A lot of people point to 'crime rates in SF are not noticeably high' but one of the reasons for that is that everyone who lives in the zone knows to avoid the worst areas at the worst times, and there are a lot of bad times and bad areas. If average people were walking around these areas frequently, crime rates would be much higher.
This is of course really bad for local businesses. And yes, a certain fraction of the homeless population needs managed care in controlled facilities until they recover, but neither the city nor the state nor the federal government wants to pay for that. Practically, that means there are areas of the city where homeless are ignored, and areas where they are chased out. If homeless people show up and start acting out in Pacific Heights etc., the cops do show up... it's just policing for the wealthy in that respect.
However, much of the rest of the city is really no different than anywhere else, but for some reason there's an epidemic of opiate use down around that Mid-Market area and that's also where the worst of the mental illness episodes seem to take place, i.e. people screaming their heads off at all hours for no apparent reason. It's too bad, for some years that whole zone was seeing an economic boom and was getting a bit nicer.
The shitty drivers are really the greatest threat to public safety across the rest of the city at present, something about the end of the pandemic has turned drivers into imbeciles it seems. (Homicides are about twice the level of auto-related deaths, but the reckless and drunk drivers are everywhere, not concentrated in the worst areas).
I suppose the organized gun-armed gangs of smash-and-grab car thieves targeting the tourist zones are part of the problem, in their nice cars with the removable license plates, but the cops are apparently too worried about their image to do anything about that. Bait cars could be an option, but then they might have to shoot somebody, which would be bad PR. Their mentality seems to be, "why risk it?"
> Dorsey announced he will introduce new legislation with Supervisor Catherine Stefani to amend the City Charter and get the Police Department fully staffed within five years.
The implication is it will fix things and then maybe businesses will return. But why did they tear it down and reduce staffing to start with? What did they expect to happen? Can’t imagine as soon as COVID hit they said “no need to worry about crime anymore, let all these officers go”.
Then what was Whole Foods thinking? Shouldn’t they have done some kind of study to analyze that particular area before opening a “flagship” location there just a year ago?
I guess it could have been a case where everyone in the decision chain might have see the train wreck coming but nobody wanted to raise their hand and object. The only way out is to let the train wreck happen. That wouldn’t be too outlandish, I’ve seen similar things happen.
That corner is well known as one of the worst in the city. The first time I ever saw someone OD in person was directly across the street - dude was slumped over in the classic fentanyl lean when I went in, and by the time I came out there was another homeless man yelling at people asking for narcan. Bunch of dealers (who I assume sold it to him) standing right by his body too, looking super nonchalant. Pretty surreal experience.
I think two blocks away, at 6th and Market, is sometimes thought to be scarier.
Although that same corner where the Whole Foods was was the first place I saw someone openly injecting heroin on the street while other people were watching (while the Trinity Place building was under construction a few years ago).
There are a lot of weird and intense juxtapositions right over there.
All the areas around the BART stations are very sketchy now too. Mission St is even worse than it was a decade ago. We used to hang out in SF all the time, taking BART in, which was nice as we didn’t have to worry about parking and all the homies from around the bay could just jump on and meet up in SF. No one wants to do this anymore because every time riding BART is a thrilling experience of “is this dude going to stab us or is he just trying to smoke something?”, then the stations are like a round of Left 4 Dead. I love the Bay Area and really want to see this fixed, and it’s been extremely frustrating watching it get worse. Also frustrating are all these companies demanding that folks come back into the office, for no discernible reason aside from making good use of their overpriced commercial real estate.
Really does feel like a “doom loop” for San Francisco. Who will write the definitive book on how everything went downhill over the past 10 or so years? Michael Lewis would entertaining. Or maybe it’s a job for Matt Levine? Who else?
Maybe the city could implement some sort of "Sanctuary District", a walled-off ghetto that is used to contain the poor, the sick, the mentally disabled, and anyone else who cannot support themselves. It would be right on schedule for 2024.
Launch a "Gentrification Relocation Program" for the ultra-rich, where they're given an all-expenses-paid trip to Mars, solving Earth's issues one rocket at a time.
Create a "Homeless-themed Escape Room" to help tech bros gain empathy and understanding of the struggles faced by the less fortunate, all while working on their team-building skills.
Establish "Adopt-a-Billionaire" initiatives where the homeless can select a wealthy patron to support their journey towards self-sufficiency, with the added bonus of receiving personalized financial advice.
Develop a "Homeless Monopoly" board game that highlights the systemic barriers faced by those in poverty, with bonus spaces for empathy-challenged players to experience unexpected setbacks and financial ruin.
