Live data from Hacker News

Why San Francisco’s city government is so dysfunctional

economist.com

281–290 of 441 posts

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

#281

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. Th…

Except the aliotos cannot get elected. I'm happy to believe in conspiracies but if they control so much as you say, why can't they get their own elected.

Being a member of one of those families is no guarantee that you will be supported in search for office by the wider group or even your own family.

My impression is the prevailing opinion within the families should not be attempting to hold office directly and that Angela's bid was not widely supported even by many of her relatives, let alone the wider group we're discussing.

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

#282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Low because they don't arrest anyone. But that isn't on the police - they don't arrest anyone because the DA doesn't prosecute anyone. Property crime is sky high... if you happen to get caught breaking into a car the penalty is a warning. That is the policy. You have to break into many cars and be caught (which is hard to do) many times for any action. Boudin has indefensibly ignored violent criminals, too. Like a wo…

Police inaction is a long-standing problem that pre-dates the current DA by quite some time. SF police have not responded to garage break-ins or car break-ins for some time. They might show up 5 hours later, very annoyed, and take a report. Even if you have good quality HD video evidence. Even if you have a tracking device on the stolen property proving where it is. They will not gather evidence, collect fingerprints…

This response strikes at the heart of the issue. Until the wild distortions in the property market are fixed (imo, specifically until Prop 13 gets repealed or significantly amended) big, expensive cities in California will continue have increasing crime problems.

As you can probably imagine, community policing is difficult if you're not a member of the community. And as the cost of living goes up while property taxes remain artificially depressed due to prop 13, the disparity between what municipalities are able to pay for police (which is partially funded by property taxes), and how much those police will need to afford to live there, will continue to grow. It seems like a slow, self-reenforcing downward spiral that will only get re-set if the quality of life deteriorates to the point where people actually start moving out of these communities.

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

#283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To add further color to this, the Irvine Company benefits enormously from Prop 13. This law guarantees that once you hold property for long enough, your tax burden will be so much lower than everyone else you have a cost advantage that newcomers will not be able to match. So the current state law favors older companies over new ones. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1978_California_Proposition_13

Your tax burden would stay the same, relative to future buyers, if prices stay flat. At which some point, they're bound to plateau. How many people or institutions will buy single family homes once they're $10 million each, but the median household income is still somewhere around $100k? It's a subtle point, but the benefits of Prop 13 aren't a function of time, they're a function of appreciation. It just so happens…

I think inflationary monetary policy (a good thing) more or less guarantees that in dollar terms (the thing that matters for prop 13) prices will go up every year. I think prop c does allow for some price adjustment for inflation, but it has a crazily low cap

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

#284
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was watching a twitch streamer who lives in SF, and he told a story about a time he was walking down the sidewalk at night and saw a homeless person peeing on someone's car. He said there was a cop nearby that saw him doing it, but he told the streamer that the homeless guy looked gross and he didn't feel like dealing with him, so the homeless guy just walked away when he was finished.

You want a cop to physically detain a homeless person which will just result in sending him through a pointlessly cruel and expensive criminal justice system where he'll pop-out the other side with nothing but unpayable debts that'll drive him through the same cycle again - all because he urinated on a car of someone who won't even realize it happened?

[deleted]

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

#285

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? Offer them help. If they refuse, respect their rights, and move on.

And then when they defecate on your doorstep and urinate on your porch, what do you do? Offer them treatment, they refuse, so you "respect their rights" and move on? Wash, rinse, repeat?

It is strange that people have absolutely no problem banning camping in national parks but think it is a human right to do it in urban areas. Cities, in order to survive, need to enforce standards of behavior, and those who flaunt those standards need to be coerced into following them if there is to be a large number of people living in a small urban area.

