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

Protesters block Google bus in S.F. Mission

blog.sfgate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 188 posts

Re: Protesters block Google bus in S.F. Mission

#31

Post by arnoldwh »

Hopefully, people can work together to what I think could be 2-3 good outcomes that help alleviate some of these very real problems:

1. Public Transportation: both inter & intra-city transportation is very poor. It's extremely hard to travel between neighborhoods in San Francisco, and it's a huge reason people rely so much on Lyft and other providers in the city. Also, it's really difficult to travel between SF and Oakland (as well as other cities). Creating better / more infrastructure that connects these two should help ease supply constraints that cause these price spikes in the first place. Not sure how feasible this is...especially looking at other cities experience in public transportation (example: bay bridge).

2. More supply. One of the effects of previous legislation to keep the SF "neighborhood feel" was that it constrained new supply coming into the market. Unfortunately, it takes a few years for new units to come into the market, and it's obvious it's not keeping pace with demand. There of course needs to be a balance vs. keeping SF's historic appeal, but maybe the previous compromise leaned too heavily against putting up new units.

3. Government subsidies / rent control to help ease rapid price hikes. I'm not as big of a fan of these, but largely because I don't quite understand all the economic/social effects.

Re: Protesters block Google bus in S.F. Mission

#32

Post by yid »

tedivm wrote: post #27
cynicalkane wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not obligated to "reason" with anyone who stops me, illegally, and demands my attention. I don't see why it's different for the average Google employee.

They blocked in a bus that was illegally parked. No one forced you to get on the bus that was violating city codes. What these people are complaining about is a two tiered system, where one set of laws apply to the people who live in the city and another set apply to corporations like Google. Why should that bus get to do something that common citizens are not allowed to, simply because it's owned by a company instea…

> Why should that bus get to do something that common citizens are not allowed to, simply because it's owned by a company instead of a person?

It shouldn't, but that's not an issue for a mob to take up. Call the police, or go talk to your local legislators if tech companies are being given unfair perks, but taking justice into your own hands is illegal for a very good reason.

Re: Protesters block Google bus in S.F. Mission

#33

Post by InvisibleCities »

theorique wrote: post #20
zwieback wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

private highways?

sure, why not?

You know, we actually tried that for a while (search for Turnpike System or Turnpike Trusts on wikipedia), and it was an unmitigated disaster. Because turnpike operators had what were effectively local monopolies, they collected absurdly high fees and often spent as little as possible on routine maintenance, resulting in high cost / low quality roads. This was a major impediment to free trade, as it drove shipping costs to prohibitively high levels. The socialization of roads that took place during the Victorian era, along with the growth of the railroad industry, helped usher in the period of great economic and industrial expansion that lead to the Gilded Age.

Re: Protesters block Google bus in S.F. Mission

#34

Post by WalterBright »

tedivm wrote: post #28
chaz wrote: post #6

Does anyone know what the sign "Fine $271; Total Fine (2011-2013) $1 Billion" refers to? https://twitter.com/maxbatt/status/410097083081695233/photo/...

I'm not sure about the $1billion, but the $271 fine is what we as regular citizens would get if we tried to pick people up from the bus stop. The complaint is that the two tiered system- one where normal citizens have to follow the rules, while corporations can do whatever they please- and the fine is simply one example of that.

> The bus operators — private companies like Google, Facebook, Apple and Genentech — would pay for permits to use the Muni stops

Looks like that issue is being taken care of.

Re: Protesters block Google bus in S.F. Mission

#35

Post by cynicalkane »

tedivm wrote: post #27
cynicalkane wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not obligated to "reason" with anyone who stops me, illegally, and demands my attention. I don't see why it's different for the average Google employee.

They blocked in a bus that was illegally parked. No one forced you to get on the bus that was violating city codes. What these people are complaining about is a two tiered system, where one set of laws apply to the people who live in the city and another set apply to corporations like Google. Why should that bus get to do something that common citizens are not allowed to, simply because it's owned by a company instea…

That's not what I said.

What I said is that I'm not obligated to "reason" with someone that illegally demands my attention. Maybe abortion doctors should be obligated to "reason" with pro-life protestors, to open a conversation? Hey, a lot of time those guys aren't even breaking the law.

What the OP calls being an "uptight techie" I call being an ordinary human being in an allegedly civilized country.

Re: Protesters block Google bus in S.F. Mission

#36

Post by crbnw00ts »

ma2xd wrote: post #8

It's a fake. The guy is an activist and is named Max Bell Alper. http://www.makingchangemedia.org/about-the-team/ http://www.gettyimages.no/detail/news-photo/occupy-wall-stre...

Yes, that guy was fake, but the protestors blocking the bus and preventing it from leaving were real.

Re: Protesters block Google bus in S.F. Mission

#37

Post by [deleted] »

crbnw00ts wrote: post #36
ma2xd wrote: post #8

It's a fake. The guy is an activist and is named Max Bell Alper. http://www.makingchangemedia.org/about-the-team/ http://www.gettyimages.no/detail/news-photo/occupy-wall-stre...

Yes, that guy was fake, but the protestors blocking the bus and preventing it from leaving were real.

[deleted]

Re: Protesters block Google bus in S.F. Mission

#38

Post by xanderstrike »

I don't get it. The buses are cutting down on personal driving (a universally acknowledged evil), and paying for permits to use the stops (generating revenue for the city). Would these people rather the Google employees all drive personal vehicles, increasing wear and tear on the roads, congestion, pollution, etc., costing the city money?

Also, is it really the companies fault that the value of housing in the area is going up because they exist? Can you really expect them to get up and leave?

I don't really see what the companies are getting out of this in the first place. They don't have to shuttle their employees in to work, could save a whole lot of money by not renting/buying buses, but they do and it does nothing but positive things for the employees, the city, and the environment.

Re: Protesters block Google bus in S.F. Mission

#39

Post by baddox »

mhurron wrote: post #21
zxcvvcxz wrote: post #13

Anyone find it lame how people are tweeting about an incident instead of communicating with each other when they're like 10 feet away? Don't expect to reason with protesters if you're not even willing to talk to them. Way to be the uptight sheltered techies you're being made out to be. That being said, I don't think it's legal to block a vehicle, and protesters would probably be better served doing something producti…

> I don't think it's legal to block a vehicle Civil Disobedience is pretty much by definition illegal.

Civil disobedience just means deliberately breaking laws. For your argument to make any sense, you still have to demonstrate that blocking a vehicle is breaking the law.

Re: Protesters block Google bus in S.F. Mission

#40

Post by tedivm »

yid wrote: post #32
tedivm wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They blocked in a bus that was illegally parked. No one forced you to get on the bus that was violating city codes. What these people are complaining about is a two tiered system, where one set of laws apply to the people who live in the city and another set apply to corporations like Google. Why should that bus get to do something that common citizens are not allowed to, simply because it's owned by a company instea…

> Why should that bus get to do something that common citizens are not allowed to, simply because it's owned by a company instead of a person? It shouldn't, but that's not an issue for a mob to take up. Call the police, or go talk to your local legislators if tech companies are being given unfair perks, but taking justice into your own hands is illegal for a very good reason.

If this was an issue about net neutrality, trade treaties, bitcoin, or any other number of issues then we'd have a thread full of people celebrating those protesters who were making their voices heard.

Instead we're rally behind some people who had to sit in a bus for an extra thirty minutes than they normally would. It's a miracle those poor souls managed to last as long as they did- can you imagine what kind of tragedy it would have been if the bus's wifi had broke down?

Post reply on HN