Initiate a "Hunger Games: Empathy Edition" competition where participants are placed in a simulated environment of scarcity and adversity, forcing them to confront their lack of understanding and support for the less fortunate.
Japan has somewhat of a "sanctuary district" in Sanya, Tokyo, it's been an area for those left behind for a long time as I understand it.
People in need tend to congregate around help services provided by the city, and Sanya has a lot of those services. It is unclear if homeless are "moved" to Sanya or if it is just a natural place for them to end up, because of the mentioned services. Housing, food and vending machines are also extra cheap in Sanya.
The situation for homeless Americans is a lot more dire than living in Sanya, from an outsiders perspective. I don't envy having to sleep in SF streets.
I read Sanfransicko, and thought it was interesting (although not completely convincing). It did help me create a mental framework to understand what happened in North America as a whole while I lived abroad.
I definitely would be interested in seeing all of the missed opportunities and failures in prioritization; that would require a reflective insider, which seems unlikely in the near term future.
I really hope you didn't take the book that seriously.
Shellenberger's central thesis is that addiction, mental illness, and "disaffiliation" are the primary causes of homelessness. However, this oversimplified view ignores the complex interplay of factors such as affordable housing shortages, job loss, and systemic inequalities that contribute to the problem. By focusing solely on progressive policies, Shellenberger turns a blind eye to the broader socio-economic context that has given rise to homelessness in the Bay Area.
The book's methodology is highly suspect. Shellenberger relies heavily on secondhand accounts and outdated ethnographic studies while failing to engage with the current experiences of homeless individuals. This glaring omission undermines the credibility of his analysis and reveals a lack of empathy for those affected by the issue.
Shellenberger's penchant for exaggeration and misrepresentation further erodes his argument. He is quick to criticize progressive approaches such as harm reduction and housing first policies but offers little in the way of evidence-based alternatives. Instead, he proposes vaguely authoritarian solutions that betray a deep-seated ideological bias.
Ultimately, the book's distorted portrayal of homelessness serves only to fan the flames of the culture wars.
I figured it would be 200 pages of “and that’s a result of Reagan’s drive to shut down public mental health”
I very much doubt the visible homeless problem is a result of housing - the iceberg is a result of housing. The visible homeliness wouldn’t be solved if rent were half - that doesn’t treat schizophrenia
Agreed about pandemic affecting downtown being the man culprit.
I wager SF was affected harder more than most downtowns due to high commercial rents, tons of startups that were nimble and moved, and lots of progressive big companies that are actually adapting to WFH reasonably well.
I wish commercial rents would drop significantly and more mixed use was permitted for new galleries, bars, clubs and residential.
I personally have hope SF will figure it out. It’s a town of constant change.
> I wager SF was affected harder more than most downtowns due to high commercial rents, tons of startups that were nimble and moved, and lots of progressive big companies that are actually adapting to WFH reasonably well.
Yeah, though I think it doesn't help that downtown SF has relatively low population density compared to downtown Manhattan. When the return-to-office plans started to kick in there weren't a ton of workers with very short commutes who were eager to be back in-office.
1,537 police in San Fransisco is a bit below average per capita, but not dramatically so. It's goal of 2,100 officers puts it about equal to the nationwide average.
There may be a non-linear relationship. It's 1/2 the ratio as NYC.
Please remember that the legal city of SF is quite small, compared to the area you think of as SF.
I'm not sure if that national average is a good benchmark or not (maybe there is some sort of argument for how urbanized society has become) but my guess would be that there is some density factor. SF is something like 850k people pre-pandemic on 49 square miles. While it's not one of the biggest in absolute amount of people, it is the second(?) densest. I would suspect that a city of same population but 1/4 density would not need the same amount of cops.
update: I am guessing this is what your non-linear part is about; I missed that on first read.
A new paper, The Injustice of Under-Policing, makes a point that I have been emphasizing for many years, namely, relative to other developed countries the United States is under-policed and over-imprisoned.
East of Chinatown is an interesting area. About 10 years about, the cops there had a pleasant way about them. They're still pigs and monopolize violence unequally, largely for whoever lives highest on Nob Hill or The Presidio. I bet they're glad they're not certain LA cops who are effectively unpaid UberEats for some residents.
> Whole Foods Market
> 222 Google reviews
> Located in: UN Plaza
> Address: 1185 Market St, San Francisco, CA 94103
Never knew about this location, I have to say wow that was pretty bold of them opening in UN Plaza. Nice gigantic development at Trinity Place. Interesting to see the page is still up https://www.trinitysf.com/whole-foods/
Not being familiar at all with the situation in SF these days, is this really the reason for closure?