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

#286
post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

African-Americans ethnically cleansed from the city, first by Justin Herman’s “revitalization” of the Western Addition, or the shocking fact that black men in Bayview-Hunter’s Point have a life expectancy 20 years less than other SF males , and in fact lower than the US average for black males. Just because we have a black female mayor does not mean the real racism of SF is gone, just as electing Obama did not miracu…

Are you sure that's what the parent post meant? I don't agree that they have been "ethnically cleansed." I'm sure economics has forced some out. I've live in many parts of the country, and this is by far the least racist, and most racially diverse, place I've lived. Black men in the city would be expected to have a lower life span than black men nationwide, since urban black neighborhood are more prone to drugs and g…

I just looked at a few lists of the most racially diverse cities in the U.S. and SF doesn't make any of those lists.

San Francisco also has a disproportionately low amount of black folks living there.

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

#287

I was thinking of making the move to SF for the higher income. Seeing the past few years of the city have completely changed my mind though. Chesa Boudin physically makes my head hurt so much.

Try living there for a month 1st.. it has significantly changed.

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

#288

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. Th…

I think a story about an ultra wealthy ruling class that stands behind the public political class is not going to get published in mainstream outlets. I mean it will if it's about Russia or China or historical periods like "the Gilded Age", but I guess you don't see it talked about for modern day West.

This has to do with collusion between the ultra wealthy class, the media class, and the political class.

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

#289

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. Th…

I find the Economist has fairly shallow "analysis" if you can even call what they do analysis. So I am disappointed but not surprised that they missed on the real story. The Economist is as useful in terms about learning about the world as reading headlines.

You’re not wrong but you also miss the point. I subscribe to both the Economist, a newspaper that covers a range of topics and Stratechery, a newsletter that specialises in tech.

On any tech topic Stratechery dives in deep, analysing the incentives, actions and outcomes of each player. Every quarterly report from the big tech companies is analysed. The author also has the courage to make predictions, many of which turn out to be true. It’s worth the money in my book.

The Economist also covers tech topics but at a high level, and for an audience that isn’t tech inclined. Take for example, this gem of an article - Why Companies Struggle With Recalcitrant IT (https://www.economist.com/business/2020/07/18/why-companies-...). For a layman it’s a great intro on software is always delayed and over budget. For those of us who work in IT, it’s all obvious stuff.

A person familiar with IT might say “go deeper, talk about other issues”. In fact, I did just that. I contacted the author and pointed out a couple of difficulties in software that increase complexity, like dependency management. The author was aware of this already but chose not to add this for the sake of keeping the article a manageable length [1].

That’s what the Economist does - covers a wide range of topics, while not assuming the reader is knowledgeable about any of it. Even though finance focussed newspaper, they painstakingly explain every term before they use it. But these two constraints - covering breadth and not assuming knowledge mean there is a limit to how deep they can go on any topic.

If you find a newspaper that analyses every topic in the world to your desired level of detail, please let us know. Also, if the newspaper isn’t staffed by aspiring fiction writers gratifying themselves by writing impossibly large “long reads”, that would be even better.

——

[1] - their response to my letter :

Dear nindalf,

Thank you for your letter. You're right, of course - I've always thought it's a bit like an ancient city like Istanbul, with modern buildings sitting on top of layers of old architecture that's only half-mapped and whose builders are long forgotten. Unfortunately there wasn't space to get too evocative in the piece itself.

I've forwarded your letter for publication, though, because it's an important point.

Best,

Tim Cross

Technology Editor

The Economist

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

#290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your tax burden would stay the same, relative to future buyers, if prices stay flat. At which some point, they're bound to plateau. How many people or institutions will buy single family homes once they're $10 million each, but the median household income is still somewhere around $100k? It's a subtle point, but the benefits of Prop 13 aren't a function of time, they're a function of appreciation. It just so happens…

I think inflationary monetary policy (a good thing) more or less guarantees that in dollar terms (the thing that matters for prop 13) prices will go up every year. I think prop c does allow for some price adjustment for inflation, but it has a crazily low cap

I think you need to defend your claim that inflationary monetary policy is a good thing. How is it good for the residents of a country?
Post reply on HN