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

The Street Kids of San Francisco

blog.priceonomics.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 210 posts

Re: The Street Kids of San Francisco

#101

Post by SilasX »

spiralpolitik wrote: post #78
SilasX wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably in the "pearls before swine" sense. Long-time natives just don't appreciate how much the influx of tech folks is improving things, nor how few cities would love to have such a "problem".

Thats because the long time natives don't view them as improvements. They view them as outsiders coming in and disrupting their communities eventually driving them (the natives) out. The general consensus in most parts of the Bay Area is that people want things to stay the same as it was the day they arrived.

Yep, that's the San Francisco lefty for ya: "You're welcome to immigrate to our country ... just not our city."

Re: The Street Kids of San Francisco

#102

Post by SilasX »

moxie wrote: post #84
Locke1689 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Presumably because he either pays property taxes or pays rent to someone who uses it to pay property taxes. Fundamentally, one can see people living on the street as belonging to a complex subgroup in our society: one which can be both symbiotic and parasitical. It is symbiotic in the sense that it provides a culture with which many can identify, especially those who have experienced hardship or difficult home lives…

There's an old wobbly story: A wobbly was riding a freight train across the midwest one summer, in between jobs. The train sided out in the middle of nowhere, and it was scorching hot, so the wobbly got off the train and started walking down a dirt road. After a couple of miles, the road passed by an apple orchard. The wobbly hopped over the fence, and sat down to rest under the shade of a big apple tree. The wobbly…

>The point being that a lot of these conceptions about who belongs and who doesn't are based on private property, but that there fundamentally isn't any real justification for private property. Even John Locke's attempts to justify it break down.

Its negation breaks down too, computer-hoarder.

Re: The Street Kids of San Francisco

#103

Post by barce »

yid wrote: post #95
dewitt wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And judging from the other comments, people who have no first-hand exposure to this enviroment are simply eating the article up, believing they have the full story. I'd invite anyone who is prepared to generalize about street kid culture based on this one article alone to spend just one /evening/ walking around Haight and Stanyan. Head into the park a ways. You don't have to go more than 50 yards. I guarantee you tak…

Reading the article, I pretty much had the exact same thoughts. It really seemed like the writer had a particular feel-good story in mind ("hippies still live in the Haight!") and went out there trying to find it. The error in the article is casting the entire scene as the same slice of peace-n-love that is espoused in the story, leaving aside -- as you say -- the things that happen after dark. Serious mental illness…

I think the point of the article is that it's not as bad, or their word, "Dickensian," as people think. The article is missing some hard numbers: how many are choosing the lifestyle? How many of those that do are engaging in criminal / disruptive activity?

It's pretty cool you got to check out a commune in Lake county.

Re: The Street Kids of San Francisco

#104

Post by SilasX »

moxie wrote: post #64
dewitt wrote: post #40

Like another commenter on this thread, I've lived in the Haight for the past nine years. And while the article is interesting and informative, it doesn't quite paint a full picture (literally—the pictures aren't representative, that girl is not a typical street kid by a long shot, she hasn't slept a day outside in her life. Think camo and combat boots and pit bulls, not peace signs and hacky sacks) of the underside o…

I'm curious to know why you see them as a guest in your home, rather than the other way around?

Probably because he produces the value that makes the land a desirable place to mooch, while the street kids don't produce any of the value that makes it desirable place for him to sell his services to others.

And unlike in your Wobbly story, they wouldn't be able to produce that same value "if only" the greedy OP quit hogging that land he lives and works on.

You ever wonder why the street kids don't exercise their freedom to roam in less wealthy areas? Food for thought.

Re: The Street Kids of San Francisco

#105

Post by Locke1689 »

moxie wrote: post #84
Locke1689 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Presumably because he either pays property taxes or pays rent to someone who uses it to pay property taxes. Fundamentally, one can see people living on the street as belonging to a complex subgroup in our society: one which can be both symbiotic and parasitical. It is symbiotic in the sense that it provides a culture with which many can identify, especially those who have experienced hardship or difficult home lives…

There's an old wobbly story: A wobbly was riding a freight train across the midwest one summer, in between jobs. The train sided out in the middle of nowhere, and it was scorching hot, so the wobbly got off the train and started walking down a dirt road. After a couple of miles, the road passed by an apple orchard. The wobbly hopped over the fence, and sat down to rest under the shade of a big apple tree. The wobbly…

I don't see why you need a broad intellectual foundation here. Property is granted by governments. Why? Because it's a useful abstraction. Where did the government get the property? It claimed it and enforced its claim by force.

So I guess my answer to the story would be: fine, you can fight the owner for it, but the real owner isn't me, it's the United States government. If you are so inclined to fight the government, fine, but don't be surprised when people who find the abstraction useful and productive, or even simply find the other mechanisms of the government productive, decide to fight back.

