19 ms·

The American dream is on life support in the Bay Area

161 points by lando2319 5y ago

bugeats 5y ago
The audacity of calling the the new destination state politics a “shitshow”, while abandoning the direct political legacy that is now in flames.
giantg2 5y ago
"Add it all up: merit, achievement, and success are becoming a lost cause" I feel this, so much.
picsao 5y ago
mercy_dude 5y ago
Not just Bay Area, pretty much any middle to big cities. Housing ownership dream is dead, cost of education has skyrocketed and healthcare is just a mess. That’s everywhere. The only thing on top of that we have got in Bay Area is increasing petty crime rates with no consequences. But that is on Bay Area residents for consistently electing egghead politicians.
- tandymodel100 5y ago
  Well, public schools are still free everywhere. And in state public universities are still fairly affordable - the one in my hometown offers $1k tuition for the year now.
- gaoshan 5y ago
  Take a city like Columbus, Ohio. Home ownership is relatively cheap and easy, school are great, healthcare is no more messy than the average in the US. Crime is negligible, it's clean, has tons of great restaurants, good sports, very cool and unique neighborhoods with easy access to everywhere else. There are so many cities like that around the US that people on the coasts seem almost blind to. The main downside is winter but aside from that it's a pretty great area. Especially on a tech salary. People say, "Yeah but... Ohio". To which I say, they really, acutely and deeply don't know what they are talking about.
  - gonehome 5y ago
    I grew up in Western New York before moving to the Bay Area for work. People really love my hometown. It’s okay, you can adapt to any place and make the most of it. But I think the coastal cities are much better places to live. More opportunity, more food, more people to learn from and things to do, more variety. There are cost of living trade offs for sure, but I wouldn’t go back. I hope Garry Tan is successful fixing SF. I’ll do what I can to get the bad politicians out.
  - cozzyd 5y ago
    Not sure you can say Columbus has negligible crime, unless you mean Dublin or something. Columbus has had around 200 homicides this year. SF, with swhichlmist identical population in city limits, looks like it's had fewer than 60. Columbus is only marginally (25% or so) less murderous per capita than Chicago, where I live, and certainly nobody says we have negligible crime!
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  I live in a city that most of HN would call a rust belt post-industrial shithole. The kinds of petty crime, squalid behavior and cost of living issues I see people say "is only in a few areas" in defense of SF I haven't seen in any area.
cam0 5y ago
I first started seeing these blog posts and Twitter threads documenting reasons for leaving SF at the start of the pandemic, and they tend to get a significant amount of engagement/comments/likes. I had never before seen anyone write such long and detailed reasons for something as routine and boring as moving cities. I can only imagine the reason for doing this is to increase their following on social media. Just stoking the rage-engagement machine.
- pm90 5y ago
  I tend to agree. There’s certainly valid reasons for wanting to move away. But these posts aren’t really saying anything new, they tend to feed off of each other creating an online impression of SF as some kind of hellhole.
- bingohbangoh 5y ago
  You must understand that people have not liked SF for a long time -- at least five years if not further -- and feel "stuck" there for career reasons. The pandemic has made a lot of things (everything?) about the city much worse while opening up an avenue to leave. Thus, many people have taken it. As they're leaving behind a network, a likely fractured group of friends, and a never ending lockdown threat, it's created complicated feelings.
  - AustinDev 5y ago
    I lived in alameda for 1 year in 2010. Hated the whole Bay Area and left as soon as I could. For me it was just personal preference.
    - bingohbangoh 5y ago
      I visited LA for a week in 2018 and SF for two weeks in 2016. Never have I felt so unliked on a personal level (weird scowls in the Mission district, didn't get one match on Tinder lmao). I made it a point that I would never return to California for as long as I lived (unless you're willing to pay me a lot). For point of reference, I'm from NYC so this isn't a blue-state/red-state thing like it has become for a lot of people. There's something about the California vibe that does not mesh with me.
gromitss 5y ago
Barrin92 5y ago
>"On the one hand, I think any rational individual would acknowledge that privilege has made for a rigged system. But on the other hand, in the spirit of deconstructing those imbalances, we’ve dismantled upward mobility for everyone — not just the underprivileged. Instead of a definition of equity that raises the floor (a rising tide floats all boats), we’ve adopted a definition that institutes a ceiling on achievement:" Despite repeating the "pull yourself up by your own bootstraps" motto literally ten times, it should be noted that upwards mobility is highest precisely in countries that implement policies the author laments (a phenomenon known as the 'Great Gatsby Curve' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Gatsby_curve#/media/File:The_Great_Gatsby_Curve.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Gatsby_curve#/media/File...). The explanation is fairly straight-forward and intuitive, shorter ladders are easier to climb.
- zwkrt 5y ago
  I’m a big ol’ hippie but one sticking point I always have with my friends is that to have upward mobility there must also be the chance for downward mobility. There can be no success without a chance for failure. And I don’t mean this in a zero-sum sort of way. Ideally every person would be able to invest in themselves and their community to the fullest extent. Teach themselves and others new skills, start their own business, sell themselves and their talents to others, and create a robust ecosystem of success and opportunity at scales ranging from the individual to the mega-corporation. I dream of a culture (both interpersonal and governmental) that strives for such an ideal. In practice this does not happen though because it is a lot of work, not all people are able, not all people are willing, not all people are as open, sinscere, and imaginative, “the system” is not really favorable to being so self-starting, and the reality is that most available jobs are awful and it is very hard to have such a clear and vivid imagining of one’s own future when bogged down by a series of dead-end line cook jobs. When I see things like the anti-work meme/movement I get where it’s coming from, but I also wonder what such a person would do once their goal of anti-work is achieved.
  - hogFeast 5y ago
    Economic policy has had a huge role in that. If you are wealthy, you can borrow money for free, you can pay no taxes, and you can invest your free money at 10%+...oh, and the govt will bail you out if it goes wrong. I worked in equity research at a financial adviser, I am not anti-markets at all (although am probably towards the left of things, for economics more than anything...substantial inequality is not sustainable economically) but the reason why the US doesn't have downward mobility is because rich people do not need skills. You need money to get rich, not skills. If you look at other countries with similar economic models, for example the UK, you see much higher downward mobility. Again, the simple reason for that is less buoyant financial markets (and btw, UK property has gone through the roof and wealthier individuals in the UK own proportionally more property...the US is really, really out there). The only place that is really comparable are explicitly corporatist states like Germany and China...and the former has (tbf, fairly weak) mechanisms to guarantee a certain living standard. I don't really understand the US system at all. The welfare state is Bezos and Musk's space projects. And people wonder why their fellow citizens are struggling? You are rich, but you live in a society where many other people are suffering...that isn't wealth.
caconym_ 5y ago
The bay area seems to have combined the pernicious conservatism of aging "liberals", the worst of leftist politics, and the bizarre, culturally illiterate excesses of SV tech and grind culture into a noxious stew I'm surprised anybody can tolerate for any length of time.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
SwSwinger 5y ago
Coming from a Southern US state, I expected that the Bay Area would be more egalitarian given the language. Instead, I've found that it's more like an idea incubator setup by generational wealth that people need to leave if they can't become nouveau riche before they want to build a family. Even when you win the lottery, your reward is living the same type of life in CA that you could in 45 other US states without pushing yourself. 1849 Gold Rush. Same as it ever was.
- jseliger 5y ago
  The Bay Area seems to have a lot of cognitive dissonance, where the statements made don't seem to even remotely match the reality on the ground or the policies pursued: https://jakeseliger.com/2018/08/19/what-santa-barbara-says/ https://jakeseliger.com/2018/08/19/what-santa-barbara-says/
  - thephyber 5y ago
    Cog Dis is part of the human condition. There is no significantly populated place in the US where there is a lack of Cog Dis about at least some political policies
- MomoXenosaga 5y ago
  SF is just a city, it cannot change America into a European style democratic socialist system- provided anyone in the US would actually want that and not immediately start crying about 21% VAT.
  - Amezarak 5y ago
    VAT is one of those weird mismatches between US and European politics. It would be regarded as very regressive in the US, since sales taxes disproportionately harm the poor.
    - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
      It's a lot easier to have regressive taxes when your starting point is this[0] The US's starting point was revolting over a few percent on a couple random assortments of goods (and a few other affronts). [0] https://img.ifunny.co/images/bfab53583fcce050029cd61cfea5c6d670394f26bf6ce48085bcd42622565289_1.jpg https://img.ifunny.co/images/bfab53583fcce050029cd61cfea5c6d...
EarlKing 5y ago
- michaelcampbell 5y ago
  > as the author and his fellow locusts Yeah, /you're/ part of the solution.
  - sremani 5y ago
    I do not know if @EarlKing is part of solution but I can guarantee the smug douchebag who wrote the article is going to be a problem for Miami. This guy was drooling with contempt in his second sentence.
- labcomputer 5y ago
