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

Why San Francisco’s city government is so dysfunctional

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 441 posts

Re: Why San Francisco’s city government is so dysfunctional

#41

Post by shuckles »

zaphar wrote: post #34
runarberg wrote: post #15

What is the point of this article? The bulk of it is explaining that things are bad in SF, and that the city government is to blame. Sure I’ll buy that. But then it makes a leap of logic by claiming—or rather insinuating—that the reason for why they don’t fix those issues is because they are dysfunctional. As for why it is dysfunctional. Well: > As it is, the city has been safely Democratic for 40 years and seems all…

I mean it's hard to argue that it isn't the voters fault. Whether that is because they are not electing a conservative enough mayor or not isn't the point of the article. Vote in non-corrupt officials who are willing to clean house and you start to make a dint in the problem. Ideology is irrelevant as a qualification for the candidate. The fact that they choose largey based on ideology rather than integrity is the pr…

At this level of evidence, every problem in a nominally democratic society could be explained by “voters” in the abstract. Would you blame local discretion over land use, Prop 13, or CEQA - semi-permanent features of the Californian democratic system - on today’s San Francisco voters? How about the lack of national healthcare system that can support drug abusers and other mentally incompetent which drives a lot of net migration of homeless people to the city?

Re: Why San Francisco’s city government is so dysfunctional

#42

Post by ithinkso »

rpmcmurdo wrote: post #17

27 year San Francisco resident here. The government here is dysfunctional because that's what people voted for. The fact that people pay so much to live here says that people are willing to put up with a lot in exchange for living in a diverse and beautiful city.

People are willing to put up with a lot if it means they don't give anything to someone that doesn't deserve it.

'I will walk through a pile of shit before my money is used for you to shit somewhere else you lazy fuck'

Re: Why San Francisco’s city government is so dysfunctional

#43

Post by flyinglizard »

rpmcmurdo wrote: post #17

27 year San Francisco resident here. The government here is dysfunctional because that's what people voted for. The fact that people pay so much to live here says that people are willing to put up with a lot in exchange for living in a diverse and beautiful city.

Not sure I’d call a city which had one ruling party for forty years “diverse”.

Re: Why San Francisco’s city government is so dysfunctional

#44

Post by themanmaran »

diffset wrote: post #19
LurkingPenguin wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Per my own experience SF is not a bad place to live. I have the opposite view. In SF, your risk of the following occurring is non-negligible and in some cases, shockingly quite likely: - Being mugged/robbed - Having your car broken into - Being harangued or even assaulted by someone who is mentally ill and/or under the influence - Witnessing public urination, defecation, drug use and grab and go retail theft - Step…

The homeless and those issues pretty much only exist in the tourist areas near downtown, the tenderloin, soma, etc. The tourists come and see all of that and get the idea SF is some horrible dystopia, but unless you live in those areas, it's not a problem. I lived in Noe Valley for 3 years and never ran into a single problem from your list. SF is so much more than downtown.

Noe Valley resident as well. But you have to realize that Noe is very segregated from the rest of the city.

Mainly it's the hills. Hard to be homeless and hike up the castro hill. Same with why Bernal is so clean.

But anywhere in Mission or along Market gets pretty sketch.

Re: Why San Francisco’s city government is so dysfunctional

#45

Post by metalforever »

shuckles wrote: post #25
hamburgerwah wrote: post #11

A lot of my family has lived in SF for decades, all of them have moved out in the past 4 years. It's a monstrous dystopia now. The ultra rich completely insulated from the human misery sprawled out in every direction around them while their peasants toil away as tiny ants looked down upon with pity from their gleaming towers.

Huh? The primary issue with San Francisco is that you are in fact not insulated from human misery at all. If you want insulation, check out Atherton or Woodside 20 miles down south. In addition, the wealthy of San Francisco live in giant single family homes. It’s not a big skyscraper culture.

Yeah, I agree. The poster above is a nut.

