5 ms·
Well, I hate to start a political digression, but here goes: The borderline unliveable nature of many parts of SF (and increasing now) are a direct and foresee
by kepler1 6y ago
Well, I hate to start a political digression, but here goes:
The borderline unliveable nature of many parts of SF (and increasing now) are a direct and foreseeable product of the city's overly tolerant approach to crime, the homeless population, and all the enablers of that over the last decade. The city had chances to set itself up better to survive this situation, but it squandered the time.
All of the policies that contribute to high housing cost, "neighborhood preservation", unwillingness to rezone and push out the festering drug dens of the city. All in the name of nebulously defined "equity".
Better to have a crime-ridden neighborhood that preserves some grandma's barely-scraping-by corner store than to have a safe neighborhood with, god forbid, some new young people who have jobs. All of the money and tax revenue spent on useless services for the incurably drug-addicted, instead of preparing the city and its infrastructure and economy against a downturn. All of the policies that excuse people from following some of the rules and tradeoffs of a civilized society. As if you can provide enough counseling sessions for someone to not break into your car.
What the city is experiencing now is the payback for its years of inaction and unwillingness to put in place harsher and more orderly policies. You see now that everyone is fleeing SF because you don't live there longer than you have to, unless you're really rich or own your own condo. The empty apartments for rent are 10-deep on Zillow.
It costs too much to staff the police properly, and they get criticized if they arrest someone, so you basically only get a cop to show up if you've been stabbed. Unreasonable people protest every time you try to clean up a homeless encampment, so the garbage just shifts from 7th street to Cesar Chavez, to your next favorite corridor the following week.
It costs too much to staff Bart and Muni at a reasonable rate (or even check that people pay the fare), so you have people getting stabbed and shot on trains that are absolutely foul, and they wonder why ridership is so low. Supervisors are incentivized more to appear on camera saying they support BLM than actually doing things that make those lives matter in the neighborhoods. Let's promote looting and protest, and then regret later what it caused.
You build up points to cash in as a city when you really need it, and to make life better in regular times. SF wasted it all.
- 8f2ab37a-ed6c 6y agoKeep in mind that "preserving neighborhood character" is likely a way to cover up voting against new construction by existing landlords in an attempt to keep their net worth rising with each year by restricting supply. Artificial supply restriction leads to prices going up in desirable areas. Of course there is going to be a breaking point at which the area is no longer desirable, but I don't think we're anywhere near that in SF despite what they doomsayers like to claim in 2020. Wouldn't you vote the same way if you could make one of your biggest assets beat the market consistently every year? It's the usual tragedy of the commons.
- presentation 6y agoI always found it impressive how SF landlords successfully weaponize poor immigrant communities and financially unstable youth to campaign against their own interests in service of the wealthy.
- presentation 6y agoI broadly agree but I’ve also heard that despite how terrible it is now, apparently it was even worse a few decades ago, with gangs controlling large swaths of the city and the mission being super dangerous.