Why San Francisco’s city government is so dysfunctional • Hacker News Board

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

#321

Post by jawarner » Sat, Aug 28, 2021, 7:33 AM UTC

spfzero wrote: post #258

rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For better or for worse, homelessness in America can largely be attributed to Regan-era changes in policy [1] that prevented people from being committed against their will to psychiatric hospitals. It was done in the name of human rights, but naturally there were ulterior motives. It's time we reverted it. About 10% of humans have been addicts across most cultures throughout most of recorded human history, and they d…

But they are making rational decisions, in their own framework. And they are caring for themselves, as much as they care. Sure we could grab them up and throw them into institutions, and call the problem solved. I’d rather see us hold them accountable for any behavior that harms others, and leave it at that. Sleep on the sidewalk? Fine. Block the sidewalk? Not fine. Litter, endanger, defacate in public? Same penalty…

What are those penalties, and does this penal system actually work to change people's habits, or is it just part of a cycle, e.g. streets -> jail -> streets?

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

#322

Post by nradov » Sat, Aug 28, 2021, 7:34 AM UTC

wahern wrote: post #293

nradov wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If SF politics is really controlled by a wealthy cabal then why have they allowed the situation to deteriorate so much? What possible benefit could they derive from homelessness, dirty streets, rampant property crime, and a dysfunctional government? The wealthy people who control NYC politics seem less tolerant of such issues.

> If SF politics is really controlled by a wealthy cabal then why have they allowed the situation to deteriorate so much? Because they can't influence supervisor elections or school board elections as well as they can elections for mayor. The reason why San Francisco mayors are always re-elected is because they're very middle of the road in terms of politics and risk tolerance. Activist policies are usually the produ…

How are the monied elite able to select the mayor, yet unable to select the district attorney?

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

#323

Post by jawarner » Sat, Aug 28, 2021, 7:35 AM UTC

trhway wrote: post #223

rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For better or for worse, homelessness in America can largely be attributed to Regan-era changes in policy [1] that prevented people from being committed against their will to psychiatric hospitals. It was done in the name of human rights, but naturally there were ulterior motives. It's time we reverted it. About 10% of humans have been addicts across most cultures throughout most of recorded human history, and they d…

>About 10% of humans have been addicts across most cultures throughout most of recorded human history, and they desperately need help (even if they claim don't want it). one can wonder why this trait hasn't been selected out by now (or some trait managing it hasn't appeared).

It's not a genetic issue, it's an ecological issue. I imagine almost all humans can become addicted to something or develop mental health issues under the right (wrong) circumstances.

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

#324

Post by hack-news » Sat, Aug 28, 2021, 7:42 AM UTC

bpodgursky wrote: post #227

chrisseaton wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

I don't consider it humane to let someone live on the streets begging until they happen to die of a drug overdose. I don't care about their wishes, guided by drug addiction and mental health issues. To allow and enable this much squandering of human potential is a moral crime. Get people clean of drugs, healthy, stable, and educated. By force, if needed. If from that baseline he decides to go back into a life of drug…

Everyone should have a gun to protect themselves from lunatics like you.

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

#325

Post by smhost » Sat, Aug 28, 2021, 7:42 AM UTC

spfzero wrote: post #258

rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For better or for worse, homelessness in America can largely be attributed to Regan-era changes in policy [1] that prevented people from being committed against their will to psychiatric hospitals. It was done in the name of human rights, but naturally there were ulterior motives. It's time we reverted it. About 10% of humans have been addicts across most cultures throughout most of recorded human history, and they d…

But they are making rational decisions, in their own framework. And they are caring for themselves, as much as they care. Sure we could grab them up and throw them into institutions, and call the problem solved. I’d rather see us hold them accountable for any behavior that harms others, and leave it at that. Sleep on the sidewalk? Fine. Block the sidewalk? Not fine. Litter, endanger, defacate in public? Same penalty…

I think the idea of "There's nothing you can do for me given the current social-political reality" too often gets conflated with "This is all I want my life to be". And even if the person has truly given up on society, I don't think society should ever give up on the person.

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

#326

Post by jawarner » Sat, Aug 28, 2021, 7:42 AM UTC

muh_gradle wrote: post #208

chrisseaton wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Given that causing violence onto other people is illegal, I suppose what you're talking about could be thought of as a change to the prison system so that it's designed to improve the (mental) health of people committed, rather than just being punitive.

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

#327

Post by space_fountain » Sat, Aug 28, 2021, 7:46 AM UTC

lowkey wrote: post #290

space_fountain wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

I mean to the best of my knowledge basically all economists think it is, but beyond that imagine a world where we had stagnation or worse deflation. You would have much less of an incentive to invest money rather than just keep it in the bank.

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

#328

Post by retrac » Sat, Aug 28, 2021, 7:50 AM UTC

trhway wrote: post #223

rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For better or for worse, homelessness in America can largely be attributed to Regan-era changes in policy [1] that prevented people from being committed against their will to psychiatric hospitals. It was done in the name of human rights, but naturally there were ulterior motives. It's time we reverted it. About 10% of humans have been addicts across most cultures throughout most of recorded human history, and they d…

>About 10% of humans have been addicts across most cultures throughout most of recorded human history, and they desperately need help (even if they claim don't want it). one can wonder why this trait hasn't been selected out by now (or some trait managing it hasn't appeared).

Same reason some young men play chicken with traffic. Paradoxically, it's likely a signal of fitness. A young man who can still manage sex successfully under the burden of multiple addictions probably has decent genes, cardiovascularly speaking. Probably why men are much more likely than women to take such risks, too.

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

#329

Post by bosie » Sat, Aug 28, 2021, 7:53 AM UTC

spfzero wrote: post #258

rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For better or for worse, homelessness in America can largely be attributed to Regan-era changes in policy [1] that prevented people from being committed against their will to psychiatric hospitals. It was done in the name of human rights, but naturally there were ulterior motives. It's time we reverted it. About 10% of humans have been addicts across most cultures throughout most of recorded human history, and they d…

But they are making rational decisions, in their own framework. And they are caring for themselves, as much as they care. Sure we could grab them up and throw them into institutions, and call the problem solved. I’d rather see us hold them accountable for any behavior that harms others, and leave it at that. Sleep on the sidewalk? Fine. Block the sidewalk? Not fine. Litter, endanger, defacate in public? Same penalty…

> Litter, endanger, defacate in public? Same penalty as anyone else.

what penalty is that for people who cannot pay any fines?

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

#330

Post by zumu » Sat, Aug 28, 2021, 7:56 AM UTC

muh_gradle wrote: post #22

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.

If you want to open a Walgreen's in the FiDi, I'd advise against it, but assuming you're a tech worker, it's a pretty pleasant place to live.

While it all depends on your values, it's very walkable for a US city, relatively safe, and has mild weather. Homelessness is of course an issue as it is for most west coast cities.