7 ms·

The real solution is don't live in SF. Seriously. From what I read here on HN, SF is pretty messed up. So, if someone doesn't want to live somewhere messed up,

The real solution is don't live in SF. Seriously. From what I read here on HN, SF is pretty messed up. So, if someone doesn't want to live somewhere messed up, don't go there to begin with. One can't move near an airport and complain about the noise.

dpark 10y ago
> From what I read here on HN, SF is pretty messed up. You probably shouldn't base your impression of SF entirely on the negative articles you read on HN. SF has some serious issues, but it also has a lot going for it. Namely, the job opportunities if you're in tech are great. The weather is great. Lots of the area is beautiful. It's a liberal area (great if that fits your views), including being LGBT-friendly. It's got some great culture if you're in tech. The biggest problem with SF seems to be housing affordability, and that's frankly not a huge problem for 6-figure earners (not the way it is for the real middle class), despite all the self-pity. 6-figure earners in the bay can afford housing, even if they can't afford what they want to own. > So, if someone doesn't want to live somewhere messed up, don't go there to begin with. This isn't helpful for the nearly million people who already live in SF or the millions who live in the surrounding areas.
- amyjess 10y ago
  > It's got some great culture if you're in tech. Honestly, I find the culture of Silicon Valley's tech industry to be utterly degenerate. Even if the area was affordable, I wouldn't live or work there in large part because SV puts me off. I work in tech, I'm LGBT myself (multiple letters of LGBT at that), and the Dallas area is pretty much everything I want in a city. I honestly don't get why the Bay Area doesn't just expand outward. Sure, you can't go farther west because there's an ocean in the way, but what's stopping it from sprawling north, south, and east? I'm from Dallas, which has experienced booming growth for as far back as I can remember, and we've kept housing prices down without sacrificing suburban culture by simply expanding outwards. Nobody cares that none of the expansion is in Dallas proper; the locals here see each suburb as neighborhoods, not separate cities (albeit, neighborhoods with their own street signage and lane markings, but still). Not just housing; workplaces are moving outwards too. Hell, right now, I live in the burbs, and my workplace is in a suburb that's even farther away from Downtown from where I live.
  - Kalium 10y ago
    The Bay Area already has sprawled north, south, and east. I have coworkers who commute from all those directions. It's hit the limit of the current transit infrastructure, and adding more is cost and time prohibitive.
  - dpark 10y ago
    > Honestly, I find the culture of Silicon Valley's tech industry to be utterly degenerate. I'm not sure what that means. I was mostly referring to the fact that there are a ton of techies there. If you want to strike up a conversation about microservices with a stranger on the street, SF is probably the easiest place to do so. > I honestly don't get why the Bay Area doesn't just expand outward. Traffic, probably. It takes about 30 minutes to commute from Oakland to SF, and those two are pretty close geographically. Your commute could be far longer depending on where you live and work in the existing Bay Area. I doubt most people want to commute an hour from San Ramon to SF. Plus there are mountains not far east of the Bay. I'm not sure how much of that land is easily developed.
    - uola 10y ago
      I think the question is why San Francisco doesn't expand like, say, New York has? Where each new neighborhood becomes somewhat self sustaining. I seem like there would be a queue of people that wants to start a company in the cheaper part of town. I guess maybe SV is that cheaper part though.
      - umanwizard 10y ago
        Is each new neighborhood of NYC really self-sustaining? It seems NYC's ability to grow is based on massive amounts of people being able to easily and cheaply commute to Manhattan daily.
      - dpark 10y ago
        It has. You don't have to go into SF for anything if you live in Mountain View, or Oakland, or Sunnyvale, or any of the other towns in the bay area. But as you noted, those aren't cheap either.
- jacalata 10y ago
  It's a liberal area where people don't care about problems that only affect poor people. A lot more Libertarian than classic left-wing.
cloudjacker 10y ago
Sure, SF is merely masquerading as a world class city, by the people that live in the area. It has no grip on its elementary problems that actual world class cities have developed solutions for. But you can have a good time there. Nobody will actually know if you live in an apartment and have startups give you free food everyday, or if you live in a tent under the highway. Now if you are trying to earn enough to make a downpayment for a place in San Francisco.... thats not in the cards.
- andrewbinstock 10y ago
  What makes a world-class city? I'd say great architecture, great culture, high-quality museums, good schools, great universities, excellent hospitals. And people who care about each other. San Francisco has all of those.
  - cloudjacker 10y ago
    Visit another self-proclaimed world class city and see what functions better
  - umanwizard 10y ago
    All of that stuff put together matters less than basic quality-of-life stuff like "not having to own a car". I go to the museum a few times a year; I take the train twice a day. I'll stay in the city with good trains over good museums.
  - santaclaus 10y ago
    Reliable public transit and bars open until 4am would be rad to have! > great universities SFSU?
lordnacho 10y ago
I was there a couple of times last year. Mostly seemed like any other large city, except it's too low-rise to make sense. Actually not a pretty place, a lot of boring buildings. (Landmarks are different.) The thing that really stood out to me, however, was that there seems to be a lack of psychiatric care. Almost every day I was there I would run into some guy who was having an argument with an imaginary person. Often a very aggressive argument. Cops even came by once. Not something I often see in Europe, and I've lived in 5 cities in 3 countries now.
- brixon 10y ago
  The US does not handle it's population of people with mental illness very well. A large percentage of the US homeless population have mental illness and cities with good weather have a much higher number of homeless people.
- vacri 10y ago
  SF has a lot of homeless people because it has relatively good services for the homeless compared to other places in the US, and the weather is tolerable. If you're mentally ill and homeless, SF is a better option than most.
roflchoppa 10y ago
You should see what the people are doing over at Laguna Seca, you bought your house next to a race track and you're complaining about the sound? Completely baffling.

