19 ms·

My family has lived in SF since the 1800s. I recently moved because it has gotten so bad. I hate what the government has done to my city.

brtkdotse 4y ago
What has the government done to your city?
- jackmott 4y ago
  [dead]
- junofan 4y ago
  Downvoting for flame bait. Come on.
  - lizardking 4y ago
    It’s a fair question
  - swasheck 4y ago
    i had the same question. i believe it to be a legitimate inquiry, as someone with low exposure to the politics and results of the area.
    - iLoveOncall 4y ago
      My understanding from a European that doesn't follow the news very much is that they did defund the police and what everyone knew would happen happened.
      - swasheck 4y ago
        except they walked that back last year.
  - kdkdk 4y ago
    It‘s not just the government. As SF controls ever larger part of the world, many power hungry people flock to SF. Prices go up and more people want a piece of the action.
- bmelton 4y ago
  Interpreting the question in good faith (since nobody else seems to want to) I work in SF but don't live there, but over the past few years (especially under Chesa Boudin, the previous District Attorney) they've moved towards "soft on crime" policies that may have contributed to what friends who live there are referring to as 'lawlessness' Some policies that likely have contributed include: Bail Reform: They've prohibited cash bail, meaning most offenders who are arrested have no incentive to stand trial or prevent fleeing. No idea what the effect has been here, and as I understand it, offenders deemed violent are asked to forego bail. Again, no information on whether that's a voluntary ask or an imposed demand, but the impression is that people are arrested and back on the streets the same day to potentially reoffend. Decriminalized theft up to $950: It is now quasi-legal to walk into a store in San Francisco, steal up to $949 in merchandise, and walk right back out. Allegedly, police won't respond to such incidents, and there's no deterrent from doing so. This has led to gangs who take turns, each walking in and snagging almost a thousand dollars worth of merchandise, then pooling the goods and reselling them. Pharmacies seem to have been particularly affected. This was walked back somewhat, as shoplifting is now considered a felony again, especially if done as part of a ring, but police are apparently still extremely unlikely to respond. Reduced sentences: Due to budgetary concerns, California as a whole is now imprisoning offenders for less time, issuing shorter sentences and early release as much as possible so that they do not have to bear the cost of imprisonment. They defunded the police: Or, at least they pretended to? They promised to redirect $120 million of police funding away from law enforcement to support other social initiatives, and I remember a remark at the time that this was to fund reparation initiatives that they seem to be aiming to implement, but I have no idea as to the sincerity of that. That said, in the years since this promise, police budgets are up from where they were, so they seem to have either reversed course or possibly never gave it more than lip service. I'm not sure. All together, if those are to be believed as causes (rather than say, wealth inequality, general social unrest, etc.) then it's worth looking into. Crime is up 110% in San Francisco relative to the American average, and is up 91% relative to the average in California. Two additional notes: I'm just relaying what I think might have been OP's causes for attributing this to government action. I have no idea. I don't live there. Also, it seems that residents aren't particularly happy with it, as there was a (failed) attempt to recall Gavin Newsom, and a (successful) attempt to recall Chesa Boudin, and there are efforts underway to recall Mayor London Breed as well. No idea how that will fare. Edit: It's probably worth remembering that someone can be stabbed anywhere, and if the fact that this happened in San Francisco confirms a bias you had, it's probably worth reframing it as somewhere else. Confirmation bias is our common enemy, and one that we don't have to succumb to just because our brains insist on it. Ask yourself if your tirade applies if you replace "San Francisco" with Zurich, Tokyo, Toronto, or Frisco Texas.
roflyear 4y ago
The government, or rich people?
- shuckles 4y ago
  Every elected legislator in San Francisco is rich (as is the populace - it’s one of the richest cities in the region and planet), so you’ve proposed a distinction without a difference.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- agentofoblivion 4y ago
  Rich people? Lol. At least people are transparently saying their hateful nonsense these days. Yes, it’s people with large incomes that are making people take fentanyl, shit on the streets and stab people to death. If only rent was 50% cheaper, that guy would be a productive member of society! Hey, I have a great idea. Let’s have the government step in, take that stupid rich guys money, and give it to the drug addict. That’s never been tried before and I’m sure will solve the problem completely…
- iancmceachern 4y ago
  They're the same thing
chpatrick 4y ago
The last time I was in SF was 2015, and it was already horrible.
- cromwellian 4y ago
