but people act like it doesn’t exist.

Re: Californians aren’t leaving the state en masse but are leaving San Francisco

#336

Post by maya24 »

jeffbee wrote: post #172
coryrc wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's more sarcasm than not. He's saying it was never a desirable area but tech companies moved there anyway despite theoretically having the money to be nicer places.

Name a tech company with an office in the Tenderloin.

Microsoft, Twitter, Dolby are 3 who share an intersection! Square and Uber just a block away.

Re: Californians aren’t leaving the state en masse but are leaving San Francisco

#337

Post by jandrewrogers »

NotChina wrote: post #292
sampo wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> SF is over 5x denser than Dallas San Francisco is also 3x less dense than Paris (Paris, France). SF could add homes for 1.5 million people and still be as livable as Paris, if it wanted to.

Paris is not on a fault line either. Or built on large portions of land that suffer from liquid faction.

That isn't a credible argument. We've known how to engineer for seismic risks for a very long time and many dense, tall cities are built on top of faults in seismic risk zones at least as severe as San Francisco without issue.

For example, Tokyo and Seattle. San Francisco even has the advantage of being merely fault adjacent. In cases like Seattle, a major thrust fault runs through the city. It doesn't prevent dense construction.

Re: Californians aren’t leaving the state en masse but are leaving San Francisco

#338

Post by mikem170 »

selimthegrim wrote: post #308
mikem170 wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the recent Texas power outage is the result of a free-market system for energy Texas was not the only area that had problems. Louisiana is regulated and had outages, people with no potable water, etc [0] Nearby states did not have available power to send via the interconnects. It was really cold for a really long time. Everyone talks about how it snowed ten years ago in Austin. I know, I was there. But do they also…

I live in New Orleans and by and large things were fine. Maybe 50K people lost power and water in the state and most of those were in BR. (Lake Charles is still recovering from the hurricanes). It was much worse here in Jan 2018. Entergy turned over its grid control to MISO, as well as built a (huge waste of a) gas peaker plant that I will concede was used in this situation but probably wasn't needed given our connec…

I drew an equivalence to highlight that the problems related to the record 100 year cold weather crossed regulatory boundaries, which was the topic of discussion.

In Louisiana 2 million people lost power (42% of the state population), 800k had to boil water (17%), and 5 people died (1 of every 940k).

In Texas 4.5 million people lost power (17% of the state population), 12 million had water problems (43%), and 40 deaths as of a few days ago (1 of every 685k).

I don't think my comparing the two states to prove a point was out of bounds. The numbers show significant impact in both of them. I know Oklahama got it pretty bad, and Mexico was impacted. Cold weather kills. Water pipes were going to freeze regardless of electricity. People don't go to shelters when they should. I know the numbers are not the complete picture, but back to the original point: This was a 100 year cold spell, not a free market failure.

I'm not sure of your angle, I might be misunderstanding your comment. I didn't mean to trash Louisiana. It's understandable that this record cold would cause problems. I don't think it's fair to single Texas out, and the numbers above support that.

Re: Californians aren’t leaving the state en masse but are leaving San Francisco

#339

Post by lettergram »

mushbino wrote: post #325
lettergram wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Link the data. I’m saying it attracts people who need something. You stop services to people maintaining the status of quo and invest in rehabilitating and upon failure, removing people. The problem is (idk how many homeless you’ve spoken with in SF). Most chose to be there, you have to make it somewhere they can’t live like that. This is a failure of policy. Other cities have solved this, SF can too.

Cut off services and have them go where? Also, how do you ban someone from a city? This is just a purely NIMBY response and not in any way realistic or helpful. You just really don't like it in your backyard and want it in someone else's backyard. I feel like your next suggestion is euthanasia.

(1) Offer rehabilitation (many homeless don't willingly take advantage of this).

(2) Regularly push them out of where they are staying with officers. If necessary, use hoses or w.e.

People will either leave because they can't stay there or they attempt to rehabilitate. This is what they do most places outside of California.

This method often leads to rehabilitation, because they don't really have a choice. Those who don't want to be rehabilitate leave and start a life the next town over, live in the woods, what have you.

It's better for everyone in a society to hold each other accountable -- be apart of the society or leave. Many homeless are drug addicts and / or mentally ill, they need help, but you can't help them (unless they want to). By holding everyone accountable, everyone will be better off.

Re: Californians aren’t leaving the state en masse but are leaving San Francisco

#340

Post by cozuya »

mushbino wrote: post #306
lettergram wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ugh, almost all modern cities have solved this. SF can solve this too. You force the homeless out of the city and attempt to rehabilitate where you can. Also, this is definitely not a federal problem. At most it’s a Cali problem. This is how the US works, local jurisdictions deal with the local problem.

Force them out of cities to where exactly? It doesn't sound like you've thought this through. What OP meant was that it will take a federal initiative, meaning something that will cover every state and local jurisdiction. If they're forced out of one locality, what's to stop the next one from moving them out of there and so on?

What the OP is probably trying to say is that TPTB should collectively push-together, no wait, thats not the word, gather? No that's not right either. Ah yes, "concentrate" the undesirables into to some sort of "camp", perhaps.
Post reply on HN