5 ms·
Only in San Francisco do you get liberals who are virulently anti-immigrant and anti-busses.
by morgante 11y ago
Only in San Francisco do you get liberals who are virulently anti-immigrant and anti-busses.
- astazangasta 11y agoAre you using 'immigrant' to describe privileged tech workers who move to the city? This seems a strange misappropriation of the word.
- morgante 11y agoNothing about the term "immigrant" reserves it to the poor. In what way are people who move into San Francisco from elsewhere in the world not immigrants? I've long wanted to do a quiz on identifying whether phrases are from San Francisco liberals or Donald Trump.
- gozo 11y ago> Nothing about the term "immigrant" reserves it to the poor No, but it is generally reserved for people whom have permanently settled in another country. That doesn't include H1B (non-immigration) workers that could be thrown out if fired.
- morgante 11y agoNowhere near the majority of SV tech workers are on an H1B visa.
- gozo 11y agoOther popular visas aren't immigration visas either. Your point doesn't hold since by large peoples attitudes doesn't differ between immigrants and temporary workers, if people are from outside or inside the country nor relate to immigrants that settle outside the bay area. They are maybe protectionistic, anti-urbanization or anti-development but not anti-immigrant per se.
- DanBC 11y agoWhat? Immigrants are not poor. We need to be careful because a lot of people are strongly against asylum seekers and other migrants saying things like "They've got smart phones, they're not poor". That ignores the fact that asylum seekers are not fleeing poverty but violence and oppression.
- thedevil 11y agoMany, if not most of them, are indeed immigrants.
- resonanttoe 11y agoI think you've just uncovered more about your own biases and prejudices than any kind of politically correct idea you were trying to further.
- jsprogrammer 11y agoWhat is a privileged tech worker and how is it not immigration if they change location?
- xienze 11y agoTo be fair, the buses actually make the problem worse. Without them, I think a lot of Google employees would think twice about living in SF and commuting to Mountain View.
- thrownaway2424 11y agoYou didn't even read the article, did you?
- xienze 11y agoThe article doesn't ask the question "how many people moved to the city who otherwise wouldn't if there wasn't a free, comfy, Wi-Fi enabled bus available?" It starts from the assumption that everyone commuting from the city would do so regardless.
- runamok 11y agoYes, it does. There are percentages shown relating how many would (if the shuttle service was gone): drive alone, carpool, move, get a closer job, take public transportation... Granted it is self reported but whatever.
- xienze 11y agoThe question "now that you're here, what would you do if the buses disappeared" does not accurately account for people who made the decision to live further away from work because they know there is an employee-sponsored bus to shield them from the economic and time consequences of their actions. The question that is not asked by this article is "would you have moved to the city if there were no buses?" It's an important distinction.