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

70% of San Francisco residents say quality of life has declined: poll

kron4.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 260 posts

Re: 70% of San Francisco residents say quality of life has declined: poll

#221

Post by asah »

astura wrote: post #219
pope_meat wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that's the case our cities should have fallen apart by now from just the dogs alone.

I mean... Urine has destroyed light posts, before, even in SF. https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/City-lamp-post-falls-... >“We believe there was some contribution of dog or human urine on the base of the pole,” PUC spokesman Tyrone Jue said. “It has actually been an issue for us in the past. We encourage people and dogs alike to do their business in other places, like a proper restroom or one of our fire hydrant…

Leaving this here:

Human Waste Shuts Down BART Escalators

"When work crews pulled open a broken BART escalator at San Francisco's Civic Center Station last month, they found so much human excrement in its works they had to call a hazardous-materials team."

https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Human-waste-shuts-dow...

Re: 70% of San Francisco residents say quality of life has declined: poll

#222

Post by asah »

Consultant32452 wrote: post #124
burlesona wrote: post #2

I feel like this experience is so common it’s almost cliche, but I ended up moving with my family out of the city in mid 2020 mostly due to the major influx of homeless into our neighborhood, which had very little before. I didn’t like my kids facing that every time we walked to the park or the grocery store. There was also a rise in petty crime that made the neighborhood feel a lot less safe. It’s a tough situation.…

The theory is that if people like you are forced to see the homeless you’ll be more willing to fund helping them. Tuck those homeless into shelters and you’ll forget. The problem is people with options leave. They might be willing to help but not at the cost of their own children. The thing 2020 taught me is 90% of the population considers me an acceptable sacrifice. I’m going to have to live with that now and act ac…

not sure why this is downvoted - it's precisely our story and the stories of many friends.

Re: 70% of San Francisco residents say quality of life has declined: poll

#223

Post by [deleted] »

w_TF wrote: post #104

I find it weird how everyone wants to point their fingers at politicians or the police as if these are the forces that created this mess, as if those groups simply snapped their fingers then the economic conditions that perpetuate homelessness would magically disappear. Everyone wants someone else to make the problem go away for them, that they shouldn't have to play any part in that because they pay taxes, and all t…

[deleted]

Re: 70% of San Francisco residents say quality of life has declined: poll

#224

Post by pengaru »

dougmwne wrote: post #173
walrus01 wrote: post #64

The same as with vancouver, San Francisco and Los Angeles are both some of the rare large cities in the USA where a homeless person can live a fully outdoor lifestyle year-round and not risk freezing to death.

This is often repeated, but the entirety of the US south is warm year-round and the proportion of unhoused homeless is much lower in all those southern cities. Clearly there is something else at play on the west coast that resists housing the homeless.

Turns out the homeless, like many (most?) people, prefer living in desirable places.

When you have no ability/intention to pay rent, the whole cost of living deterrent vanishes.

So it seems rather obvious to me you'd have a higher rate of homelessness in the most desirable (most expensive) cities. Not without interventions creating costs or inconveniences actually relevant to the homeless as a proportional deterrent. I'm not sure if that's even possible without being cruel though.

Re: 70% of San Francisco residents say quality of life has declined: poll

#225

Post by manigandham »

chrisseaton wrote: post #216
manigandham wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you also agree that "A human being driving around and crossing a red light with some basic looking both ways is not a danger to anyone."? Cars are driven by people, so it's humans in cars vs humans on foot. Both can create danger to each other. Just because you can safely do something doesn't override the reason and spirit of the law. Jaywalking is a tiny niche of a massive amount of rules that govern how we inter…

> Do you also agree that "A human being driving around and crossing a red light with some basic looking both ways is not a danger to anyone."? No. > Both can create danger to each other. Absolute nonsense. The person on foot is no danger to anyone. For example, two people on foot are no danger to each other. It's only when you add a car that there's any danger at all. The entire cause of any danger whatsoever is the…

If you don't agree then your argument is logically inconsistent. Cars are not living things. It's humans vs humans. Two humans travelling on foot can collide and cause injury to each other, meanwhile two humans in cars can easily avoid each other even in cross traffic.

If you want to argue that its about cross-modalities then why have train crossings? Just let cars drive across the tracks if they think its safe. Now surely you can see why that might be an issue?

The whole point of these laws is to create safety by reducing unpredictable events. Again, it doesn't mean you can't safely ignore the laws (even most of the time), but that's not what the law is for. It's ironic that you mention reasonableness and yet have a completely unreasonable understanding of the rules.

