3 ms·

I can't speak for OP, but my feeling from his tone is frustration that the failings of government, and the subsequent privatization of key services is frequentl

I can't speak for OP, but my feeling from his tone is frustration that the failings of government, and the subsequent privatization of key services is frequently treated by the Valley as some kind of disruptive innovation, rather than a pyrrhic victory. Take Uber for example - Uber only exists due to the complete failure of SF's public transportation network, as well as its horrifyingly corrupt taxi industry. The fact that it exists may be necessary, but it is indicative of a malaise, not a leap forward. I personally find it very annoying at how self-congratulatory our industry is on these matters. A private police force is nothing to celebrate, it's cause for sober reflection on just how badly we've completely fucked up to even make it necessary.

malyk 13y ago
I hear that, for sure. Oakland has a serious problem with burglaries/robberies. The police force is understaffed and, while oakland is finally trying to add more officers, it's going to take years to get back to a level of staffing that is sufficient to fight crime in the city. What is the alternative here? And my neighborhood is one of the poorest in the bay area. If you look at richblockspoorblocks.com for oakland north of 580 and west of 24. Those are some of the neighborhoods that are looking to hire private security (among others). My census tract (4007) has a median household income of $38,646!!! These aren't "rich" people that want to hire security to protect their gated community (:cough: piedmont :cough:). These are working class neighborhoods fed up with the crime rate and powerless to speed the process of growing the policing power of the city of oakland. The only thing they can do with any speed is hire someone to help out.