I've noticed a pattern of using whatever convenient trendy excuse (crime in SF) for leadership to avoid stating the real reason that might cause them to be accountable for a bad decision (perhaps a low grossing store due to poor location market-fit analysis). I'm quite skeptical now when reading these trendy rationalizations.
I used to shop there all the time - crime was a massive issue. And not just shoplifting either, pretty much every employee I talked to either had been physically assaulted or knew someone who had been.
> I've noticed a pattern of using whatever convenient trendy excuse (crime in SF) for leadership to avoid stating the real reason
Interesting, because I’ve noticed a trend of people bending themselves into pretzels to avoid starting that crime is an issue.
Last week, a drug-addicted homeless woman gave birth to a baby on the street in SF like an animal. It's worse than a 3rd world country in SF these days.
That’s so terrible. When I visited San Francisco I was expecting a beautiful city, architecture, the hills, nature. But I was just saddened by seeing the homeless. They were in pain, suffering, some nodding of, some drinking and crying into their drinks. The whole city had an aura of sad desperation. None of the beautiful architecture or nature could make up for it. I couldn’t wait to escape from there.
This is horrible. I see horrible scenes in the city streets on a regular basis but seeing the picture of this poor tiny little baby on the pavement hit me hard.
It's disheartening to hear such stories, but generalizing San Francisco based on isolated events is unfair. Like any city, SF faces challenges like homelessness and substance abuse. Instead of making comparisons, let's acknowledge the ongoing efforts to address these issues and work together to foster positive change...
Poverty porn is disgusting. Instead of helping by calling an ambulance, spectators taking videos of it to publicly shame individuals and give fodder for voyeurs to look down on the poor.
Inhumane conditions aren't unique to SF. Sacramento, Chico, San Jose, Oakland, and LA. These also aren't unique to California.
NYC, PDX, SEA, ATX.. take your pick. Same shit, different city.
I live about two blocks from the WF location in the article. I went there yesterday for the first time in a few months. I would like to be able to walk there and pick up groceries, but it’s very intimidating to do so. You have to keep your head on a swivel to stay safe. The anxiety and paranoia is not worth the convenience. I’ve never seen anything really major happen when walking over there, but the store is usually empty when I go, so I’m sure they’re just hurting because no one wants to go there.
I remember taking the train to the hotel from the airport when I worked at Heroku.
At one station, two kids were fighting and one threw the other into the train. No one at the station did anything. I was coming from Tokyo and the scene was so insane that I could only sit and record a video. Like I felt physically unable to move beyond bringing my phone up and hitting the record button.
I still watch the video sometimes and wonder if I should have done something.
It's actually that bad. In basically any urban area of the Bay Area you're likely to see and interact with _violent_ mentally ill homeless people. It's worst in San Francisco, specifically in that area of town, despite it being the main street of the city.
Readit News
This is of course really bad for local businesses. And yes, a certain fraction of the homeless population needs managed care in controlled facilities until they recover, but neither the city nor the state nor the federal government wants to pay for that. Practically, that means there are areas of the city where homeless are ignored, and areas where they are chased out. If homeless people show up and start acting out in Pacific Heights etc., the cops do show up... it's just policing for the wealthy in that respect.
However, much of the rest of the city is really no different than anywhere else, but for some reason there's an epidemic of opiate use down around that Mid-Market area and that's also where the worst of the mental illness episodes seem to take place, i.e. people screaming their heads off at all hours for no apparent reason. It's too bad, for some years that whole zone was seeing an economic boom and was getting a bit nicer.
The shitty drivers are really the greatest threat to public safety across the rest of the city at present, something about the end of the pandemic has turned drivers into imbeciles it seems. (Homicides are about twice the level of auto-related deaths, but the reckless and drunk drivers are everywhere, not concentrated in the worst areas).
I suppose the organized gun-armed gangs of smash-and-grab car thieves targeting the tourist zones are part of the problem, in their nice cars with the removable license plates, but the cops are apparently too worried about their image to do anything about that. Bait cars could be an option, but then they might have to shoot somebody, which would be bad PR. Their mentality seems to be, "why risk it?"
It's lifting the veil on a fundamentally thoughtless, greedy society that refuses to effectively care for or help hungry people who have nothing.
The implication is it will fix things and then maybe businesses will return. But why did they tear it down and reduce staffing to start with? What did they expect to happen? Can’t imagine as soon as COVID hit they said “no need to worry about crime anymore, let all these officers go”.
Then what was Whole Foods thinking? Shouldn’t they have done some kind of study to analyze that particular area before opening a “flagship” location there just a year ago?
I guess it could have been a case where everyone in the decision chain might have see the train wreck coming but nobody wanted to raise their hand and object. The only way out is to let the train wreck happen. That wouldn’t be too outlandish, I’ve seen similar things happen.
