4 ms·

Why though? SF has a crime problem. People are leaving. Businesses are leaving.

1letterunixname 3y ago
Pure fiction. SF's crime rate hasn't changed appreciably in 20 years (it went up and down twice, but it's back where it was). It is safer than: - Baltimore, MD - New Orleans, LA - Washington, DC - Chicago, IL - Dallas, TX - Philadelphia, PA - Houston, TX and it goes on because 29 other major cities are more dangerous than SF. So where is the outrage about those cities? Seems more like poverty shaming and anti-liberal bias against SF. https://www.macrotrends.net/cities/us/ca/san-francisco/crime-rate-statistics https://www.macrotrends.net/cities/us/ca/san-francisco/crime... What's changed is people can work remotely and don't need to commute, so there's no primary purpose to reside or travel into a city anymore. And, besides, the main problem with SF is that housing there is too damn expensive because of all of the starry-eyed people who yearn to live there.
- bufferoverflow 3y ago
  You're confusing crime and crime reporting. SF stopped charging people with crimes, police stopped arresting people committing crimes, because they know the leftist DA will just release them in an hour.
mrbombastic 3y ago
SF feels like it is in a similar place to NYC in the 80s. Not perfectly analogous but rampant crime and quality of life issues will eventually force in some hard changes in political landscape which will in time correct the problem. SF geographically is gorgeous and has many advantages. I believe long term it will turn around but what that timeline will be is unclear. Still if I had a bunch of cash sitting around once the real estate there hits bottom it would be tempting.
- ghaff 3y ago
  Very different cities but there is a similar something's gotta give feeling based on the time I spent in Manhattan in the mid-80s. Of course, things don't have to get better. Look at Detroit. (And, yes, there's been significant improvements around the river but the city as a whole is still pretty bad.) As you say, San Francisco's geographic assets are something you can't take away and very few other cities can match--but they're not enough by themselves.
  - mrbombastic 3y ago
    It’s a fair point, and SF’s over reliance on the tech sector might have some concerning overlap with Detroit relationship with the auto industry. Nothing is guaranteed but still I am optimistic it is a city people will want to live in long term.

Pure fiction. SF's crime rate hasn't changed appreciably in 20 years (it went up and down twice, but it's back where it was). It is safer than: - Baltimore, MD - New Orleans, LA - Washington, DC - Chicago, IL - Dallas, TX - Philadelphia, PA - Houston, TX and it goes on because 29 other major cities are more dangerous than SF. So where is the outrage about those cities? Seems more like poverty shaming and anti-liberal bias against SF. https://www.macrotrends.net/cities/us/ca/san-francisco/crime-rate-statistics https://www.macrotrends.net/cities/us/ca/san-francisco/crime... What's changed is people can work remotely and don't need to commute, so there's no primary purpose to reside or travel into a city anymore. And, besides, the main problem with SF is that housing there is too damn expensive because of all of the starry-eyed people who yearn to live there.

bufferoverflow 3y ago
You're confusing crime and crime reporting. SF stopped charging people with crimes, police stopped arresting people committing crimes, because they know the leftist DA will just release them in an hour.

mrbombastic 3y ago

SF feels like it is in a similar place to NYC in the 80s. Not perfectly analogous but rampant crime and quality of life issues will eventually force in some hard changes in political landscape which will in time correct the problem. SF geographically is gorgeous and has many advantages. I believe long term it will turn around but what that timeline will be is unclear. Still if I had a bunch of cash sitting around once the real estate there hits bottom it would be tempting.

ghaff 3y ago
Very different cities but there is a similar something's gotta give feeling based on the time I spent in Manhattan in the mid-80s. Of course, things don't have to get better. Look at Detroit. (And, yes, there's been significant improvements around the river but the city as a whole is still pretty bad.) As you say, San Francisco's geographic assets are something you can't take away and very few other cities can match--but they're not enough by themselves.
- mrbombastic 3y ago
  It’s a fair point, and SF’s over reliance on the tech sector might have some concerning overlap with Detroit relationship with the auto industry. Nothing is guaranteed but still I am optimistic it is a city people will want to live in long term.