  The murder rate in SF is below what it was in the 1990s. There are far more dangerous cities than SF, which isn’t even in the top 20 in terms of crime. SF does have problems but there’s been a kind of relentless right wing attack on SF and CA in general that simply is not objective and it’s a rea irony because many of the red states have the highest murder rates. We’ve got a serious problem in this country in many areas but it’s never going to be fixed by getting hysterical over crime. This was an awful awful awful tragedy, but statistically, all of the people talking about how bad things have gotten apparently didn’t live through the 80s and 90s. We literally had vigilante groups like the Guardian Angels in the 80s because crime was so high. I’d like it if SF takes action to reduce crime of course but I’m skeptics of simplistic claims without knowing the core reasons crime dropped dramatically from 1980-2000. [people voting it down but providing no rebuttal that the “gotten bad” claims are subjective and don’t map to actual violent crime stats. What has objectively gotten worse is property crime. If someone can provide stats that show violent crime has objectively gotten worse over the last decade or two, I’d be curious]
  - cylinder 4y ago
    Why do Americans keep comparing crime rates to 30-50 years ago? Compare to other societies now. There’s supposed to be progress, and in other places, there has been.
    - qgin 4y ago
      Comparing a place to other places can help see what's possible, but comparing a place to itself in the past is how you judge progress, no?
    - mikeyouse 4y ago
      Of course they should compare both but how else would you judge progress but to look at the same city over a period of time?
octopoc 4y ago
When someone's family has lived for generations in one place, I imagine that gives you a special connection to it. Sorry you had to leave there.
turbobooster 4y ago
[dead]
alistairSH 4y ago
If by “government”, you mean “citizens”, then sure. But we elect the government and can toss them out next election cycle.
- INTPenis 4y ago
  A bad government breeds social inequality and this leads to desperation among citizens. You can't just blame citizens as if there's something in the air in SF. People are desperate. Tbh the whole US system is so messed up, it's generations upon generations of PTSD among the working masses. I hate to get into these discussions but it makes my blood boil to see how people are left stranded with no safety net and just more and more money gouging corporations around them.
  - joemazerino 4y ago
    What does this have to do with murder? This could have been premeditated or a random attack. No one knows yet.
    - INTPenis 4y ago
      I sure as hell don't know but the poster blamed the citizens as if there's something in the air in SF. And all the comments are about the general state of the city, rather than a targeted attack. So calm down, read the comments and you'll see that no one has any idea what happened and are just grasping.
    - alistairSH 4y ago
      Legneato blamed "the government" for the state of the city. I was only pointing out that the government is us. We elect them, they don't existing a vacuum. I never directly blamed the citizens, but they are the ones who live there, work there, and elect the government, so at least indirectly, they are to blame. It's a wealthy city - there's no reason (beyond apathy or greed) that the government can't implement policies that make the city a better place.
  - alistairSH 4y ago
istjohn 4y ago
In a democracy, you are the government. What we see today in SF is the consequence of decades of hostility to construction and growth from the residents of SF.
- ilikecakeandpie 4y ago
  In the US, that's not entirely true. There's acts of voter suppression and gerrymandering that have been rampant for what feels like forever and persist today.
  - Mountain_Skies 4y ago
    Is that what's happening in San Francisco?
  - throwayyy479087 4y ago
    I agree. The GOP gerrymandering SF so that they have complete control of city council is obviously the problem here. /s There are no GOP members in City government, and haven't been for a long, long time. This is the result of progressive policies. Accept that or this will continue. https://sfbgarchive.48hills.org/sfbgarchive/2014/08/05/last-republican/ https://sfbgarchive.48hills.org/sfbgarchive/2014/08/05/last-...
    - anon291 4y ago
      Americans have a major fetish for blaming the GOP. In my city of Portland which has many similar problems to sf, I constantly hear the reasons things are so bad is the GOP. What causes this kind of analysis to become so widespread?
      - throwayyy479087 4y ago
        People don't like to believe that problems are of their own making. You legalize meth, then your city fills up with people using meth - that's not the problem of the GOP. There's approximately no Republicans in Seattle, SF, or Portland - the problem is progressivism.
7174n6 4y ago
There is so much truth to the saying "The People Get The Government They Deserve". The government of SF only exists in it's current state because the majority of voters in SF chose them.
- CrackerNews 4y ago
  I have an issue with that sentiment because people do not directly vote for policies. They indirectly vote for a representative to enact policies, and the viable ones are backed by mass party apparatuses. Here, the Party's interests overrides the People's and dominate the political discussion. The Party is backed by a large network of corporate lobbyists. It's really that corporate personhood gets the government they deserve.
- anon291 4y ago
  Well in the case of old time san Franciscans, they made quite a nice city and then people moved in, out numbered them, and voted exactly for that which they didn't want.
TheBigSalad 4y ago
When did you leave? Statistically, the city has gotten much safer over the past 30 years, like most other American cities.

brtkdotse 4y ago

What has the government done to your city?

jackmott 4y ago
[dead]
junofan 4y ago
Downvoting for flame bait. Come on.
- lizardking 4y ago
  It’s a fair question
- swasheck 4y ago
  i had the same question. i believe it to be a legitimate inquiry, as someone with low exposure to the politics and results of the area.
  - iLoveOncall 4y ago
    My understanding from a European that doesn't follow the news very much is that they did defund the police and what everyone knew would happen happened.
    - swasheck 4y ago
      except they walked that back last year.
- kdkdk 4y ago
  It‘s not just the government. As SF controls ever larger part of the world, many power hungry people flock to SF. Prices go up and more people want a piece of the action.
bmelton 4y ago
Interpreting the question in good faith (since nobody else seems to want to) I work in SF but don't live there, but over the past few years (especially under Chesa Boudin, the previous District Attorney) they've moved towards "soft on crime" policies that may have contributed to what friends who live there are referring to as 'lawlessness' Some policies that likely have contributed include: Bail Reform: They've prohibited cash bail, meaning most offenders who are arrested have no incentive to stand trial or prevent fleeing. No idea what the effect has been here, and as I understand it, offenders deemed violent are asked to forego bail. Again, no information on whether that's a voluntary ask or an imposed demand, but the impression is that people are arrested and back on the streets the same day to potentially reoffend. Decriminalized theft up to $950: It is now quasi-legal to walk into a store in San Francisco, steal up to $949 in merchandise, and walk right back out. Allegedly, police won't respond to such incidents, and there's no deterrent from doing so. This has led to gangs who take turns, each walking in and snagging almost a thousand dollars worth of merchandise, then pooling the goods and reselling them. Pharmacies seem to have been particularly affected. This was walked back somewhat, as shoplifting is now considered a felony again, especially if done as part of a ring, but police are apparently still extremely unlikely to respond. Reduced sentences: Due to budgetary concerns, California as a whole is now imprisoning offenders for less time, issuing shorter sentences and early release as much as possible so that they do not have to bear the cost of imprisonment. They defunded the police: Or, at least they pretended to? They promised to redirect $120 million of police funding away from law enforcement to support other social initiatives, and I remember a remark at the time that this was to fund reparation initiatives that they seem to be aiming to implement, but I have no idea as to the sincerity of that. That said, in the years since this promise, police budgets are up from where they were, so they seem to have either reversed course or possibly never gave it more than lip service. I'm not sure. All together, if those are to be believed as causes (rather than say, wealth inequality, general social unrest, etc.) then it's worth looking into. Crime is up 110% in San Francisco relative to the American average, and is up 91% relative to the average in California. Two additional notes: I'm just relaying what I think might have been OP's causes for attributing this to government action. I have no idea. I don't live there. Also, it seems that residents aren't particularly happy with it, as there was a (failed) attempt to recall Gavin Newsom, and a (successful) attempt to recall Chesa Boudin, and there are efforts underway to recall Mayor London Breed as well. No idea how that will fare. Edit: It's probably worth remembering that someone can be stabbed anywhere, and if the fact that this happened in San Francisco confirms a bias you had, it's probably worth reframing it as somewhere else. Confirmation bias is our common enemy, and one that we don't have to succumb to just because our brains insist on it. Ask yourself if your tirade applies if you replace "San Francisco" with Zurich, Tokyo, Toronto, or Frisco Texas.

roflyear 4y ago

The government, or rich people?

shuckles 4y ago
Every elected legislator in San Francisco is rich (as is the populace - it’s one of the richest cities in the region and planet), so you’ve proposed a distinction without a difference.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
agentofoblivion 4y ago
Rich people? Lol. At least people are transparently saying their hateful nonsense these days. Yes, it’s people with large incomes that are making people take fentanyl, shit on the streets and stab people to death. If only rent was 50% cheaper, that guy would be a productive member of society! Hey, I have a great idea. Let’s have the government step in, take that stupid rich guys money, and give it to the drug addict. That’s never been tried before and I’m sure will solve the problem completely…
iancmceachern 4y ago
They're the same thing

chpatrick 4y ago

The last time I was in SF was 2015, and it was already horrible.