  > his fellow locust [...] Better they fly off to Miami [...] rest of us can clean up the mess and restore some sanity around here. Not to put too fine a point on it, but how are you going to afford food if all the techies leave? Every economy (not just nations) trades with its neighbors and has imports and exports. One of San Francisco's imports is food. But what does San Francisco produce to export/trade for that food? Today one of the exports is generalized "tech" (software licenses, X as a Service, design of products that are built in China). What else? When tech leaves, what do you produce that can be sold to people outside San Francisco? If you look at any former rust-belt mill town, it's not just the factory workers that are affected when the plant closes. Unemployed mill workers can't afford new trucks (so salespeople make less). They can't afford haircuts, so the barber closes up shop. The can't afford to go out to eat or drink, so the entire service industry feels the pain.
  - EarlKing 5y ago
    > One of San Francisco's imports is food. Remember the part where I said, "The Bay Area is not San Francisco"? I don't live in San Francisco. I genuinely don't care what San Francisco produces for export. Also, you're implying that San Francisco, or the greater Bay Area, somehow didn't produce anything before the tech locusts arrived. That is false. California's economy consists of far more than just tech drek.
martin1975 5y ago
- tandymodel100 5y ago
  [flagged]
  - _dain_ 5y ago
    [flagged]
  - hogFeast 5y ago
    - vb6sp6 5y ago
      You are missing the step where the people who refuse the medical procedure are also taking up a disproportionate medical resources when they get sick. And it seems to be, at least according to the data, more prevalent with conservative ideology. Nice try though
      - hogFeast 5y ago
        No, I am not. People are paying for the medical resources they use. Nice try though (I would learn more about social policy, the point of social policy is that it is for everyone, not people who agree to a medical procedure, not people who have political views you agree with...this is why the US doesn't have a welfare state, because people believe money will go to people "who aren't like them").
        vb6sp6 5y ago
        People aren't being denied COVID treatment so the social policy isn't being violated. Unless getting your feelings hurt by Twitter comments is a violation of social policy?
Swizec 5y ago
As a recent (~6 years) newcomer from the poor parts of Europe ... eh it's fine. Yes it would be nice if people cared more about doing good than being seen to talk about caring about the correct things, but I can't imagine any other place in the world where I could've grown my personal wealth from zero to "As much as my parents did in a lifetime" in 6 years. Whether that's because of or in spite of the environment I don't know, but it sure wasn't happening back home. That said, would be nice if all the friends I made in the past few years stopped salmoning and stayed in the city. You don't have to move back out to the burbs just because it's family time. Cities are a strictly superior place to live (imo) and being exposed to the riffraff is a feature, not a bug. edit: There is research that says mixed income neighborhoods are the fastest way to lowering crime, lifting kids out of poverty, and improving life outcomes for all. https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/27116/412292-Effects-from-Living-in-Mixed-Income-Communities-for-Low-Income-Families.PDF https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/27116/...
maxdo 5y ago
Terry_Roll 5y ago
One method which helps reinforce a States existence, is to define action, like in this case, https://twitter.com/michelletandler/status/1423015999075495938 https://twitter.com/michelletandler/status/14230159990754959... We have michelle tandler saying all females have been assaulted. The beauty of words and law is they can be incredibly absolute and incredibly vague, so people can project their feelings into this domain and then go to the state to justify its existence. Its just another form of religion in a way and no doubt uses the same techniques religion uses. Plus how many sock puppets exist, has anyone every met anyone featured in the news and witnessed this sort of crime, or is social media an amplifying echo chamber? Who would have thought AI on social media could be such expert trolls?
650 5y ago
This article quotes `Twitter users` too much. Twitter users are not representative of the populace at large all too often. The interspaced boxes with emojis make the text harder to read. "I think it’s now officially more inconvenient to live in San Francisco or Oakland than when I lived in Chennai or Bombay growing up." - I definitely don't think this is a fair assessment objectively.
pm90 5y ago
Ultimately the root cause of SFs problems (and Bay Area in general) is lack of housing. It’s a city that should be as dense (or more) than NYC considering the amount of economic activity it generates, but the existing landed Gentry has opposed any and all measures to remedy the situation since the status quo increases their wealth. If SF built enough housing, it would mostly solve the homelessness crisis, but also generate even more tax revenue for investing in better social services, transit etc. As a resident, it feels like a lost opportunity: the pandemic has made remote work common and fewer people will want to move to the SF in the future.
- jmspring 5y ago
  Building housing isn't going to "solve homelessness". The majority of "visible homeless" that you see on the streets, etc. have mental health and addiction issues. Also, most housing, especially those catering to those "on the streets" have rules. More than a few living on the street don't want to have rules and structure. So, building housing isn't going to a total solution. Mental health issues need wrap around services and the ability to restrict their actions - which years of legislation and rulings (many will blame the ACLU) doesn't allow for such in nearly all cases. Addicts, for them, they need to WANT to get better. Even then it is still a long road. Hitting bottom may not even happen for some.
  - khuey 5y ago
    > So, building housing isn't going to a total solution. It's not a total solution but it's a prerequisite to any solution. You will never be able to get the homeless into permanent housing when that permanent housing costs 2.5k/month.
    - blitzar 5y ago
      Lets pretend for a minute that you got housing down from 2.5k/month to 1k/month. How many homeless, jobless people would that take off the streets? Hint: zero.
      - 5y ago
nateburke 5y ago
I feel like the young, single person's American dream is still alive and well in SF. If you're willing and able to bend your life around work, there are few better places to do it. And for those with families, especially those with young children, I think life is pretty hard right now, just about everywhere.
- b9a2cab5 5y ago
  Only if you work in tech, and only if you're a software engineer or PM. It is straight up not possible to live in a reasonably safe area in SF on a salary less than $100k before tax. And the biggest reason is the toxic cost of living caused by refusal to build high density housing. I know software engineers who went from living with roommates in a tiny apartment in SF to paying less for a penthouse in other big cities.
  - reidjs 5y ago
    Not disagreeing, but I think it has more to do with not having kids. You can find a one bedroom on Craigslist in almost any neighborhood in SF for less than $2,000 a month. How much more do you need to survive as a single person? Another $2K a month? That puts you at $4k/month, or $48K a year, which most full-time jobs will pay. Assuming healthy, no kids, and that the landlord agrees to rent you the place, which may be difficult if you’re a person of color or have a low salary.
    - b9a2cab5 5y ago
      Pre-COVID you couldn't find a 1br in a safe neighborhood for less than $3-3.5k. Less than 2k gets you something in the Tenderloin, which is the opposite of safe. Add food (~$700 because high cost of living), car payments (~$450 for an econobox), car insurance (~$200 because SF has a lot of break-ins and theft), health insurance, utilities (also expensive as fuck in NorCal due to cost of living), phone/internet bills, and you can realistically hit $5k/mo in expenses. According to this calculator [1] post-tax a $100k salary nets you $5500/mo in San Francisco. This is mostly due to high state taxes. So you are basically living paycheck to paycheck despite making 6 figures and living a pretty standard life, which is moronic no matter how much you look at it. [1]: https://smartasset.com/taxes/paycheck-calculator#XhSaiPp5Sy https://smartasset.com/taxes/paycheck-calculator#XhSaiPp5Sy
jowday 5y ago
Author spends a lot of time discussing the social contract and then laments an elected official calling out a billionaire for disobeying a public health mandate during a world historic pandemic to reopen a factory.
- ghufran_syed 5y ago
  Why? Because the politician must be right, while the “billionaire” (aka “a citizen”) wanting to actually pay people money to actually make things must be wrong?
- around_here 5y ago
  [flagged]
forrestthewoods 5y ago
California has the highest or second highest poverty rate in the country when you account for cost of living. California policies are an absolute disaster for poor people. This is true for most other big cities in blue states as well. Although California and Bay Area are far and away the worst offenders. I live in Seattle. It’s not nearly as bad as the Bay. We’ve made a lot of the same bad decisions. And a handful of better ones. But the trend line is very bad and getting worse.
- khuey 5y ago
  > California policies are an absolute disaster for poor people. It's really just one policy and it's the policy of making it near impossible to build housing.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
starik36 5y ago
Another article from the same SF crowd that voted in people like Chesa Boudin. Now they are wondering why you can't walk down the street in peace. All this without once acknowledging their responsibility. Sleep with the dogs - you'll wake up with the fleas.
- rmk 5y ago
  The article is by an immigrant worker in tech. It is exceedingly unlikely he votes in any sort of election, and is almost certainly not the kind to elect Chesa Boudin.
  - sjg007 5y ago
    Can't vote if you aren't a citizen.
  - starik36 5y ago
    In the article he refers to Texas and Florida as "political train-wrecks". I think his vote definitely does go to the Chesa Boudin crowd.
    - gonehome 5y ago
      There are a large amount of people that think the Republican subservience to trump is a “political train wreck” and also hate the progressive politics of the far left. A lot of people that would have preferred Bloomberg, some center left, or any center right non-trump Republican. I’d guess the author is in this more moderate camp.
julianeon 5y ago