Re: The Street Kids of San Francisco

#106

Post by yid »

barce wrote: post #103
yid wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reading the article, I pretty much had the exact same thoughts. It really seemed like the writer had a particular feel-good story in mind ("hippies still live in the Haight!") and went out there trying to find it. The error in the article is casting the entire scene as the same slice of peace-n-love that is espoused in the story, leaving aside -- as you say -- the things that happen after dark. Serious mental illness…

I think the point of the article is that it's not as bad, or their word, "Dickensian," as people think. The article is missing some hard numbers: how many are choosing the lifestyle? How many of those that do are engaging in criminal / disruptive activity? It's pretty cool you got to check out a commune in Lake county.

> It's pretty cool you got to check out a commune in Lake county.

It was a little creepy, to be honest. They have pictorial banners up in the woods, without any words. I was only allowed into the bookshop, and every single book and CD was by the commune leader. Every single one.

Edit: I'll add some detail here since people seem to be interested. Lake County is a very, very remote area a few hours north of San Francisco. The commune has been functional since the 60s, sucking up its members' wealth in exchange for living under the direction of a charismatic leader. While a generation lived under this leader's direction, their children suffered the brunt of the eccentricity and thoughtlessness that the era inculcated. The one incident that I recall hearing about is when several children (including the person I was dating) in the 8-12 age range were randomly ordered to live with different parents on a whim, and the families complied. A significant fraction of the kids of that generation are somewhat screwed up, with causes ranging from heroin addiction to the effects of sexual abuse as children. It put a very dark tint on the rainbow of the 60s for me.

Re: The Street Kids of San Francisco

#107

Post by SilasX »

hindsightbias wrote: post #85
dewitt wrote: post #40

Like another commenter on this thread, I've lived in the Haight for the past nine years. And while the article is interesting and informative, it doesn't quite paint a full picture (literally—the pictures aren't representative, that girl is not a typical street kid by a long shot, she hasn't slept a day outside in her life. Think camo and combat boots and pit bulls, not peace signs and hacky sacks) of the underside o…

Relevant: http://www.hanc-sf.org/next-meeting/the-homeless-bill-of-rig... Tonight.

"The bill helps protect homeless people from discrimination in employment, ..."

|face-palm|

Re: The Street Kids of San Francisco

#108

Post by johngalt »

moxie wrote: post #84
Locke1689 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Presumably because he either pays property taxes or pays rent to someone who uses it to pay property taxes. Fundamentally, one can see people living on the street as belonging to a complex subgroup in our society: one which can be both symbiotic and parasitical. It is symbiotic in the sense that it provides a culture with which many can identify, especially those who have experienced hardship or difficult home lives…

There's an old wobbly story: A wobbly was riding a freight train across the midwest one summer, in between jobs. The train sided out in the middle of nowhere, and it was scorching hot, so the wobbly got off the train and started walking down a dirt road. After a couple of miles, the road passed by an apple orchard. The wobbly hopped over the fence, and sat down to rest under the shade of a big apple tree. The wobbly…

Here's a justification for private property. How will there ever be an orchard otherwise? Orchards don't just burst spontaneously into existence.

Imagine that no one 'fought the natives for it'. Instead the land was a vacant waste with no one living there and nothing growing there. Over the years through hard work, dedication and sacrifice the land was amended and the trees grew creating the orchard. The only thing the farmer asked for in return was to sell his surplus. Lowering the cost of apples to all.

Then some jackass jumps off a train and expects it all handed to him for free or he'll attack the farmer.

I can understand the idea of not wanting to participate in a capitalist system, but I can't understand what makes someone 'evil' just because they've created something that you haven't.

Re: The Street Kids of San Francisco

#109

Post by ghshephard »

The one question that I always ask (and instantly makes me unpopular) of the hippie/transient/counter-culture types, is, "Do you realize you would all likely be dead of hunger withing two to three weeks without a massively efficient capitalist system supporting you?"

They are able to exist because of people who are willing to work to support them. Even the communes rely on fertilizer, fuels, metals, foodstuffs from 2000+ years of increasingly efficient capitalists economies.

Don't get me wrong - I love spending a week to ten days out on the playa, and have never had such a wonder experience of "community" anywhere else - but I never, ever kid myself into believing that such a lifestyle is sustainable.

I don't like to use the word, "parasite", but I can't really think of a better word to describe the Haight street pan-handlers/garbage divers. They can't survive without people providing for them.

Re: The Street Kids of San Francisco

#110

Post by [deleted] »

moxie wrote: post #84
Locke1689 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Presumably because he either pays property taxes or pays rent to someone who uses it to pay property taxes. Fundamentally, one can see people living on the street as belonging to a complex subgroup in our society: one which can be both symbiotic and parasitical. It is symbiotic in the sense that it provides a culture with which many can identify, especially those who have experienced hardship or difficult home lives…

There's an old wobbly story: A wobbly was riding a freight train across the midwest one summer, in between jobs. The train sided out in the middle of nowhere, and it was scorching hot, so the wobbly got off the train and started walking down a dirt road. After a couple of miles, the road passed by an apple orchard. The wobbly hopped over the fence, and sat down to rest under the shade of a big apple tree. The wobbly…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN