3 ms·
> "due to rampant interference in the operation of the free market" But maybe in another sense, San Francisco is a product, and the feature it's selling includ
by freyr 8y ago
> "due to rampant interference in the operation of the free market"
But maybe in another sense, San Francisco is a product, and the feature it's selling includes rampant overregulation.
If that's not a good business model, another city can step up and offer better incentives. And people can move there. There are many nice cities and towns in the US. If you insist on living on the dirty tip of a tiny overcrowded peninsula, that's a choice.
You're trying to regulate San Francisco's right to regulate.
- colordrops 8y agoAnd that's how a city should operate. The citizens should regulate how the city regulates.
- anonsfnative 8y agoWe do. That's what people here are complaining about. They have no stake in this game, have no intention of becoming part of the community, they're just looking for a cheap buck and don't mind if they ruin everything that makes our home great. There are plenty of other places to go to, and everybody whining about "San Francisco being a zoning failure" might want to remember that we have a larger GDP than many developed nations. If that's failure, what exactly is your idea of success?
- colordrops 8y agoBased on your response I'm guessing you are not being sarcastic in saying that GDP is the main measure of success. GDP is just a measure for a particular system. I could think of several more direct measures than GDP without trying very hard, for instance quality of life, cost of living, and overall happiness.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]