I live in SF and have spent a lot of time thinking about the problems here. I don't think you can understand SF today without starting from this foundational assumption, which is something of a narrative violation, actually. I don't see many starting from this point of view - but I do, and I think it explains almost everything in his article. That assumption is: San Francisco is a city for the rich. That's what really explains the motivations and the things that matter, politically. Furthermore (starting from there), as a city for the rich, SF cares proportionately less than other metropolises would, about things that in other places would make for strong incentives. So, housing. Remember, city for the rich: they are housed, in nice houses that should keep their value (not have it lowered by apartments). So new housing doesn't get built. Thefts: Eh, too bad, but if most if your shopping takes place through Postmates & Instacart... did it really happen? Do you really care? You don't feel the pain all that much. So your response is kind of lethargic. You're not personally losing money so it's not so bad really. BART: You don't use that, lol. I mean it'll keep running and you can get from place to place on it, for the sake of working people, sure. But beyond that... whatever. School Board: Your kids go to private school. Next. Tech: We already have money, and jobs. We (the voters) are already very well off. It's fine it tech wants to add to our economy, but we don't need tech and we're not threatened by its departure. And that's very much what happened. If you look at most of the problems in SF, and the way the voting public has responded, to me this model has the most explanatory power. Now maybe the average SF voter isn't rich - but the people who shape the conversation & have the most impact are. SF is very much a city that caters to them.
- mercy_dude 5y ago
  You can replace SF with any big coastal city in America and it’s the same story.
  - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
    Neither Boston nor DC are that bad. I hear Philly is trying though, no recent first hand experience with that one.
    - 5y ago
linuxhansl 5y ago
Wasn't going to respond, but just feel compelled to... I have lived in the Bay Area for over 20 years, 12 years in SF, and now in the East Bay. I'm in SF, Berkeley, Oakland, Emeryville, and Contra Costa at least once a week. Personally I do not know anybody who has been assaulted or robbed and I have never been assaulted or robbed. I frequently am in SF downtown, and in Oakland/Emeryville. Both considered "hotspots"; nothing ever happened to me and never felt unsafe. I do not feel exhausted. I never did anything more than my job (and, yes, I'm in "tech". And nobody ever yelled at me for it.) The nature, landscape, the parks, hikes, culture, weather are pretty awesome and I'll likely never move away. Is everything perfect? Of course not! Is there a problem with homelessness? Yes there is! Maybe we should do what other cities and counties have done and just chase the homeless out to somewhere else, kick the can down the road? HELL NO! I happen to work at a company that actually does something about that. My sampling set is obviously small (my friends, colleagues, and acquaintances), and so seems the author's sampling set. The author undoubtedly had his experiences and that's a shame. I'm just here to convey a different view on things and not all of us feel that way.
- Flankk 5y ago
  Appreciate your perspective. It was in the news that people are leaving their car windows and trunk open to prevent theft. Smash and grabs are rampant throughout the city. Is this not your experience or has someone already stolen your car so it's not an issue anymore?
  - linuxhansl 5y ago
    Heh. We all know that news are sensational by their very nature. Nobody reports all the good things that happen, or on the bad stuff that did not happen. No, my car was not stolen and no it hasn't been broken into, yet. (knock knock knock) Don't doubt it's happening, I have never seen a car with the window or trunk open.
- chrischen 5y ago
  I lived in SF 10 years and early on I was robbed at knife point just walking around The Mission district at around 7 PM (though it was dark because it was winter time). I wasn't robbed but there was a person that burst out of the Victoria's secret downtown right in front of me. My friend had her laptop stolen in the coffee shop I used to frequent, and while the thief was caught they could not recover any of the stolen stuff and she was eventually released. Someone grabbed my iPhone out of my pocket (though I chased him down and forced him to return it). Friend had parked a car in The Mission for their wedding held there. It was broken into and some wedding gifts including cash were stolen. Friend had a guy "accidentally" open his back balcony door. While working out of a pretty crowded Starbucks in the financial district some thugs came in and attempted a snatch and grab. He basically leaned in really quickly towards me but then apparently aborted when I braced and held the laptop. I wasn't even sure until the guy next to me told me after they left that they were planning to snatch it, and that one time he saw them do this and while trying to leave run full speed into a door that opened in-ward only. I also for several years took the BART around midnight daily (after working out of a coffee shop downtown) so there's a long list of stuff I'm not even mentioning. I think if you do short restricted trips to SF to nice areas, go with groups, take Ubers or your own car, etc, you can be pretty insulated. It wouldn't be hard to be sensible and take obvious precautions to greatly limit your exposure to crime. In fact, almost all of my friends who are there find it a great place to live because they basically do not have to interact with any of the undesirable parts or peoples of SF. I personally tried to take as much public transit (bus, walking, and BART) as much as I could, ate in The Tenderloin almost daily (and walked through it), and worked from public places frequently, so maybe I was asking for it but also I didn't want to give up the freedom to be able to do those things and not live some "alternate" city insulated life. It's no wonder there's an anti-techie sentiment because the techies live on a complete different plane of existence here, never having to interact with the lower classes except when giving a tip, accepting a delivery, or writing a roommate rejection letter, and never having to interact with the public infrastructure that a whole class of people depend on and have no choice but to use. Some of my friends never had to leave the house except to go to work (delivery for food and groceries, Uber if they had to go somewhere specific). Yea if you can keep yourself in this bubble life is great; the city is great; the pay is great. Of course, I did feel exhausted and left last year. If I wanted an insulated city life I'd have moved to the suburbs or LA. Planning to move to Tokyo as soon as they open up, where I can hopefully at least live in the city amongst the people, rather than above them.
devmunchies 5y ago
> The Californian experiment was audacious and brave Yet you can’t be brave enough to give any kudos to Florida’s red politics, and instead call it a “political train wreck”. This kind of social fear is the other half of the bay areas failure. It’s not just the politicians, it’s the people. You’ll need to get over your holier-than-thou political perception to enjoy Miami (and life). Texas and Florida are having a huge upswell because they are basically making an anti-political stand to go “back to normal”. It’s attractive to people who don’t want politics.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- somewhereoutth 5y ago
  "back to normal" is not an anti-political stand - no politics wants to keep us from normal. However rather a lot of politics wants to pretend that Covid isn't happening, both for financial and ideological reasons.
  - kkjjkgjjgg 5y ago
    Are you sure that there aren't some (many) politicians who enjoy the feeling of importance they get from decreeing emergency laws because of Covid? I think for many citizens it is the same, they finally have their "moments" of importance, just as previous generations had their wars.
  - devmunchies 5y ago
    > politics wants to pretend that Covid isn't happening, both for financial and ideological or their constituents don't care about covid, in that case the govt is getting out of the way. which seems more correct, and why Miami is attracting so many. the people want it.
    - somewhereoutth 5y ago
      Ah 'the people' (or at least a large chunk of them) are easily told what they want - by those financially and ideologically motivated politicians. The idea of government 'getting out the way' is itself a political/propaganda construct, if people actually sat down and thought about it they'd realise that in fact they actually quite like the government getting in the way.
rmk 5y ago
The core of the problem is housing. The passage of recent bills that grant homeowners the right to subdivide their lots and potentially put 4 houses without objections from their neighbors is a good step. But it's too little, too late. The two main groups of people who have built wealth: (a) Highly skilled immigrants who came here in droves and (b) Young people who came here in pursuit of their dreams are both utterly unwelcome here. Existing residents who own housing are open in their disdain for these groups of people, and wish that tech had never exploded, threatening their "lifestyle". The dysfunctional politics at the national level treat highly skilled immigrants as a nonentity, focusing all their efforts on appeasing or amnestying illegal immigrants, because their sizable numbers guarantee that they will be a significant source of support for them. The worst outcomes are for the young immigrants, who see that they have no future here because they can't make long-term plans because of neverending waits for permanent residence and citizenship, and can't own even modest homes because of the utter indifference of locals to the housing needs of others. Add to this the neverending turf wars of the dozens of jurisdictions that prevent mass transit from ever built (which enable other large conurbations such as the NYC/Northern NJ area to provide housing to much larger numbers of workers), and it's a miracle tech and the workforce that drives it is still here. Something's gotta give, and the pandemic has made the other shoe drop. It remains to be seen if the past two years and perhaps the coming year are just an aberration, or whether the changes are permanent.
throwawaymanbot 5y ago
giantg2 5y ago
You should report the other break ins. They sometimes use crime stats to allocate resources. On a related note, it would be a good idea to harden your home so future break ins are only "attempted" break ins. The American Dream is generally in a similarly bad position all across the country. At least my area doesn't have a severe crime problem and the state comparatively allows us to defend ourselves. But the rest of it seems just normal.
- masonic 5y ago
  >it would be a good idea to harden your home so future break ins are only "attempted" break ins That would mean reinforced doors and no windows.
  - giantg2 5y ago
