San Francisco's guerrilla protest at Google buses swells into revolt • Hacker News Board

Re: San Francisco's guerrilla protest at Google buses swells into revolt

#41

Post by raverbashing » Sun, Jan 26, 2014, 2:59 PM UTC

BjoernKW wrote: post #32

"Anthony Levandowski is building an unconscionable world of surveillance, control and automation," they wrote on flyers left near his house. "He is also your neighbour." What were those people thinking? They're subtly but very clearly trying to intimidate that guy. This is like saying "We don't want the likes of you around here." If those protesters really wanted to do something against surveillance and control they…

"If gentrification helps driving people out of town who display such obnoxious behaviour then we can't have enough of it."

Yes, let's remove every current resident of SF by charging outrageous rent rates and only have rich Google engineers there. Because, that's why. There's no other place they can live, of course, right?

But don't complain then when they don't have anywhere to go for laundry, or the only coffee place is an overpriced Starbucks, or groceries are double what you pay somewhere else.

Re: San Francisco's guerrilla protest at Google buses swells into revolt

#42

Post by nirnira » Sun, Jan 26, 2014, 3:00 PM UTC

joeblau wrote: post #6

There is one thing that I've really come to love and respect about the city of San Francisco. They fight for what they want. I've seen protests for everything ranging from wars, to working conditions, to America's Cup worker wages. Most other places would just get rolled over by whomever has the money. Underneath this issue, there are some serious socioeconomic issues at hand that need to be addressed. One thing I've…

Nice. But if you think it's so worthwhile to help homeless people, why don't you help them full-time, instead of just dabbling? And if you're going to help them, are goodie bags really the best way, or can you think of more powerful, uplifting ways to help them improve their station in life? That's the economically rational course of action, after all - devote the maximum amount of your time to the activity you consider most valuable (whether to yourself or others - wherever your priorities lie), and try and be as effective in that activity as possible - otherwise you're just splitting your time, jack of all trades, master of none.

Re: San Francisco's guerrilla protest at Google buses swells into revolt

#43

Post by infinity0 » Sun, Jan 26, 2014, 3:03 PM UTC

joeblau wrote: post #6

There is one thing that I've really come to love and respect about the city of San Francisco. They fight for what they want. I've seen protests for everything ranging from wars, to working conditions, to America's Cup worker wages. Most other places would just get rolled over by whomever has the money. Underneath this issue, there are some serious socioeconomic issues at hand that need to be addressed. One thing I've…

Ignore the haters commenting on this post, being all self-sensitive at you simply making an observation based on how you see things, and nit-picking on an incorrect use of the word "most". I'm an engineer and I'm not offended, and I can definitely see your point. A lot of highly-paid people don't see, or refuse to analyse, the surrounding consequences of their wealth, as well as their own actions.

Re: San Francisco's guerrilla protest at Google buses swells into revolt

#44

Post by dredmorbius » Sun, Jan 26, 2014, 3:03 PM UTC

macspoofing wrote: post #27

This is a quintessential embarrassment of riches. San Fran is powered by a real 21st century economy, which many other cities and countries are trying to recreate, and you still find something to complain about? What's the solution here? Not have tech companies that employ thousands of people (for upper-middle class wages) in the area?! Not have thousands of young educated people from all over the country and the wor…

leave the downtown-core decrepit and crime-ridden?

In the case of San Francisco, this is most definitely not the case. Downtown office space (especially in fashionable areas) is in high demand, rents are high, vacancies low.

Of course, the city is small enough that once you get outside the relatively small historic downtown (the Financial District) and the new downtown (SOMA), there is older and less-featured office space. Even this is under high demand.

And of course there's the push of office space into traditionally industrial areas such as Mission Bay (UCSF, Salesforce.com). These are almost suburban in their single-use planning presently, though that might change.

Though reachable via CalTrain, BART service favors downtown SF and the near SOMA neighborhoods.