dpark 10y ago

> From what I read here on HN, SF is pretty messed up. You probably shouldn't base your impression of SF entirely on the negative articles you read on HN. SF has some serious issues, but it also has a lot going for it. Namely, the job opportunities if you're in tech are great. The weather is great. Lots of the area is beautiful. It's a liberal area (great if that fits your views), including being LGBT-friendly. It's got some great culture if you're in tech. The biggest problem with SF seems to be housing affordability, and that's frankly not a huge problem for 6-figure earners (not the way it is for the real middle class), despite all the self-pity. 6-figure earners in the bay can afford housing, even if they can't afford what they want to own. > So, if someone doesn't want to live somewhere messed up, don't go there to begin with. This isn't helpful for the nearly million people who already live in SF or the millions who live in the surrounding areas.

amyjess 10y ago
> It's got some great culture if you're in tech. Honestly, I find the culture of Silicon Valley's tech industry to be utterly degenerate. Even if the area was affordable, I wouldn't live or work there in large part because SV puts me off. I work in tech, I'm LGBT myself (multiple letters of LGBT at that), and the Dallas area is pretty much everything I want in a city. I honestly don't get why the Bay Area doesn't just expand outward. Sure, you can't go farther west because there's an ocean in the way, but what's stopping it from sprawling north, south, and east? I'm from Dallas, which has experienced booming growth for as far back as I can remember, and we've kept housing prices down without sacrificing suburban culture by simply expanding outwards. Nobody cares that none of the expansion is in Dallas proper; the locals here see each suburb as neighborhoods, not separate cities (albeit, neighborhoods with their own street signage and lane markings, but still). Not just housing; workplaces are moving outwards too. Hell, right now, I live in the burbs, and my workplace is in a suburb that's even farther away from Downtown from where I live.
- Kalium 10y ago
  The Bay Area already has sprawled north, south, and east. I have coworkers who commute from all those directions. It's hit the limit of the current transit infrastructure, and adding more is cost and time prohibitive.
- dpark 10y ago
  > Honestly, I find the culture of Silicon Valley's tech industry to be utterly degenerate. I'm not sure what that means. I was mostly referring to the fact that there are a ton of techies there. If you want to strike up a conversation about microservices with a stranger on the street, SF is probably the easiest place to do so. > I honestly don't get why the Bay Area doesn't just expand outward. Traffic, probably. It takes about 30 minutes to commute from Oakland to SF, and those two are pretty close geographically. Your commute could be far longer depending on where you live and work in the existing Bay Area. I doubt most people want to commute an hour from San Ramon to SF. Plus there are mountains not far east of the Bay. I'm not sure how much of that land is easily developed.
  - uola 10y ago
    I think the question is why San Francisco doesn't expand like, say, New York has? Where each new neighborhood becomes somewhat self sustaining. I seem like there would be a queue of people that wants to start a company in the cheaper part of town. I guess maybe SV is that cheaper part though.
    - umanwizard 10y ago
      Is each new neighborhood of NYC really self-sustaining? It seems NYC's ability to grow is based on massive amounts of people being able to easily and cheaply commute to Manhattan daily.
    - dpark 10y ago
      It has. You don't have to go into SF for anything if you live in Mountain View, or Oakland, or Sunnyvale, or any of the other towns in the bay area. But as you noted, those aren't cheap either.
jacalata 10y ago
It's a liberal area where people don't care about problems that only affect poor people. A lot more Libertarian than classic left-wing.

cloudjacker 10y ago

Sure, SF is merely masquerading as a world class city, by the people that live in the area. It has no grip on its elementary problems that actual world class cities have developed solutions for. But you can have a good time there. Nobody will actually know if you live in an apartment and have startups give you free food everyday, or if you live in a tent under the highway. Now if you are trying to earn enough to make a downpayment for a place in San Francisco.... thats not in the cards.

andrewbinstock 10y ago
What makes a world-class city? I'd say great architecture, great culture, high-quality museums, good schools, great universities, excellent hospitals. And people who care about each other. San Francisco has all of those.
- cloudjacker 10y ago
  Visit another self-proclaimed world class city and see what functions better
- umanwizard 10y ago
  All of that stuff put together matters less than basic quality-of-life stuff like "not having to own a car". I go to the museum a few times a year; I take the train twice a day. I'll stay in the city with good trains over good museums.
- santaclaus 10y ago
  Reliable public transit and bars open until 4am would be rad to have! > great universities SFSU?

lordnacho 10y ago

I was there a couple of times last year. Mostly seemed like any other large city, except it's too low-rise to make sense. Actually not a pretty place, a lot of boring buildings. (Landmarks are different.) The thing that really stood out to me, however, was that there seems to be a lack of psychiatric care. Almost every day I was there I would run into some guy who was having an argument with an imaginary person. Often a very aggressive argument. Cops even came by once. Not something I often see in Europe, and I've lived in 5 cities in 3 countries now.

brixon 10y ago
The US does not handle it's population of people with mental illness very well. A large percentage of the US homeless population have mental illness and cities with good weather have a much higher number of homeless people.
vacri 10y ago
SF has a lot of homeless people because it has relatively good services for the homeless compared to other places in the US, and the weather is tolerable. If you're mentally ill and homeless, SF is a better option than most.

roflchoppa 10y ago

You should see what the people are doing over at Laguna Seca, you bought your house next to a race track and you're complaining about the sound? Completely baffling.