    Not really. Better window hardware and window locks, as well as window films are a significant improvement. Strong exterior doors/frames should really be a no brainer. Good lock design including key types and door frame strength go a long way. Nothing is impervious. The goal is to slow them down and potentially make it too difficult for the majority of the unskilled criminals to be successful. Or for them to choose a weaker target. Of course Good security hygiene is another one that is sometimes overlooked (not using the deadbolt, leaving a spare key out, etc).
eweise 5y ago
I feel fortunate to have moved just north of SF 15 years ago. It was a compromise since there is not much work so you have to commute to SF or the east bay. But now with the ability to work remote, it's just about perfect. I'm sure other people in lifestyle areas, are feeling the same now.
CottonMcKnight 5y ago
You can't pull yourself up by your bootstraps if you willfully ignore the whole meaning of the metaphor: it is impossible to lift oneself up by tugging on one's own bootstraps.
- kodah 5y ago
  What are you suggesting? The Bay Area is not conservative, and that is a conservative motto, so I'm left sufficiently confused.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
YeGoblynQueenne 5y ago
>> Armed gangs of 60-80 are now systematically looting malls and shopping districts. Is that true?
- augustuspolius 5y ago
  Sort of. It happened several times in the past few months.
- kgin 5y ago
  https://apnews.com/article/business-lifestyle-san-francisco-holidays-theft-8f798f79e2deaf2905f4412f75e3603a https://apnews.com/article/business-lifestyle-san-francisco-... > Hours later, about 80 people, some wearing ski masks and wielding crowbars, ransacked a Nordstrom at an outdoor mall in Walnut Creek
  - YeGoblynQueenne 5y ago
    The article says this happens "systematically", which I interpret to mean regularly and often. That's what I'm asking about. Is it true that this kind of thing happens "systematically", or is it an exaggeration expressing the author's frustration that such things can happen at all?
    - actually_a_dog 5y ago
      No, it does not. You hear about it on the news every time it happens in part because it is rare, not because it is common.
- pengaru 5y ago
  Not just in SF, it's a relatively recent CA-wide thing, has happened in LA as well. Some blame Prop47: "Proposition 47 was passed by California voters on November 5, 2014. It made some 'non-violent' property crimes, where the value of the stolen goods does not exceed $950, into misdemeanors. ... Under California law, though, if two or more person's conspire to 'cheat and defraud any person or any property, by any means which are in themselves criminal' they can face no more than one year in county prison, a fine of $10,000 or a combination of the two." It wouldn't surprise me if this just accelerates the total disappearance of retail businesses. Next up: smash and grab the Amazon warehouses.
yonran 5y ago
I think most of these backwards policies come from simplistic “luxury beliefs” of the rich that are disconnected from reality (https://nypost.com/2019/08/17/luxury-beliefs-are-the-latest-status-symbol-for-rich-americans/ https://nypost.com/2019/08/17/luxury-beliefs-are-the-latest-...). A popular luxury belief is that police brutality and mass incarceration are the biggest problems in the judicial system nationally, so the solution is to virtually stop catching petty thieves who steal from cars and shops. A popular luxury belief on housing in San Francisco is that allowing developers to add housing supply harms poor people. So they delay and add costs to new housing in the name of helping the poor and ignore the fact that these very restrictions ratchet up the rent. A popular luxury belief in education is that black and brown people are less prepared for academic tests so it is racist to use tests to make decisions. This ignores all the poor people who benefitted from the incentives to study. Hence the decision to eliminate admissions requirements to the magnet school Lowell. Another luxury belief not mentioned is that vaping is just as immoral as smoking. So even while we loosened marijuana restrictions, San Francisco increased taxes and restrictions on vaping to match the restrictions on smoking. By the way, although the decision to make Lowell High School a normal lottery-based school was reversed on procedural problems, the superintendent has vowed to bring back the resolution the first thing in January. So we're still going in the wrong direction there http://go.boarddocs.com/ca/sfusd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=C9K2DW81DDA7 http://go.boarddocs.com/ca/sfusd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=C9K2...
- bsder 5y ago
  > Another luxury belief not mentioned is that vaping is just as immoral as smoking. Vaping has reversed 20+ years of anti-smoking efforts in high schools. This is a problem. Vaping is seems safer than smoking but this is medically unproven. Vaping is NOT safer than not-Vaping and not-Smoking. The vaping companies ran the Big Tobacco playbook to exactly the same effect. It is unsurprising that their opponents are running their playbook to stop them.
  - Red_Leaves_Flyy 5y ago
    >Vaping has reversed 20+ years of anti-smoking efforts in high schools. This is a problem. Citation needed. >Vaping is seems safer than smoking but this is medically unproven. The research is robust enough for the UK to encourage vaping over smoking. Perhaps not being lobbied by big tobacco is the only real difference between the state of public health guidance in both countries. >Vaping is NOT safer than not-Vaping and not-Smoking. I’ve yet to meet anyone that has suggested such a thing. >The vaping companies ran the Big Tobacco playbook to exactly the same effect. It is unsurprising that their opponents are running their playbook to stop them. Juul, backed by a big tobacco corp has ran their playbook. Can you name a major company that isn’t backed a tobacco company? The cynic in me expects it was to force the public to demand the fda create new regs that can allow big tobacco to catch up and capture the market. This conversation is also pointless without bringing up the perverse incentives that tobacco taxes have on regulators and politicians. Ending tobacco use is bad for politicians because they’ll need to balance the budget by cutting services and raising taxes on everyone instead of offloading the burden to a marginalized group of disproportionately poor people. Fear mongering about children vaping is a recycled to trick to manufacture consent among the public for extortionate and regressive taxes. Alcohol, gambling and similar taxes are just perverse.
JJMcJ 5y ago
SF (especially downtown, Mission, SOMA) is not the same as the entirety of the Bay Area. Some aspects of the article are true generally in the Bay Area: expense and a feeling that the government leadership seems indifferent to the difficulties many people are having.
joelbondurant0 5y ago
[dead]
aronpye 5y ago
plankers 5y ago
loving how the central idiom of this piece was coined because its physically impossible. this author missed something along the way, i think. https://uselessetymology.com/2019/11/07/the-origins-of-the-phrase-pull-yourself-up-by-your-bootstraps/ https://uselessetymology.com/2019/11/07/the-origins-of-the-p...
RcouF1uZ4gsC 5y ago
> Instead of a definition of equity that raises the floor (a rising tide floats all boats), we’ve adopted a definition that institutes a ceiling on achievement: if everyone can’t have it, no one can have it. We’ve adopted the philosophy of a petulant grade school bully. This is an unfortunate trend across the country, but it really feels like California and the Bay Area specifically are at the bleeding edge of this philosophy. The cancelling of gifted programs across the countries sure seems like this. The easy way to achieve equality is to make like shitty for everyone.
999900000999 5y ago
>There is a large encampment two blocks from our house. Multiple times, homessless folks have slept or showered in our driveway. I feel the same way about Los Angeles. What once was a funky chill city, has rapidly turned into a massive homeless encampment. When watching recent shows based in LA I've never seen a tent on the sidewalk. So you have a fantasy which gets broadcasted. You can either complain or leave. Since I've left LA every aspect of my life has been outrageously great. Had a girlfriend within a month , cut my living expenses by a 1/3rd. I haven't owned a car in years ! I think people get too attached to defending the idea of their hometown. I know the LA I loved is long gone. But life moves on, I had to estrange myself from much of my family to move, but frankly a life in LA isn't much of a life. I do enjoy reading these articles, no matter how liberal you are you get sick of homeless people commiting various crimes without consequences. You get sick of paying 10% in state income tax for practically nothing.
- partido3619463 5y ago
  Where did you move to?
- spaetzleesser 5y ago
  “Since I've left LA every aspect of my life has been outrageously great. Had a girlfriend within a month” I had no idea that women are more willing in other areas of the country. Good to know :)
  - 999900000999 5y ago
    If you want to know how easy dating will be in a city, just checkout the gender ratios. LA has one of the worst for a straight guy. This means someone like myself would never find a partner. Imagine two cities 4000 miles apart. In PoorCity unemployment is 45%, and due to bizarre zoning laws a 1bdrm is 3800$. In GoodCity, unemployment is 3% and a 1bdrm is 1100$. Which city would you rather live in ? Where do you think life will be easier ? You can read a dozen books on finding a job, won't really help if your in PoorCity. Likewise dating books are essentially useless since I've never seen one address gender ratios. I've had no trouble outside of LA. In fact I dated a girl who took the initiative to introduce herself. She was beyond great! More than worth moving for ! Did I mention I really really hate driving ? I'm saving so much money now that I'm car free.
u385639 5y ago
Peculiarly low bar for "American Dream".
madengr 5y ago
TheRealNGenius 5y ago
I don't believe a single anecdotal tweet for each of the author's point qualifies as objective evidence to support their claims.
lost_soul 5y ago
The decline and fall of SF seems to be a popular topic on HN. Yet SF real estate prices remain astronomical. Somebody wants to live there.
saargrin 5y ago
"In the last seven years, my wife and I have experienced four home break-ins, one car break-in, multiple other thefts, broken up a purse snatching, been chased and lunged at by mentally ill people a few times a year. It literally happened on Bart the day I wrote the first draft of this post. Pre-pandemic, my wife used to call me every day to have someone on the phone, when walking the 5 minutes home from Bart each night. There is a large encampment two blocks from our house. Multiple times, homessless folks have slept or showered in our driveway. I only reported one break-in incident, because… what’s the point?" ouchie