Re: 70% of San Francisco residents say quality of life has declined: poll

#226

Post by SamReidHughes »

evanelias wrote: post #170
creamytaco wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe not as dysfunctional as SF, but clearly there is severe social dysfunction in a lot of the cities run by liberals: Oakland, Seattle, Portland, NYC, Detroit, DC, Minneapolis. Allowing for some variation, at what point does one begin to blame the policies and ideologies behind those policies, that are substantially similar across the board?

What "severe social dysfunction" are you referring to in, say, NYC or DC? Among the 10 most populous US cities, not a single one currently has a Republican mayor. Among the top 25, there are only 2 with Republican mayors: Jacksonville, FL and Fort Worth, TX. Do you honestly believe that most of the other 23 largest cities in the country have severe social dysfunction? Do you honestly believe that Jacksonville and For…

In NYC, for years, Jews have repeatedly gotten attacked in the streets. Last year, the city had major riots and looting. D.C. had the same.

Here in San Diego we had a Republican mayor, Republican county board of supervisors, and Republican county DA last year, and there was only minimal social dysfunction, while rioters and looters ransacked many parts of LA County.

Re: 70% of San Francisco residents say quality of life has declined: poll

#227

Post by BuyMyBitcoins »

chrisseaton wrote: post #120
alexjplant wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My logic is 'crossing the road is completely reasonable, doesn't harm anyone, people should be allowed to get to the other side of the road'. That logic doesn't follow to speeding, which is dangerous and selfish. Putting oneself in the path of a multi-ton vehicle that doesn't expect you to be there and placing the onus on them to avoid committing vehicular manslaughter when you could use a space explicitly designat…

Why is your default that the road belongs to the car in the first place? Why should people need to stick to limited spaces 'designated' for them? How do you think we manage it in the UK without these laws and why do you think our road-death rate is lower?

>” Why is your default that the road belongs to the car in the first place?”

I’d say it’s because the roads are obviously designed to accommodate automobile traffic. Virtually all modern roads are absolutely designed car-first and it’s apparent that people on-foot aren’t meant to travel on them, except on the sidewalk.

Additionally, a “road” that is only for people and bicycles is typically just called a trail or a path. At least that’s the case where I live. If it’s surrounded by buildings then they call it a plaza.

Re: 70% of San Francisco residents say quality of life has declined: poll

#228

Post by BuyMyBitcoins »

ceejayoz wrote: post #174
throwaway316943 wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many people seem to take it to mean that. It even seems like some are trying to implement it that way. Catchy slogans tend to result in shitty implementations.

> Many people seem to take it to mean that. Sure, just like no one actually knows what "critical race theory" actually means. A concerted effort to encourage these misunderstandings hardly helps.

“Defund the police” is a horrible slogan, no matter how accurately or inaccurately someone describes it. If you need to write a paragraph or two explaining what your slogan actually means, then you need to abandon it.

Re: 70% of San Francisco residents say quality of life has declined: poll

#229

Post by BuyMyBitcoins »

knownjorbist wrote: post #168
foobar33333 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most places deal with this via border restrictions. One country with better welfare does not allow themselves to be flooded with people from other countries. This problem can not be solved by one city without the ability to restrict movement.

Border restrictions are a recent phenomenon. If you care about free markets or a smaller state, but not the free movement of labor at the same time, you are holding hypocritical beliefs.

The “free market” is not a real thing and it never will be - it is a platonic ideal.

Every nation on Earth has border restrictions of some kind. Though recent in human history, such restrictions clearly have utility and value in the modern world.

Re: 70% of San Francisco residents say quality of life has declined: poll

#230

Post by evanelias »

SamReidHughes wrote: post #226
evanelias wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What "severe social dysfunction" are you referring to in, say, NYC or DC? Among the 10 most populous US cities, not a single one currently has a Republican mayor. Among the top 25, there are only 2 with Republican mayors: Jacksonville, FL and Fort Worth, TX. Do you honestly believe that most of the other 23 largest cities in the country have severe social dysfunction? Do you honestly believe that Jacksonville and For…

In NYC, for years, Jews have repeatedly gotten attacked in the streets. Last year, the city had major riots and looting. D.C. had the same. Here in San Diego we had a Republican mayor, Republican county board of supervisors, and Republican county DA last year, and there was only minimal social dysfunction, while rioters and looters ransacked many parts of LA County.

I've lived in or near NYC for 14 years now. There were no "major riots" last year, full stop. There was some looting, yes. Not "major riots". Crown Heights in 1991 was a "major riot", this was nothing of the sort.

As for violence against Hasidim (not "Jews" in general), there have been occasional acts of violence between the Hasidic community and other residents of the same neighborhoods -- in both directions, notably -- for several decades. Including times when the mayor was a Republican.

I'm Jewish and have never felt unsafe in NYC. The NYC metro area literally has the highest percentage of Jewish population in the entire US.

Post reply on HN