Re: Why San Francisco’s city government is so dysfunctional

#46

Post by pjlegato »

diffset wrote: post #19
LurkingPenguin wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Per my own experience SF is not a bad place to live. I have the opposite view. In SF, your risk of the following occurring is non-negligible and in some cases, shockingly quite likely: - Being mugged/robbed - Having your car broken into - Being harangued or even assaulted by someone who is mentally ill and/or under the influence - Witnessing public urination, defecation, drug use and grab and go retail theft - Step…

The homeless and those issues pretty much only exist in the tourist areas near downtown, the tenderloin, soma, etc. The tourists come and see all of that and get the idea SF is some horrible dystopia, but unless you live in those areas, it's not a problem. I lived in Noe Valley for 3 years and never ran into a single problem from your list. SF is so much more than downtown.

The "bad / dangerous" part of the city is now significantly larger than it was even three years ago, when you moved here. It's been expanding rapidly the past few years.

Re: Why San Francisco’s city government is so dysfunctional

#47

Post by systemvoltage »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #29

I will note that California seems to be America's dumping ground for the nation's homeless problem. There are also long-standing federal and state housing policies impacting San Francisco. I have no idea how dysfunctional the local city government is in this case, but there are things going on here beyond its control. It's not fair or reasonable to act like the condition the city is in is entirely due to local govern…

I keep hearing this. Do you have any citations for "America's dumping ground". How many homeless are migrating to California?

> As the data shows us, most of the homeless people you pass on the streets every day are in fact Californians.

> Less than a fifth (18 percent) said they had lived out of state before becoming homeless.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/06/us/homeless-population.ht...

Everytime this argument has been brought up, instead of owning to the responsibility of causing homelessness, Californians love to point out how kind they are to homeless and how they're a "dumping ground" for homelessness. It is a cop out.

Re: Why San Francisco’s city government is so dysfunctional

#48

Post by metalforever »

ithinkso wrote: post #42
rpmcmurdo wrote: post #17

27 year San Francisco resident here. The government here is dysfunctional because that's what people voted for. The fact that people pay so much to live here says that people are willing to put up with a lot in exchange for living in a diverse and beautiful city.

People are willing to put up with a lot if it means they don't give anything to someone that doesn't deserve it. 'I will walk through a pile of shit before my money is used for you to shit somewhere else you lazy fuck'

You don't actually live in SF or you would know that there's not actually literal piles of shit everywhere.

Re: Why San Francisco’s city government is so dysfunctional

#49

Post by LurkingPenguin »

diffset wrote: post #19
LurkingPenguin wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Per my own experience SF is not a bad place to live. I have the opposite view. In SF, your risk of the following occurring is non-negligible and in some cases, shockingly quite likely: - Being mugged/robbed - Having your car broken into - Being harangued or even assaulted by someone who is mentally ill and/or under the influence - Witnessing public urination, defecation, drug use and grab and go retail theft - Step…

The homeless and those issues pretty much only exist in the tourist areas near downtown, the tenderloin, soma, etc. The tourists come and see all of that and get the idea SF is some horrible dystopia, but unless you live in those areas, it's not a problem. I lived in Noe Valley for 3 years and never ran into a single problem from your list. SF is so much more than downtown.

There are homeless encampments and tents on streets in the Marina district now, so these issues aren't isolated to "tourist areas".

Yes, some parts of the city definitely have it worse than others, but I don't think it's fair to dismiss these issues on the basis that there are small residential enclaves that are less affected.

If you want to enjoy SF's restaurant scene, nightlife, hiking, etc., you will inevitably have to go to areas where this crime is rampant. And this crime should not be happening in an American city, let alone one that is so rich.

Re: Why San Francisco’s city government is so dysfunctional

#50

Post by bryan0 »

hamburgerwah wrote: post #11

A lot of my family has lived in SF for decades, all of them have moved out in the past 4 years. It's a monstrous dystopia now. The ultra rich completely insulated from the human misery sprawled out in every direction around them while their peasants toil away as tiny ants looked down upon with pity from their gleaming towers.

I can sadly relate to this. Before the pandemic, in my tech company’s offices you could sip free cold brew looking out at the beautiful city from way up above. But if you looked directly down at the plaza below there was a growing sea of homelessness. Often needles and shit littered around them. Everyone seemed to just “tune it out” and pretend they weren’t there, because otherwise you would have to face that we were living in a dystopian reality.
Post reply on HN