161 points by lando2319 5y ago

The audacity of calling the the new destination state politics a “shitshow”, while abandoning the direct political legacy that is now in flames.

giantg2 5y ago

"Add it all up: merit, achievement, and success are becoming a lost cause" I feel this, so much.

picsao 5y ago

mercy_dude 5y ago

Not just Bay Area, pretty much any middle to big cities. Housing ownership dream is dead, cost of education has skyrocketed and healthcare is just a mess. That’s everywhere. The only thing on top of that we have got in Bay Area is increasing petty crime rates with no consequences. But that is on Bay Area residents for consistently electing egghead politicians.

tandymodel100 5y ago
Well, public schools are still free everywhere. And in state public universities are still fairly affordable - the one in my hometown offers $1k tuition for the year now.
gaoshan 5y ago
Take a city like Columbus, Ohio. Home ownership is relatively cheap and easy, school are great, healthcare is no more messy than the average in the US. Crime is negligible, it's clean, has tons of great restaurants, good sports, very cool and unique neighborhoods with easy access to everywhere else. There are so many cities like that around the US that people on the coasts seem almost blind to. The main downside is winter but aside from that it's a pretty great area. Especially on a tech salary. People say, "Yeah but... Ohio". To which I say, they really, acutely and deeply don't know what they are talking about.
- gonehome 5y ago
  I grew up in Western New York before moving to the Bay Area for work. People really love my hometown. It’s okay, you can adapt to any place and make the most of it. But I think the coastal cities are much better places to live. More opportunity, more food, more people to learn from and things to do, more variety. There are cost of living trade offs for sure, but I wouldn’t go back. I hope Garry Tan is successful fixing SF. I’ll do what I can to get the bad politicians out.
- cozzyd 5y ago
  Not sure you can say Columbus has negligible crime, unless you mean Dublin or something. Columbus has had around 200 homicides this year. SF, with swhichlmist identical population in city limits, looks like it's had fewer than 60. Columbus is only marginally (25% or so) less murderous per capita than Chicago, where I live, and certainly nobody says we have negligible crime!
throwaway0a5e 5y ago
I live in a city that most of HN would call a rust belt post-industrial shithole. The kinds of petty crime, squalid behavior and cost of living issues I see people say "is only in a few areas" in defense of SF I haven't seen in any area.

cam0 5y ago

I first started seeing these blog posts and Twitter threads documenting reasons for leaving SF at the start of the pandemic, and they tend to get a significant amount of engagement/comments/likes. I had never before seen anyone write such long and detailed reasons for something as routine and boring as moving cities. I can only imagine the reason for doing this is to increase their following on social media. Just stoking the rage-engagement machine.

pm90 5y ago
I tend to agree. There’s certainly valid reasons for wanting to move away. But these posts aren’t really saying anything new, they tend to feed off of each other creating an online impression of SF as some kind of hellhole.
bingohbangoh 5y ago
You must understand that people have not liked SF for a long time -- at least five years if not further -- and feel "stuck" there for career reasons. The pandemic has made a lot of things (everything?) about the city much worse while opening up an avenue to leave. Thus, many people have taken it. As they're leaving behind a network, a likely fractured group of friends, and a never ending lockdown threat, it's created complicated feelings.
- AustinDev 5y ago
  I lived in alameda for 1 year in 2010. Hated the whole Bay Area and left as soon as I could. For me it was just personal preference.
  - bingohbangoh 5y ago
    I visited LA for a week in 2018 and SF for two weeks in 2016. Never have I felt so unliked on a personal level (weird scowls in the Mission district, didn't get one match on Tinder lmao). I made it a point that I would never return to California for as long as I lived (unless you're willing to pay me a lot). For point of reference, I'm from NYC so this isn't a blue-state/red-state thing like it has become for a lot of people. There's something about the California vibe that does not mesh with me.

gromitss 5y ago

Barrin92 5y ago

>"On the one hand, I think any rational individual would acknowledge that privilege has made for a rigged system. But on the other hand, in the spirit of deconstructing those imbalances, we’ve dismantled upward mobility for everyone — not just the underprivileged. Instead of a definition of equity that raises the floor (a rising tide floats all boats), we’ve adopted a definition that institutes a ceiling on achievement:" Despite repeating the "pull yourself up by your own bootstraps" motto literally ten times, it should be noted that upwards mobility is highest precisely in countries that implement policies the author laments (a phenomenon known as the 'Great Gatsby Curve' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Gatsby_curve#/media/File:The_Great_Gatsby_Curve.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Gatsby_curve#/media/File...). The explanation is fairly straight-forward and intuitive, shorter ladders are easier to climb.

zwkrt 5y ago
I’m a big ol’ hippie but one sticking point I always have with my friends is that to have upward mobility there must also be the chance for downward mobility. There can be no success without a chance for failure. And I don’t mean this in a zero-sum sort of way. Ideally every person would be able to invest in themselves and their community to the fullest extent. Teach themselves and others new skills, start their own business, sell themselves and their talents to others, and create a robust ecosystem of success and opportunity at scales ranging from the individual to the mega-corporation. I dream of a culture (both interpersonal and governmental) that strives for such an ideal. In practice this does not happen though because it is a lot of work, not all people are able, not all people are willing, not all people are as open, sinscere, and imaginative, “the system” is not really favorable to being so self-starting, and the reality is that most available jobs are awful and it is very hard to have such a clear and vivid imagining of one’s own future when bogged down by a series of dead-end line cook jobs. When I see things like the anti-work meme/movement I get where it’s coming from, but I also wonder what such a person would do once their goal of anti-work is achieved.
- hogFeast 5y ago
  Economic policy has had a huge role in that. If you are wealthy, you can borrow money for free, you can pay no taxes, and you can invest your free money at 10%+...oh, and the govt will bail you out if it goes wrong. I worked in equity research at a financial adviser, I am not anti-markets at all (although am probably towards the left of things, for economics more than anything...substantial inequality is not sustainable economically) but the reason why the US doesn't have downward mobility is because rich people do not need skills. You need money to get rich, not skills. If you look at other countries with similar economic models, for example the UK, you see much higher downward mobility. Again, the simple reason for that is less buoyant financial markets (and btw, UK property has gone through the roof and wealthier individuals in the UK own proportionally more property...the US is really, really out there). The only place that is really comparable are explicitly corporatist states like Germany and China...and the former has (tbf, fairly weak) mechanisms to guarantee a certain living standard. I don't really understand the US system at all. The welfare state is Bezos and Musk's space projects. And people wonder why their fellow citizens are struggling? You are rich, but you live in a society where many other people are suffering...that isn't wealth.

caconym_ 5y ago

The bay area seems to have combined the pernicious conservatism of aging "liberals", the worst of leftist politics, and the bizarre, culturally illiterate excesses of SV tech and grind culture into a noxious stew I'm surprised anybody can tolerate for any length of time.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

SwSwinger 5y ago

Coming from a Southern US state, I expected that the Bay Area would be more egalitarian given the language. Instead, I've found that it's more like an idea incubator setup by generational wealth that people need to leave if they can't become nouveau riche before they want to build a family. Even when you win the lottery, your reward is living the same type of life in CA that you could in 45 other US states without pushing yourself. 1849 Gold Rush. Same as it ever was.

jseliger 5y ago
The Bay Area seems to have a lot of cognitive dissonance, where the statements made don't seem to even remotely match the reality on the ground or the policies pursued: https://jakeseliger.com/2018/08/19/what-santa-barbara-says/ https://jakeseliger.com/2018/08/19/what-santa-barbara-says/
- thephyber 5y ago
  Cog Dis is part of the human condition. There is no significantly populated place in the US where there is a lack of Cog Dis about at least some political policies
MomoXenosaga 5y ago
SF is just a city, it cannot change America into a European style democratic socialist system- provided anyone in the US would actually want that and not immediately start crying about 21% VAT.
- Amezarak 5y ago
  VAT is one of those weird mismatches between US and European politics. It would be regarded as very regressive in the US, since sales taxes disproportionately harm the poor.
  - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
    It's a lot easier to have regressive taxes when your starting point is this[0] The US's starting point was revolting over a few percent on a couple random assortments of goods (and a few other affronts). [0] https://img.ifunny.co/images/bfab53583fcce050029cd61cfea5c6d670394f26bf6ce48085bcd42622565289_1.jpg https://img.ifunny.co/images/bfab53583fcce050029cd61cfea5c6d...