And as I've said, the bus protests themselves are really asinine.

Re: San Francisco's guerrilla protest at Google buses swells into revolt

#45

Post by macspoofing » Sun, Jan 26, 2014, 3:06 PM UTC

rtpg wrote: post #36

macspoofing wrote: post #27

This is a quintessential embarrassment of riches. San Fran is powered by a real 21st century economy, which many other cities and countries are trying to recreate, and you still find something to complain about? What's the solution here? Not have tech companies that employ thousands of people (for upper-middle class wages) in the area?! Not have thousands of young educated people from all over the country and the wor…

>leave the downtown-core decrepit and crime-ridden The companies aren't in downtown, they're out 40 miles away instead, so not paying local taxes or helping the local economy. Instead you just have the workers who basically just sleep in SF, paying property taxes but not even opting to using the public transportation to make it better. > San Fran is powered by a real 21st century economy, which many other cities and…

>The companies aren't in downtown

The employees live in the city.

>Based off of complaints from the tech community, it also seems to be a city with a lot of homelessness

None of that is caused by having Google in the area. This is a cultural and a government regulatory problem (municipal, and state and federal to lesser extent).

>The problem isn't that workers are living in the city, it's that they're not working there.

If you're an employee you spend money where you live, not where you work. It would be nice for San Fran if all engineers worked in San Fran as well, but you can't have everything. Plus it wouldn't be so nice for Mountain View, Cupertino, Sunnyvale, Palo Alto, etc. In fact, those municipalities have more to complain about since they can argue they are nothing more than commuter cities.

San Fran should count their blessings.

Re: San Francisco's guerrilla protest at Google buses swells into revolt

#46

Post by rtpg » Sun, Jan 26, 2014, 3:08 PM UTC

bermanoid wrote: post #33

datphp wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I agree with that. There is a legion of people making six figures, who together have a lot of power if they were to try to do something. I know disruption or even violence won't help at first, but it raises awareness. Maybe then people can start talking about intelligent measures to help those who need it. I know if I was making 200k I'd be glad to be taxed an extra %, if that money was going towards hel…

Unfortunately this is mostly a zero-sum game: there's a very limited supply of housing in San Francisco, and it's always going to go to the highest bidder, which is the eternal gentrification struggle. Rich people deciding they're willing to pay more taxes won't help here, because it won't create more housing supply. Even a direct redistribution scheme wouldn't do much, because the rich will still be able to outbid t…

>Weirdly, it's the very people that are protesting the current influx of tech workers and rising rents that most viciously oppose new high-occupancy construction in the "true" SF neighborhoods because it would destroy their character, so it's a tough nut to crack.

That's really unfortunate, I'd hope that people would realize that you can have good-quality high-occupancy construction(see loads of places in Europe, Japan).

I don't necessarily know if it's a zero-sum game though. If higher quality mass transit were in place, the cost of living out of the city would be lessened (both in cost and stress).

I think it would be really cool if San Francisco built a subway line that went down south. It would convince people to not live exactly in the city center (because you'd have relatively easy access by subway), so could ease real estate preasures downtown, and would generally encourage a better spread of the population. It's not that people want to live downtown, but that they want to easily get downtown.

Re: San Francisco's guerrilla protest at Google buses swells into revolt

#47

Post by JoeAltmaier » Sun, Jan 26, 2014, 3:12 PM UTC

It smacks of 'protest chic'. Cool to wave signs somebody else made and get in the new for being all liberal.

If those guys were going to a factory job, they'd be ok neighbors. But because they're going to a better job, it's cool to make trouble for them.

