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

401–410 of 441 posts

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

#401

Post by xyzzy21 »

SF has ALWAYS been dysfunctional.

California created the "ballot proposition system" which causes the ballot measure to become part of the California constitution because the state political system has ALWAYS been corrupt and dysfunctional! The system was created in 1856!!! Just 6 years after becoming a state - so FU in its very origins. Because politicians could NOT be trusted to be honest or civilly reliable to the mission of the state!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_ballot_proposition

As historical precedent has shown, most California politicians are still corrupt and dysfunctional ALL the time.

So after 165 years, why is anyone surprised or even posing the question??? It's baked into California history and norms!

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

#402

Post by xyzzy21 »

nradov wrote: post #232
Hermitian909 wrote: post #207

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…

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.

Simple: NIMBY. There are places they can live where they don't have to dip their toes into the literal shit. And they keep the "riff-raff" out with harsh NIMBY-ism.

You have Pacific Heights, Presidio/Richmond (especially where Feinsteins, Pelosis, Cockers, Dorseys, etc. live) as well as Marin and Hillsborough, et al.

They can let it happen because they can create their own little bubble world and never interact with "the deplorables".

I grew up in the Bay Area and went to "good schools" with these peoples' children so I've seen them up-close-and-personal. They are not nice people.

New Yorkers in my experience are far more practical and "based" compared to Western large blue cities.

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

#403

Post by pkdpic »

pkdpic wrote: post #77
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 grew up in SF and still have family sticking it out there. I don't completely disagree with the sentiment here but last I heard I thought SF had a pretty serious diversity problem. Is that no longer the case?

Not sure why this got down voted, I was just asking a question. Thanks HN. Seriously though thanks for the responses, I was legit curious what people thought. I'm gonna go watch last black man in san francisco again.

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

#404

Post by Karrot_Kream »

lhorie wrote: post #390
Karrot_Kream wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You're lucky (and not that I want to intentionally bring up this card, but I bet you're a burly caucasian male). Stop this. I'm a non-burly non-caucasian male and this (being mugged, robbed, or undergoing physical violence) has never happened to me even once. Maybe you're unlucky? Drawing from your personal anecdotes gets tiring. > I've witnessed multiple retail theft incidents. I've been spat on, literally out of…

> Drawing from your personal anecdotes gets tiring. Perhaps that says more about the impact of high crime stats on real people than my individual luck. The reality remains that various forms of crime are deeply intertwined with various forms of inequality (be it correlation between race/gender/etc and violence/harrassment, or geographic segregation and property crime) I've lived in Toronto and Sao Paulo, so I have qu…

> huge slum in a 3rd world city with a ridiculously high crime rate.

If you think Sao Paulo is a 3rd world city, then I don't know what you'd bin Naypyidaw or Monrovia into. 4th world maybe?

You'd probably enjoy living in a South Bay suburb. There's lots of pockets of different races and you'd never have to meet anyone outside of that community and you'd have total local control of police response and other things. Crime rates are low and cultural values are homogeneous in the community.

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

#405

Post by burnished »

chrisseaton wrote: post #344
burnished wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lets talk about harm. Street people don't have places to dispose of needles, they don't have access to sanitation or toilettes, frequently are struggling with mental health issues in loud and sometimes frightening fashions, oh and I guess if you're a woman in that position you're in incredible danger. With that in mind, is it more clear why other people wouldn't want any one to live like that?

I already said > As long as the homeless people have been offered help and are not harming others So I don’t know why you’re giving examples where they are causing harm.

Because your example is just a distraction, no one cares about the people just minding their own business not causing any (visible) problems. Almost definitionally when we're talking about this we are talking about the people that are harming others, either directly or indirectly.

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

#406

Post by throw123123123 »

fighterpilot wrote: post #314
throw123123123 wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

San francisco is a net exporter of homeless people according to a report about the subject on the guardian.

Link to this report?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2017/dec/... linked in another comment

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

#407

Post by mixmastamyk »

space_fountain wrote: post #185
mixmastamyk wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree they are fixable, not even particularly difficult. But there’s no political will.

Well let's work on building the political will then? It is true that individually we're unlikely to have much impact, but there are organizations and groups working for change and they've been having results.

I don’t know how to do that when extremists from “both sides” dominate the discussion. If you have any ideas or groups to link to.

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

#408

Post by akomtu »

iammisc wrote: post #311
akomtu wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Elected officials are a lot like C-suite: they run the company, but they don't own it. Owners sit on the board and rarely seek publicity.

Except Angela alioto has run unsuccessfully for mayor multiple times. The family seeks political power but does not get it. This is just ungrounded conspiracy

Just like some board members like to get hands dirty and run things themselves. Musk is this type. But that's an exception.

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

#409

Post by zumu »

hitekker wrote: post #388
zumu wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

SF is great once you convince yourself that crime, lawlessness and misery are "values" rather than the result of poor governance. When I lived in SF, it was fun watching who could admit the government wasn't great, and who did extreme mental gymnastics to avoid unpleasant reality.

I'm not saying "crime, lawlessness and misery" are values, but rather trade-offs for other amenities the city brings, namely walkability, weather, nice parks, decent public transportation, etc.

In the US, I find you either live in a place where you can ignore these problems (e.g. car-centric cities, suburbs, gated communities, etc.) or you live amongst it. In SF, both trade-offs exist—you can live somewhere like Soma, or you can live somewhere like the Outer Sunset. Depending on where you choose to live, you can have a very different experience of SF.

I firmly agree the SF government isn't great and probably won't be here long term because of its various problems, but I'm still glad I moved here to launch my career.

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

#410

Post by rayiner »

Managor wrote: post #381
rayiner wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There you have it. Why is San Francisco’s city government so dysfunctional? Because no matter how bad it gets and how much liberal policies fail, voters can convince themselves that the problem is “moneyed elites” and “ not enough liberalism.” Just amazing.

The word you're looking for is progressivism, not liberalism. American liberalism is just progressivism wearing liberalism as a skinsuit.

Fair enough. I’m a liberal if by that you mean “ACA is a good idea.” “Let’s have massive tent camps of homeless people” is where you lose me.
Post reply on HN