EarlKing 5y ago

michaelcampbell 5y ago
> as the author and his fellow locusts Yeah, /you're/ part of the solution.
- sremani 5y ago
  I do not know if @EarlKing is part of solution but I can guarantee the smug douchebag who wrote the article is going to be a problem for Miami. This guy was drooling with contempt in his second sentence.
labcomputer 5y ago
> his fellow locust [...] Better they fly off to Miami [...] rest of us can clean up the mess and restore some sanity around here. Not to put too fine a point on it, but how are you going to afford food if all the techies leave? Every economy (not just nations) trades with its neighbors and has imports and exports. One of San Francisco's imports is food. But what does San Francisco produce to export/trade for that food? Today one of the exports is generalized "tech" (software licenses, X as a Service, design of products that are built in China). What else? When tech leaves, what do you produce that can be sold to people outside San Francisco? If you look at any former rust-belt mill town, it's not just the factory workers that are affected when the plant closes. Unemployed mill workers can't afford new trucks (so salespeople make less). They can't afford haircuts, so the barber closes up shop. The can't afford to go out to eat or drink, so the entire service industry feels the pain.
- EarlKing 5y ago
  > One of San Francisco's imports is food. Remember the part where I said, "The Bay Area is not San Francisco"? I don't live in San Francisco. I genuinely don't care what San Francisco produces for export. Also, you're implying that San Francisco, or the greater Bay Area, somehow didn't produce anything before the tech locusts arrived. That is false. California's economy consists of far more than just tech drek.

martin1975 5y ago

tandymodel100 5y ago
[flagged]
- _dain_ 5y ago
  [flagged]
- hogFeast 5y ago
  - vb6sp6 5y ago
    You are missing the step where the people who refuse the medical procedure are also taking up a disproportionate medical resources when they get sick. And it seems to be, at least according to the data, more prevalent with conservative ideology. Nice try though
    - hogFeast 5y ago
      No, I am not. People are paying for the medical resources they use. Nice try though (I would learn more about social policy, the point of social policy is that it is for everyone, not people who agree to a medical procedure, not people who have political views you agree with...this is why the US doesn't have a welfare state, because people believe money will go to people "who aren't like them").
      - vb6sp6 5y ago
        People aren't being denied COVID treatment so the social policy isn't being violated. Unless getting your feelings hurt by Twitter comments is a violation of social policy?

Swizec 5y ago

As a recent (~6 years) newcomer from the poor parts of Europe ... eh it's fine. Yes it would be nice if people cared more about doing good than being seen to talk about caring about the correct things, but I can't imagine any other place in the world where I could've grown my personal wealth from zero to "As much as my parents did in a lifetime" in 6 years. Whether that's because of or in spite of the environment I don't know, but it sure wasn't happening back home. That said, would be nice if all the friends I made in the past few years stopped salmoning and stayed in the city. You don't have to move back out to the burbs just because it's family time. Cities are a strictly superior place to live (imo) and being exposed to the riffraff is a feature, not a bug. edit: There is research that says mixed income neighborhoods are the fastest way to lowering crime, lifting kids out of poverty, and improving life outcomes for all. https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/27116/412292-Effects-from-Living-in-Mixed-Income-Communities-for-Low-Income-Families.PDF https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/27116/...

maxdo 5y ago

Terry_Roll 5y ago

One method which helps reinforce a States existence, is to define action, like in this case, https://twitter.com/michelletandler/status/1423015999075495938 https://twitter.com/michelletandler/status/14230159990754959... We have michelle tandler saying all females have been assaulted. The beauty of words and law is they can be incredibly absolute and incredibly vague, so people can project their feelings into this domain and then go to the state to justify its existence. Its just another form of religion in a way and no doubt uses the same techniques religion uses. Plus how many sock puppets exist, has anyone every met anyone featured in the news and witnessed this sort of crime, or is social media an amplifying echo chamber? Who would have thought AI on social media could be such expert trolls?

650 5y ago

This article quotes `Twitter users` too much. Twitter users are not representative of the populace at large all too often. The interspaced boxes with emojis make the text harder to read. "I think it’s now officially more inconvenient to live in San Francisco or Oakland than when I lived in Chennai or Bombay growing up." - I definitely don't think this is a fair assessment objectively.

pm90 5y ago

Ultimately the root cause of SFs problems (and Bay Area in general) is lack of housing. It’s a city that should be as dense (or more) than NYC considering the amount of economic activity it generates, but the existing landed Gentry has opposed any and all measures to remedy the situation since the status quo increases their wealth. If SF built enough housing, it would mostly solve the homelessness crisis, but also generate even more tax revenue for investing in better social services, transit etc. As a resident, it feels like a lost opportunity: the pandemic has made remote work common and fewer people will want to move to the SF in the future.

jmspring 5y ago
Building housing isn't going to "solve homelessness". The majority of "visible homeless" that you see on the streets, etc. have mental health and addiction issues. Also, most housing, especially those catering to those "on the streets" have rules. More than a few living on the street don't want to have rules and structure. So, building housing isn't going to a total solution. Mental health issues need wrap around services and the ability to restrict their actions - which years of legislation and rulings (many will blame the ACLU) doesn't allow for such in nearly all cases. Addicts, for them, they need to WANT to get better. Even then it is still a long road. Hitting bottom may not even happen for some.
- khuey 5y ago
  > So, building housing isn't going to a total solution. It's not a total solution but it's a prerequisite to any solution. You will never be able to get the homeless into permanent housing when that permanent housing costs 2.5k/month.
  - blitzar 5y ago
    Lets pretend for a minute that you got housing down from 2.5k/month to 1k/month. How many homeless, jobless people would that take off the streets? Hint: zero.
    - 5y ago

nateburke 5y ago

I feel like the young, single person's American dream is still alive and well in SF. If you're willing and able to bend your life around work, there are few better places to do it. And for those with families, especially those with young children, I think life is pretty hard right now, just about everywhere.

b9a2cab5 5y ago
Only if you work in tech, and only if you're a software engineer or PM. It is straight up not possible to live in a reasonably safe area in SF on a salary less than $100k before tax. And the biggest reason is the toxic cost of living caused by refusal to build high density housing. I know software engineers who went from living with roommates in a tiny apartment in SF to paying less for a penthouse in other big cities.
- reidjs 5y ago
  Not disagreeing, but I think it has more to do with not having kids. You can find a one bedroom on Craigslist in almost any neighborhood in SF for less than $2,000 a month. How much more do you need to survive as a single person? Another $2K a month? That puts you at $4k/month, or $48K a year, which most full-time jobs will pay. Assuming healthy, no kids, and that the landlord agrees to rent you the place, which may be difficult if you’re a person of color or have a low salary.
  - b9a2cab5 5y ago
    Pre-COVID you couldn't find a 1br in a safe neighborhood for less than $3-3.5k. Less than 2k gets you something in the Tenderloin, which is the opposite of safe. Add food (~$700 because high cost of living), car payments (~$450 for an econobox), car insurance (~$200 because SF has a lot of break-ins and theft), health insurance, utilities (also expensive as fuck in NorCal due to cost of living), phone/internet bills, and you can realistically hit $5k/mo in expenses. According to this calculator [1] post-tax a $100k salary nets you $5500/mo in San Francisco. This is mostly due to high state taxes. So you are basically living paycheck to paycheck despite making 6 figures and living a pretty standard life, which is moronic no matter how much you look at it. [1]: https://smartasset.com/taxes/paycheck-calculator#XhSaiPp5Sy https://smartasset.com/taxes/paycheck-calculator#XhSaiPp5Sy

jowday 5y ago

Author spends a lot of time discussing the social contract and then laments an elected official calling out a billionaire for disobeying a public health mandate during a world historic pandemic to reopen a factory.

ghufran_syed 5y ago
Why? Because the politician must be right, while the “billionaire” (aka “a citizen”) wanting to actually pay people money to actually make things must be wrong?
around_here 5y ago
[flagged]

forrestthewoods 5y ago

California has the highest or second highest poverty rate in the country when you account for cost of living. California policies are an absolute disaster for poor people. This is true for most other big cities in blue states as well. Although California and Bay Area are far and away the worst offenders. I live in Seattle. It’s not nearly as bad as the Bay. We’ve made a lot of the same bad decisions. And a handful of better ones. But the trend line is very bad and getting worse.

khuey 5y ago
> California policies are an absolute disaster for poor people. It's really just one policy and it's the policy of making it near impossible to build housing.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

starik36 5y ago

Another article from the same SF crowd that voted in people like Chesa Boudin. Now they are wondering why you can't walk down the street in peace. All this without once acknowledging their responsibility. Sleep with the dogs - you'll wake up with the fleas.

rmk 5y ago
The article is by an immigrant worker in tech. It is exceedingly unlikely he votes in any sort of election, and is almost certainly not the kind to elect Chesa Boudin.
- sjg007 5y ago
  Can't vote if you aren't a citizen.
- starik36 5y ago
  In the article he refers to Texas and Florida as "political train-wrecks". I think his vote definitely does go to the Chesa Boudin crowd.
  - gonehome 5y ago
    There are a large amount of people that think the Republican subservience to trump is a “political train wreck” and also hate the progressive politics of the far left. A lot of people that would have preferred Bloomberg, some center left, or any center right non-trump Republican. I’d guess the author is in this more moderate camp.