cromwellian 4y ago
The murder rate in SF is below what it was in the 1990s. There are far more dangerous cities than SF, which isn’t even in the top 20 in terms of crime. SF does have problems but there’s been a kind of relentless right wing attack on SF and CA in general that simply is not objective and it’s a rea irony because many of the red states have the highest murder rates. We’ve got a serious problem in this country in many areas but it’s never going to be fixed by getting hysterical over crime. This was an awful awful awful tragedy, but statistically, all of the people talking about how bad things have gotten apparently didn’t live through the 80s and 90s. We literally had vigilante groups like the Guardian Angels in the 80s because crime was so high. I’d like it if SF takes action to reduce crime of course but I’m skeptics of simplistic claims without knowing the core reasons crime dropped dramatically from 1980-2000. [people voting it down but providing no rebuttal that the “gotten bad” claims are subjective and don’t map to actual violent crime stats. What has objectively gotten worse is property crime. If someone can provide stats that show violent crime has objectively gotten worse over the last decade or two, I’d be curious]
- cylinder 4y ago
  Why do Americans keep comparing crime rates to 30-50 years ago? Compare to other societies now. There’s supposed to be progress, and in other places, there has been.
  - qgin 4y ago
    Comparing a place to other places can help see what's possible, but comparing a place to itself in the past is how you judge progress, no?
  - mikeyouse 4y ago
    Of course they should compare both but how else would you judge progress but to look at the same city over a period of time?

octopoc 4y ago

When someone's family has lived for generations in one place, I imagine that gives you a special connection to it. Sorry you had to leave there.

turbobooster 4y ago

[dead]

alistairSH 4y ago

If by “government”, you mean “citizens”, then sure. But we elect the government and can toss them out next election cycle.

INTPenis 4y ago
A bad government breeds social inequality and this leads to desperation among citizens. You can't just blame citizens as if there's something in the air in SF. People are desperate. Tbh the whole US system is so messed up, it's generations upon generations of PTSD among the working masses. I hate to get into these discussions but it makes my blood boil to see how people are left stranded with no safety net and just more and more money gouging corporations around them.
- joemazerino 4y ago
  What does this have to do with murder? This could have been premeditated or a random attack. No one knows yet.
  - INTPenis 4y ago
    I sure as hell don't know but the poster blamed the citizens as if there's something in the air in SF. And all the comments are about the general state of the city, rather than a targeted attack. So calm down, read the comments and you'll see that no one has any idea what happened and are just grasping.
  - alistairSH 4y ago
    Legneato blamed "the government" for the state of the city. I was only pointing out that the government is us. We elect them, they don't existing a vacuum. I never directly blamed the citizens, but they are the ones who live there, work there, and elect the government, so at least indirectly, they are to blame. It's a wealthy city - there's no reason (beyond apathy or greed) that the government can't implement policies that make the city a better place.
- alistairSH 4y ago

istjohn 4y ago

In a democracy, you are the government. What we see today in SF is the consequence of decades of hostility to construction and growth from the residents of SF.

ilikecakeandpie 4y ago
In the US, that's not entirely true. There's acts of voter suppression and gerrymandering that have been rampant for what feels like forever and persist today.
- Mountain_Skies 4y ago
  Is that what's happening in San Francisco?
- throwayyy479087 4y ago
  I agree. The GOP gerrymandering SF so that they have complete control of city council is obviously the problem here. /s There are no GOP members in City government, and haven't been for a long, long time. This is the result of progressive policies. Accept that or this will continue. https://sfbgarchive.48hills.org/sfbgarchive/2014/08/05/last-republican/ https://sfbgarchive.48hills.org/sfbgarchive/2014/08/05/last-...
  - anon291 4y ago
    Americans have a major fetish for blaming the GOP. In my city of Portland which has many similar problems to sf, I constantly hear the reasons things are so bad is the GOP. What causes this kind of analysis to become so widespread?
    - throwayyy479087 4y ago
      People don't like to believe that problems are of their own making. You legalize meth, then your city fills up with people using meth - that's not the problem of the GOP. There's approximately no Republicans in Seattle, SF, or Portland - the problem is progressivism.

7174n6 4y ago

There is so much truth to the saying "The People Get The Government They Deserve". The government of SF only exists in it's current state because the majority of voters in SF chose them.

CrackerNews 4y ago
I have an issue with that sentiment because people do not directly vote for policies. They indirectly vote for a representative to enact policies, and the viable ones are backed by mass party apparatuses. Here, the Party's interests overrides the People's and dominate the political discussion. The Party is backed by a large network of corporate lobbyists. It's really that corporate personhood gets the government they deserve.
anon291 4y ago
Well in the case of old time san Franciscans, they made quite a nice city and then people moved in, out numbered them, and voted exactly for that which they didn't want.

TheBigSalad 4y ago

When did you leave? Statistically, the city has gotten much safer over the past 30 years, like most other American cities.