3 ms·
It's probably investment driven. I lived in a couple buildings with very bad landlord companies that basically didn't care about the conditions of the building.
by proc0 1y ago
It's probably investment driven. I lived in a couple buildings with very bad landlord companies that basically didn't care about the conditions of the building. I had to call city authorities because there was a rat infestation. Meanwhile I was paying nearly 2K and this was 5-10 years ago.
There's something deeply wrong with that city, and everyone is a kind of in a trance trying to look away because they're all in the same political team or something like that. People suffer willingly as a form of weird self-sacrifice, so there is no accountability for the leadership that makes bad decision after bad decision (although of course they are making good decisions for the people who have the status and money).
- Compzilla 1y agoIt seems totally seems plausible that investment groups could be responsible for this... the heaping on of more misery to the crippling affordability crisis there. Do you think they would stop if someone pointed out that they were definitely doing civic harm? That last bit was not to be taken seriously.
- proc0 1y agoThere's definitely corruption with the landlord companies and the local government to some extent, I'm just not sure exactly how and don't know much about it, but it's clear the priorities of the city do not favor the average SF citizen. The only way to deal with the corruption has to be holding the leadership of the city accountable through mass change in voting. Otherwise the same people keep running the place and it will never change. So yes, pointing it out and exposing them is probably part of the solution but it would only be a small part. I think people need to break out of their unwavering loyalty in order to hold the system accountable for any change to happen.