julianeon 5y ago

I live in SF and have spent a lot of time thinking about the problems here. I don't think you can understand SF today without starting from this foundational assumption, which is something of a narrative violation, actually. I don't see many starting from this point of view - but I do, and I think it explains almost everything in his article. That assumption is: San Francisco is a city for the rich. That's what really explains the motivations and the things that matter, politically. Furthermore (starting from there), as a city for the rich, SF cares proportionately less than other metropolises would, about things that in other places would make for strong incentives. So, housing. Remember, city for the rich: they are housed, in nice houses that should keep their value (not have it lowered by apartments). So new housing doesn't get built. Thefts: Eh, too bad, but if most if your shopping takes place through Postmates & Instacart... did it really happen? Do you really care? You don't feel the pain all that much. So your response is kind of lethargic. You're not personally losing money so it's not so bad really. BART: You don't use that, lol. I mean it'll keep running and you can get from place to place on it, for the sake of working people, sure. But beyond that... whatever. School Board: Your kids go to private school. Next. Tech: We already have money, and jobs. We (the voters) are already very well off. It's fine it tech wants to add to our economy, but we don't need tech and we're not threatened by its departure. And that's very much what happened. If you look at most of the problems in SF, and the way the voting public has responded, to me this model has the most explanatory power. Now maybe the average SF voter isn't rich - but the people who shape the conversation & have the most impact are. SF is very much a city that caters to them.

mercy_dude 5y ago
You can replace SF with any big coastal city in America and it’s the same story.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  Neither Boston nor DC are that bad. I hear Philly is trying though, no recent first hand experience with that one.
  - 5y ago

linuxhansl 5y ago

Wasn't going to respond, but just feel compelled to... I have lived in the Bay Area for over 20 years, 12 years in SF, and now in the East Bay. I'm in SF, Berkeley, Oakland, Emeryville, and Contra Costa at least once a week. Personally I do not know anybody who has been assaulted or robbed and I have never been assaulted or robbed. I frequently am in SF downtown, and in Oakland/Emeryville. Both considered "hotspots"; nothing ever happened to me and never felt unsafe. I do not feel exhausted. I never did anything more than my job (and, yes, I'm in "tech". And nobody ever yelled at me for it.) The nature, landscape, the parks, hikes, culture, weather are pretty awesome and I'll likely never move away. Is everything perfect? Of course not! Is there a problem with homelessness? Yes there is! Maybe we should do what other cities and counties have done and just chase the homeless out to somewhere else, kick the can down the road? HELL NO! I happen to work at a company that actually does something about that. My sampling set is obviously small (my friends, colleagues, and acquaintances), and so seems the author's sampling set. The author undoubtedly had his experiences and that's a shame. I'm just here to convey a different view on things and not all of us feel that way.

Flankk 5y ago
Appreciate your perspective. It was in the news that people are leaving their car windows and trunk open to prevent theft. Smash and grabs are rampant throughout the city. Is this not your experience or has someone already stolen your car so it's not an issue anymore?
- linuxhansl 5y ago
  Heh. We all know that news are sensational by their very nature. Nobody reports all the good things that happen, or on the bad stuff that did not happen. No, my car was not stolen and no it hasn't been broken into, yet. (knock knock knock) Don't doubt it's happening, I have never seen a car with the window or trunk open.
chrischen 5y ago
I lived in SF 10 years and early on I was robbed at knife point just walking around The Mission district at around 7 PM (though it was dark because it was winter time). I wasn't robbed but there was a person that burst out of the Victoria's secret downtown right in front of me. My friend had her laptop stolen in the coffee shop I used to frequent, and while the thief was caught they could not recover any of the stolen stuff and she was eventually released. Someone grabbed my iPhone out of my pocket (though I chased him down and forced him to return it). Friend had parked a car in The Mission for their wedding held there. It was broken into and some wedding gifts including cash were stolen. Friend had a guy "accidentally" open his back balcony door. While working out of a pretty crowded Starbucks in the financial district some thugs came in and attempted a snatch and grab. He basically leaned in really quickly towards me but then apparently aborted when I braced and held the laptop. I wasn't even sure until the guy next to me told me after they left that they were planning to snatch it, and that one time he saw them do this and while trying to leave run full speed into a door that opened in-ward only. I also for several years took the BART around midnight daily (after working out of a coffee shop downtown) so there's a long list of stuff I'm not even mentioning. I think if you do short restricted trips to SF to nice areas, go with groups, take Ubers or your own car, etc, you can be pretty insulated. It wouldn't be hard to be sensible and take obvious precautions to greatly limit your exposure to crime. In fact, almost all of my friends who are there find it a great place to live because they basically do not have to interact with any of the undesirable parts or peoples of SF. I personally tried to take as much public transit (bus, walking, and BART) as much as I could, ate in The Tenderloin almost daily (and walked through it), and worked from public places frequently, so maybe I was asking for it but also I didn't want to give up the freedom to be able to do those things and not live some "alternate" city insulated life. It's no wonder there's an anti-techie sentiment because the techies live on a complete different plane of existence here, never having to interact with the lower classes except when giving a tip, accepting a delivery, or writing a roommate rejection letter, and never having to interact with the public infrastructure that a whole class of people depend on and have no choice but to use. Some of my friends never had to leave the house except to go to work (delivery for food and groceries, Uber if they had to go somewhere specific). Yea if you can keep yourself in this bubble life is great; the city is great; the pay is great. Of course, I did feel exhausted and left last year. If I wanted an insulated city life I'd have moved to the suburbs or LA. Planning to move to Tokyo as soon as they open up, where I can hopefully at least live in the city amongst the people, rather than above them.

devmunchies 5y ago

> The Californian experiment was audacious and brave Yet you can’t be brave enough to give any kudos to Florida’s red politics, and instead call it a “political train wreck”. This kind of social fear is the other half of the bay areas failure. It’s not just the politicians, it’s the people. You’ll need to get over your holier-than-thou political perception to enjoy Miami (and life). Texas and Florida are having a huge upswell because they are basically making an anti-political stand to go “back to normal”. It’s attractive to people who don’t want politics.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
somewhereoutth 5y ago
"back to normal" is not an anti-political stand - no politics wants to keep us from normal. However rather a lot of politics wants to pretend that Covid isn't happening, both for financial and ideological reasons.
- kkjjkgjjgg 5y ago
  Are you sure that there aren't some (many) politicians who enjoy the feeling of importance they get from decreeing emergency laws because of Covid? I think for many citizens it is the same, they finally have their "moments" of importance, just as previous generations had their wars.
- devmunchies 5y ago
  > politics wants to pretend that Covid isn't happening, both for financial and ideological or their constituents don't care about covid, in that case the govt is getting out of the way. which seems more correct, and why Miami is attracting so many. the people want it.
  - somewhereoutth 5y ago
    Ah 'the people' (or at least a large chunk of them) are easily told what they want - by those financially and ideologically motivated politicians. The idea of government 'getting out the way' is itself a political/propaganda construct, if people actually sat down and thought about it they'd realise that in fact they actually quite like the government getting in the way.

rmk 5y ago

The core of the problem is housing. The passage of recent bills that grant homeowners the right to subdivide their lots and potentially put 4 houses without objections from their neighbors is a good step. But it's too little, too late. The two main groups of people who have built wealth: (a) Highly skilled immigrants who came here in droves and (b) Young people who came here in pursuit of their dreams are both utterly unwelcome here. Existing residents who own housing are open in their disdain for these groups of people, and wish that tech had never exploded, threatening their "lifestyle". The dysfunctional politics at the national level treat highly skilled immigrants as a nonentity, focusing all their efforts on appeasing or amnestying illegal immigrants, because their sizable numbers guarantee that they will be a significant source of support for them. The worst outcomes are for the young immigrants, who see that they have no future here because they can't make long-term plans because of neverending waits for permanent residence and citizenship, and can't own even modest homes because of the utter indifference of locals to the housing needs of others. Add to this the neverending turf wars of the dozens of jurisdictions that prevent mass transit from ever built (which enable other large conurbations such as the NYC/Northern NJ area to provide housing to much larger numbers of workers), and it's a miracle tech and the workforce that drives it is still here. Something's gotta give, and the pandemic has made the other shoe drop. It remains to be seen if the past two years and perhaps the coming year are just an aberration, or whether the changes are permanent.

throwawaymanbot 5y ago

giantg2 5y ago

You should report the other break ins. They sometimes use crime stats to allocate resources. On a related note, it would be a good idea to harden your home so future break ins are only "attempted" break ins. The American Dream is generally in a similarly bad position all across the country. At least my area doesn't have a severe crime problem and the state comparatively allows us to defend ourselves. But the rest of it seems just normal.

masonic 5y ago
>it would be a good idea to harden your home so future break ins are only "attempted" break ins That would mean reinforced doors and no windows.
- giantg2 5y ago
  Not really. Better window hardware and window locks, as well as window films are a significant improvement. Strong exterior doors/frames should really be a no brainer. Good lock design including key types and door frame strength go a long way. Nothing is impervious. The goal is to slow them down and potentially make it too difficult for the majority of the unskilled criminals to be successful. Or for them to choose a weaker target. Of course Good security hygiene is another one that is sometimes overlooked (not using the deadbolt, leaving a spare key out, etc).

eweise 5y ago

I feel fortunate to have moved just north of SF 15 years ago. It was a compromise since there is not much work so you have to commute to SF or the east bay. But now with the ability to work remote, it's just about perfect. I'm sure other people in lifestyle areas, are feeling the same now.

