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

201–210 of 441 posts

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

#201

Post by timoth3y »

CraigJPerry wrote: post #137

I sat and chatted to a homeless fella hanging out at Fisherman’s Wharf in SF for a while. He wasn’t from CA, from Missouri IIRC. He was gay, his family disowned him, he got into drugs. He got bitter, did some nasty stuff to people he hated, did some other misguided things and basically had hit rock bottom. I asked him what he thought would be needed to bring him out of homelessness and keep him inside society. He sai…

> It’s played on my mind many times over the years, how do you help someone in that scenario?

Acceptance? If he's clean, groomed, not bothering people, and OK with is life as it is, maybe there is room for him in society.

I think a lot of the problem stems from the fact that we all agree that "the homeless problem" should be solved, but we can't agree on what "the problem" is.

To some it's "I don't want to see and be bothered by homeless people"to others its "people are suffering needlessly" to others its "a wealthy nation like ours should be able to provide shelter to everyone" to others its some combination.

It's rare to hear a political plan to "solve homelessness" that addresses the people who want to be homeless.

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

#202

Post by refurb »

Aspos wrote: post #32
diffset wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Can confirm. In general, unless you actually step into them, human feces are not a problem. Just watch your step and be alert. How difficult can it be?

This is like some bizarre regression in civilization.

2000 years ago humans realized people shitting in random places was bad and needed to be solved. And it was.

And now we have people saying human shit on the sidewalks is “not a problem”.

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

#204

Post by irrational »

627467 wrote: post #189
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.

I've lived in south china pre-2000, in southern Europe and in south America. The first (and only) time I've seen human excrement on the streets was 2 years ago in San Francisco. It's very... odd. I mean, I don't think we should obsessed with the human feces part of it, but it would be nice to understand what's going on that it is so visible.

I agree. The only other place I’ve seen anything similar is India. Is San Francisco the India of the USA? Lots of techies in San Francisco are from India. Maybe they feel at home.

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

#205

Post by viscanti »

atdrummond wrote: post #178
tdeck wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone who doesn't know that the Richmond is a district of San Francisco doesn't get to pompously lecture me on not knowing about the city I lived in for seven years. Also, the Sunset is not a particularly wealthy district and it's not in the northwest. I never claimed that these problems don't exist, but the idea that they're part of life in every part of the city is simply false.

Richmond is also a city, hence why people usually say Richmond District if they want to explicitly refer to the NW District of SF when discussing the city and the surrounding area. Poster you’re replying to isn’t wrong, just as you aren’t.

They were providing a list of neighborhoods in SF. It wasn't ambiguous and would have been well understood by anyone familiar enough with the city to comment on the state of SF. There's also a Richmond Virginia (among many other Richmonds), none would make sense in the context of a list of SF neighborhoods.

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

#206

Post by chrisseaton »

muh_gradle wrote: post #200
CraigJPerry wrote: post #137

I sat and chatted to a homeless fella hanging out at Fisherman’s Wharf in SF for a while. He wasn’t from CA, from Missouri IIRC. He was gay, his family disowned him, he got into drugs. He got bitter, did some nasty stuff to people he hated, did some other misguided things and basically had hit rock bottom. I asked him what he thought would be needed to bring him out of homelessness and keep him inside society. He sai…

For those that are mentally ill, and especially if they are violent, you force them to get the psychiatric help that they need. It's an unpopular opinion. But frankly it's long overdue. For those that have the option to go to shelters, receive plenty of benefits (which SF most definitely provides) but prefer to be homeless, they need to be separated from major city areas where tourists, business people, and every day…

> you force them to get the psychiatric help that they need

The problem is that there’s a long history of people labelling all sorts of things they don’t like as being a mental illness and using that as an excuse to use treatment as violence against them. We called homosexuality a mental illness until very recently and forced people to have violent treatment for it, for example.

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

#207

Post by Hermitian909 »

As someone who's family has been in the bay area for over a century I was disappointed the article didn't mention any of the old money families who've controlled SF politics for decades.

This article[0] mentions some, though not all of the families (The Aliotos aren't mentioned here for example). While I haven't fully kept up, I know in the 90s at least a quarter of the financial district was held by two families. They own a ridiculous amount of the city's most valuable real estate and getting into office without their approval seems impossible.

I've been wanting someone to do a deep dive on them forever but it never happens and any analysis that lacks them feels pretty disappointing.

[0] https://www.latimes.com/projects/la-pol-ca-gavin-newsom-san-...

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

#208

Post by muh_gradle »

chrisseaton wrote: post #206
muh_gradle wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For those that are mentally ill, and especially if they are violent, you force them to get the psychiatric help that they need. It's an unpopular opinion. But frankly it's long overdue. For those that have the option to go to shelters, receive plenty of benefits (which SF most definitely provides) but prefer to be homeless, they need to be separated from major city areas where tourists, business people, and every day…

> you force them to get the psychiatric help that they need The problem is that there’s a long history of people labelling all sorts of things they don’t like as being a mental illness and using that as an excuse to use treatment as violence against them. We called homosexuality a mental illness until very recently and forced people to have violent treatment for it, for example.

If someone is having an episode and causing violence onto other people, we're not gonna look at this 20 years later and question if this isn't a mental illness. We absolutely know what the issue is here, and the situation that I described is not unheard of.

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

#209

Post by proc0 »

timoth3y wrote: post #201
CraigJPerry wrote: post #137

I sat and chatted to a homeless fella hanging out at Fisherman’s Wharf in SF for a while. He wasn’t from CA, from Missouri IIRC. He was gay, his family disowned him, he got into drugs. He got bitter, did some nasty stuff to people he hated, did some other misguided things and basically had hit rock bottom. I asked him what he thought would be needed to bring him out of homelessness and keep him inside society. He sai…

> It’s played on my mind many times over the years, how do you help someone in that scenario? Acceptance? If he's clean, groomed, not bothering people, and OK with is life as it is, maybe there is room for him in society. I think a lot of the problem stems from the fact that we all agree that "the homeless problem" should be solved, but we can't agree on what "the problem" is. To some it's "I don't want to see and be…

How about hygiene? Where do you think they relieve themselves? How many times a day do you think they'll need to use a toilet and how many times do they find one? Hint: they don't really care. Source: experience living in SF.

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

#210

Post by proc0 »

chrisseaton wrote: post #188
CraigJPerry wrote: post #137

I sat and chatted to a homeless fella hanging out at Fisherman’s Wharf in SF for a while. He wasn’t from CA, from Missouri IIRC. He was gay, his family disowned him, he got into drugs. He got bitter, did some nasty stuff to people he hated, did some other misguided things and basically had hit rock bottom. I asked him what he thought would be needed to bring him out of homelessness and keep him inside society. He sai…

As long as they aren’t harming anyone why can’t you respect their wishes and leave them alone if that’s what they want? What if someone decided you needed help even after you made it clear you didn’t want it?

Does taking a dump in front of your building count? Because I have many experience of that, including a couple where they entered my building and took a big dump in the lobby.
Post reply on HN