4 ms·

Okay, but you have to understand, when you say things like "Oakland == Syria" it's incredibly hard to take you (and the people who make complaints like this) se

by ketzo 5y ago

Okay, but you have to understand, when you say things like "Oakland == Syria" it's incredibly hard to take you (and the people who make complaints like this) seriously. I can walk four blocks and buy, like, 19 different lattes. I can walk two blocks and get on a train that takes me to downtown SF in 18 minutes. In a 10-minute drive I can get to literally any cuisine the world has to offer, and it's fucking delicious. These are not amenities available in third-world countries (or, I might add, in many cities in the U.S., at least not at this density and quality). Do I see homeless people on the way? Yeah. I live in the Bay Area, an area going through a horrifyingly serious homelessness crisis. Parks are bad. The encampments under and along the highways are massively depressing. But there's not rubble in the streets. Families are not starving to death in their homes. People are not being gunned down against walls. Shit is bad right now, and I am afraid it's going to get worse before it gets better. But let's not pretend it's a third-world country. That helps neither your cause nor mine.

systemvoltage 5y ago
I thought it goes without saying to not take it literally. We don't have bombs falling here. Aesthetically, vast areas do look like Syria. May be not rubble, but very very far away from first-world (Switzerland, Japan). Food is amazing in a lot of big cities. There is no objective measure. New Yorkers say the same and so do people in Portland.
- NoSorryCannot 5y ago
  Even after back pedaling, this is still really out of touch. You don't seem to know what Syria looks like and "aesthetics" can't make something into the third world anyway. Not looking like a wealthy Swiss town or Japanese metropolis doesn't make anything third world.
gamblor956 5y ago
To further your point on the homeless: most of them aren't SF (or even Cali) locals. Their almost all drug addicts from other states who came to SF because they were told drugs were easy to get here and the weather's better than where they came from. Gov Rick Perry used to brag on national TV that Texas' solution to the homeless problem was to buy them tickets to California. And their director of health services recently admitted that they still do that. Texas didn't solve their homeless problem, they simply made it someone else's problem to deal with.
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > To further your point on the homeless: most of them aren't SF (or even Cali) locals Yes, they are. SF’s own research on the homeless population identified that 70% lived in SF immediately before becoming homeless, 55% for over 10 years; the 30% who did not live in SF include 22% from elsewhere in CA and 8% from other states. Migration and dumping from other states happens, but it's not the main source of homelessness.

by ketzo 5y ago

systemvoltage 5y ago

I thought it goes without saying to not take it literally. We don't have bombs falling here. Aesthetically, vast areas do look like Syria. May be not rubble, but very very far away from first-world (Switzerland, Japan). Food is amazing in a lot of big cities. There is no objective measure. New Yorkers say the same and so do people in Portland.

NoSorryCannot 5y ago
Even after back pedaling, this is still really out of touch. You don't seem to know what Syria looks like and "aesthetics" can't make something into the third world anyway. Not looking like a wealthy Swiss town or Japanese metropolis doesn't make anything third world.

gamblor956 5y ago

To further your point on the homeless: most of them aren't SF (or even Cali) locals. Their almost all drug addicts from other states who came to SF because they were told drugs were easy to get here and the weather's better than where they came from. Gov Rick Perry used to brag on national TV that Texas' solution to the homeless problem was to buy them tickets to California. And their director of health services recently admitted that they still do that. Texas didn't solve their homeless problem, they simply made it someone else's problem to deal with.

dragonwriter 5y ago
> To further your point on the homeless: most of them aren't SF (or even Cali) locals Yes, they are. SF’s own research on the homeless population identified that 70% lived in SF immediately before becoming homeless, 55% for over 10 years; the 30% who did not live in SF include 22% from elsewhere in CA and 8% from other states. Migration and dumping from other states happens, but it's not the main source of homelessness.