CottonMcKnight 5y ago

You can't pull yourself up by your bootstraps if you willfully ignore the whole meaning of the metaphor: it is impossible to lift oneself up by tugging on one's own bootstraps.

kodah 5y ago
What are you suggesting? The Bay Area is not conservative, and that is a conservative motto, so I'm left sufficiently confused.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

YeGoblynQueenne 5y ago

>> Armed gangs of 60-80 are now systematically looting malls and shopping districts. Is that true?

augustuspolius 5y ago
Sort of. It happened several times in the past few months.
kgin 5y ago
https://apnews.com/article/business-lifestyle-san-francisco-holidays-theft-8f798f79e2deaf2905f4412f75e3603a https://apnews.com/article/business-lifestyle-san-francisco-... > Hours later, about 80 people, some wearing ski masks and wielding crowbars, ransacked a Nordstrom at an outdoor mall in Walnut Creek
- YeGoblynQueenne 5y ago
  The article says this happens "systematically", which I interpret to mean regularly and often. That's what I'm asking about. Is it true that this kind of thing happens "systematically", or is it an exaggeration expressing the author's frustration that such things can happen at all?
  - actually_a_dog 5y ago
    No, it does not. You hear about it on the news every time it happens in part because it is rare, not because it is common.
pengaru 5y ago
Not just in SF, it's a relatively recent CA-wide thing, has happened in LA as well. Some blame Prop47: "Proposition 47 was passed by California voters on November 5, 2014. It made some 'non-violent' property crimes, where the value of the stolen goods does not exceed $950, into misdemeanors. ... Under California law, though, if two or more person's conspire to 'cheat and defraud any person or any property, by any means which are in themselves criminal' they can face no more than one year in county prison, a fine of $10,000 or a combination of the two." It wouldn't surprise me if this just accelerates the total disappearance of retail businesses. Next up: smash and grab the Amazon warehouses.

yonran 5y ago

I think most of these backwards policies come from simplistic “luxury beliefs” of the rich that are disconnected from reality (https://nypost.com/2019/08/17/luxury-beliefs-are-the-latest-status-symbol-for-rich-americans/ https://nypost.com/2019/08/17/luxury-beliefs-are-the-latest-...). A popular luxury belief is that police brutality and mass incarceration are the biggest problems in the judicial system nationally, so the solution is to virtually stop catching petty thieves who steal from cars and shops. A popular luxury belief on housing in San Francisco is that allowing developers to add housing supply harms poor people. So they delay and add costs to new housing in the name of helping the poor and ignore the fact that these very restrictions ratchet up the rent. A popular luxury belief in education is that black and brown people are less prepared for academic tests so it is racist to use tests to make decisions. This ignores all the poor people who benefitted from the incentives to study. Hence the decision to eliminate admissions requirements to the magnet school Lowell. Another luxury belief not mentioned is that vaping is just as immoral as smoking. So even while we loosened marijuana restrictions, San Francisco increased taxes and restrictions on vaping to match the restrictions on smoking. By the way, although the decision to make Lowell High School a normal lottery-based school was reversed on procedural problems, the superintendent has vowed to bring back the resolution the first thing in January. So we're still going in the wrong direction there http://go.boarddocs.com/ca/sfusd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=C9K2DW81DDA7 http://go.boarddocs.com/ca/sfusd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=C9K2...

bsder 5y ago
> Another luxury belief not mentioned is that vaping is just as immoral as smoking. Vaping has reversed 20+ years of anti-smoking efforts in high schools. This is a problem. Vaping is seems safer than smoking but this is medically unproven. Vaping is NOT safer than not-Vaping and not-Smoking. The vaping companies ran the Big Tobacco playbook to exactly the same effect. It is unsurprising that their opponents are running their playbook to stop them.
- Red_Leaves_Flyy 5y ago
  >Vaping has reversed 20+ years of anti-smoking efforts in high schools. This is a problem. Citation needed. >Vaping is seems safer than smoking but this is medically unproven. The research is robust enough for the UK to encourage vaping over smoking. Perhaps not being lobbied by big tobacco is the only real difference between the state of public health guidance in both countries. >Vaping is NOT safer than not-Vaping and not-Smoking. I’ve yet to meet anyone that has suggested such a thing. >The vaping companies ran the Big Tobacco playbook to exactly the same effect. It is unsurprising that their opponents are running their playbook to stop them. Juul, backed by a big tobacco corp has ran their playbook. Can you name a major company that isn’t backed a tobacco company? The cynic in me expects it was to force the public to demand the fda create new regs that can allow big tobacco to catch up and capture the market. This conversation is also pointless without bringing up the perverse incentives that tobacco taxes have on regulators and politicians. Ending tobacco use is bad for politicians because they’ll need to balance the budget by cutting services and raising taxes on everyone instead of offloading the burden to a marginalized group of disproportionately poor people. Fear mongering about children vaping is a recycled to trick to manufacture consent among the public for extortionate and regressive taxes. Alcohol, gambling and similar taxes are just perverse.

JJMcJ 5y ago

SF (especially downtown, Mission, SOMA) is not the same as the entirety of the Bay Area. Some aspects of the article are true generally in the Bay Area: expense and a feeling that the government leadership seems indifferent to the difficulties many people are having.

joelbondurant0 5y ago

[dead]

aronpye 5y ago

plankers 5y ago

loving how the central idiom of this piece was coined because its physically impossible. this author missed something along the way, i think. https://uselessetymology.com/2019/11/07/the-origins-of-the-phrase-pull-yourself-up-by-your-bootstraps/ https://uselessetymology.com/2019/11/07/the-origins-of-the-p...

RcouF1uZ4gsC 5y ago

> Instead of a definition of equity that raises the floor (a rising tide floats all boats), we’ve adopted a definition that institutes a ceiling on achievement: if everyone can’t have it, no one can have it. We’ve adopted the philosophy of a petulant grade school bully. This is an unfortunate trend across the country, but it really feels like California and the Bay Area specifically are at the bleeding edge of this philosophy. The cancelling of gifted programs across the countries sure seems like this. The easy way to achieve equality is to make like shitty for everyone.

999900000999 5y ago

>There is a large encampment two blocks from our house. Multiple times, homessless folks have slept or showered in our driveway. I feel the same way about Los Angeles. What once was a funky chill city, has rapidly turned into a massive homeless encampment. When watching recent shows based in LA I've never seen a tent on the sidewalk. So you have a fantasy which gets broadcasted. You can either complain or leave. Since I've left LA every aspect of my life has been outrageously great. Had a girlfriend within a month , cut my living expenses by a 1/3rd. I haven't owned a car in years ! I think people get too attached to defending the idea of their hometown. I know the LA I loved is long gone. But life moves on, I had to estrange myself from much of my family to move, but frankly a life in LA isn't much of a life. I do enjoy reading these articles, no matter how liberal you are you get sick of homeless people commiting various crimes without consequences. You get sick of paying 10% in state income tax for practically nothing.

partido3619463 5y ago
Where did you move to?
spaetzleesser 5y ago
“Since I've left LA every aspect of my life has been outrageously great. Had a girlfriend within a month” I had no idea that women are more willing in other areas of the country. Good to know :)
- 999900000999 5y ago
  If you want to know how easy dating will be in a city, just checkout the gender ratios. LA has one of the worst for a straight guy. This means someone like myself would never find a partner. Imagine two cities 4000 miles apart. In PoorCity unemployment is 45%, and due to bizarre zoning laws a 1bdrm is 3800$. In GoodCity, unemployment is 3% and a 1bdrm is 1100$. Which city would you rather live in ? Where do you think life will be easier ? You can read a dozen books on finding a job, won't really help if your in PoorCity. Likewise dating books are essentially useless since I've never seen one address gender ratios. I've had no trouble outside of LA. In fact I dated a girl who took the initiative to introduce herself. She was beyond great! More than worth moving for ! Did I mention I really really hate driving ? I'm saving so much money now that I'm car free.

u385639 5y ago

Peculiarly low bar for "American Dream".

madengr 5y ago

TheRealNGenius 5y ago

I don't believe a single anecdotal tweet for each of the author's point qualifies as objective evidence to support their claims.

lost_soul 5y ago

The decline and fall of SF seems to be a popular topic on HN. Yet SF real estate prices remain astronomical. Somebody wants to live there.

saargrin 5y ago

"In the last seven years, my wife and I have experienced four home break-ins, one car break-in, multiple other thefts, broken up a purse snatching, been chased and lunged at by mentally ill people a few times a year. It literally happened on Bart the day I wrote the first draft of this post. Pre-pandemic, my wife used to call me every day to have someone on the phone, when walking the 5 minutes home from Bart each night. There is a large encampment two blocks from our house. Multiple times, homessless folks have slept or showered in our driveway. I only reported one break-in incident, because… what’s the point?" ouchie