Re: San Francisco's guerrilla protest at Google buses swells into revolt

#48

Post by macspoofing » Sun, Jan 26, 2014, 3:12 PM UTC

dredmorbius wrote: post #44

macspoofing wrote: post #27

This is a quintessential embarrassment of riches. San Fran is powered by a real 21st century economy, which many other cities and countries are trying to recreate, and you still find something to complain about? What's the solution here? Not have tech companies that employ thousands of people (for upper-middle class wages) in the area?! Not have thousands of young educated people from all over the country and the wor…

leave the downtown-core decrepit and crime-ridden? In the case of San Francisco, this is most definitely not the case. Downtown office space (especially in fashionable areas) is in high demand, rents are high, vacancies low. Of course, the city is small enough that once you get outside the relatively small historic downtown (the Financial District) and the new downtown (SOMA), there is older and less-featured office…

>n the case of San Francisco, this is most definitely not the case. Downtown office space (especially in fashionable areas) is in high demand, rents are high, vacancies low.

That's not what I meant. In the last twenty years, "the downtown" has been rediscovered in most North American cities as a place that people want to work AND live in. Contrast this to the 1950-1990 period in which the thing to do was to live in suburban neighborhoods and commute to work.

Re: San Francisco's guerrilla protest at Google buses swells into revolt

#49

Post by JoeAltmaier » Sun, Jan 26, 2014, 3:16 PM UTC

raverbashing wrote: post #41

BjoernKW wrote: post #32

"Anthony Levandowski is building an unconscionable world of surveillance, control and automation," they wrote on flyers left near his house. "He is also your neighbour." What were those people thinking? They're subtly but very clearly trying to intimidate that guy. This is like saying "We don't want the likes of you around here." If those protesters really wanted to do something against surveillance and control they…

"If gentrification helps driving people out of town who display such obnoxious behaviour then we can't have enough of it." Yes, let's remove every current resident of SF by charging outrageous rent rates and only have rich Google engineers there. Because, that's why. There's no other place they can live, of course, right? But don't complain then when they don't have anywhere to go for laundry, or the only coffee plac…

Its supposed to be a free country. Sad when your rent goes up, but a free market allows that. I'm a little offended each time the self-styled old-guard want to 'protect the neighborhood' by which they mean 'keep my cheap rent'. How about you live where you can afford, like everybody else?

Re: San Francisco's guerrilla protest at Google buses swells into revolt

#50

Post by datphp » Sun, Jan 26, 2014, 3:18 PM UTC

bermanoid wrote: post #33

datphp wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I agree with that. There is a legion of people making six figures, who together have a lot of power if they were to try to do something. I know disruption or even violence won't help at first, but it raises awareness. Maybe then people can start talking about intelligent measures to help those who need it. I know if I was making 200k I'd be glad to be taxed an extra %, if that money was going towards hel…

Unfortunately this is mostly a zero-sum game: there's a very limited supply of housing in San Francisco, and it's always going to go to the highest bidder, which is the eternal gentrification struggle. Rich people deciding they're willing to pay more taxes won't help here, because it won't create more housing supply. Even a direct redistribution scheme wouldn't do much, because the rich will still be able to outbid t…

I understand the supply limitations, but we have the same problem, because we have a ton of traction towards higher-up professionals. The big difference lies within the political system. The housing/real estate market is completely free (and cutthroat) here too, but our more socialist oriented government interacts with it to help people in need.

Examples of that are "sponsored" apartments, that cities rent to their owners for regular price, and subside to people but with an adaptive price (much lower for lower income people, and a little higher for people who make more than average)

In more urgent cases, social services cooperate with people who own unused buildings, hotels during low season, etc, and pay a big price to keep people under a roof.

There's also a lot of work from associations to communicate with landlords and agencies, trying to help giving a fair chance and renting affordable places to people with regular income, students, etc, as many wealthy people are interested in cheap places too.

I feel like the people who control most of the market have a lot of political power, and they don't want a bunch of buildings popping out and lowering market pressure, making prices and their revenue drop. Money is not a definitive solution, but in the right hands it can help a lot. In turn it creates a nicer social climate, and things work out better for everyone.

A nicer social climate isn't in everyone's interest though, and a lot of people work very hard to make sure there is tension, because they profit from it, a lot.