Although that same corner where the Whole Foods was was the first place I saw someone openly injecting heroin on the street while other people were watching (while the Trinity Place building was under construction a few years ago).
There are a lot of weird and intense juxtapositions right over there.
Launch a "Gentrification Relocation Program" for the ultra-rich, where they're given an all-expenses-paid trip to Mars, solving Earth's issues one rocket at a time.
Create a "Homeless-themed Escape Room" to help tech bros gain empathy and understanding of the struggles faced by the less fortunate, all while working on their team-building skills.
Establish "Adopt-a-Billionaire" initiatives where the homeless can select a wealthy patron to support their journey towards self-sufficiency, with the added bonus of receiving personalized financial advice.
Develop a "Homeless Monopoly" board game that highlights the systemic barriers faced by those in poverty, with bonus spaces for empathy-challenged players to experience unexpected setbacks and financial ruin.
Initiate a "Hunger Games: Empathy Edition" competition where participants are placed in a simulated environment of scarcity and adversity, forcing them to confront their lack of understanding and support for the less fortunate.
People in need tend to congregate around help services provided by the city, and Sanya has a lot of those services. It is unclear if homeless are "moved" to Sanya or if it is just a natural place for them to end up, because of the mentioned services. Housing, food and vending machines are also extra cheap in Sanya.
The situation for homeless Americans is a lot more dire than living in Sanya, from an outsiders perspective. I don't envy having to sleep in SF streets.
Unfortunately George Carlin's idea on the matter seems to be hard to implement. But is still the best proposed solution
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqZBXxuT9aE
Dead Comment
I definitely would be interested in seeing all of the missed opportunities and failures in prioritization; that would require a reflective insider, which seems unlikely in the near term future.
Shellenberger's central thesis is that addiction, mental illness, and "disaffiliation" are the primary causes of homelessness. However, this oversimplified view ignores the complex interplay of factors such as affordable housing shortages, job loss, and systemic inequalities that contribute to the problem. By focusing solely on progressive policies, Shellenberger turns a blind eye to the broader socio-economic context that has given rise to homelessness in the Bay Area.
The book's methodology is highly suspect. Shellenberger relies heavily on secondhand accounts and outdated ethnographic studies while failing to engage with the current experiences of homeless individuals. This glaring omission undermines the credibility of his analysis and reveals a lack of empathy for those affected by the issue.
Shellenberger's penchant for exaggeration and misrepresentation further erodes his argument. He is quick to criticize progressive approaches such as harm reduction and housing first policies but offers little in the way of evidence-based alternatives. Instead, he proposes vaguely authoritarian solutions that betray a deep-seated ideological bias.
Ultimately, the book's distorted portrayal of homelessness serves only to fan the flames of the culture wars.
I feel like most of that would just be 200 pages of saying "And then, San Francisco didn't allow enough housing to be built." over and over.
I very much doubt the visible homeless problem is a result of housing - the iceberg is a result of housing. The visible homeliness wouldn’t be solved if rent were half - that doesn’t treat schizophrenia
I recall headlines of restaurants struggling to find cooks due to the cost of rent + commuting being too prohibitive for service workers of the city.
Who knows, maybe this "death-loop" is actually healthy for the longterm well-being of the city.
The city's approach to drug use probably doesn't help, but the pandemic-motivated downturn in foot traffic is the most obvious culprit.
I wager SF was affected harder more than most downtowns due to high commercial rents, tons of startups that were nimble and moved, and lots of progressive big companies that are actually adapting to WFH reasonably well.
I wish commercial rents would drop significantly and more mixed use was permitted for new galleries, bars, clubs and residential.
I personally have hope SF will figure it out. It’s a town of constant change.
Yeah, though I think it doesn't help that downtown SF has relatively low population density compared to downtown Manhattan. When the return-to-office plans started to kick in there weren't a ton of workers with very short commutes who were eager to be back in-office.
What's the minimum number of officers per capita in a major city?
There may be a non-linear relationship. It's 1/2 the ratio as NYC.
Please remember that the legal city of SF is quite small, compared to the area you think of as SF.
update: I am guessing this is what your non-linear part is about; I missed that on first read.
https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2022/08/st...
Looks like between 15-20 cops per 10k. 800k would be right around 1500.
Never knew about this location, I have to say wow that was pretty bold of them opening in UN Plaza. Nice gigantic development at Trinity Place. Interesting to see the page is still up https://www.trinitysf.com/whole-foods/
I've noticed a pattern of using whatever convenient trendy excuse (crime in SF) for leadership to avoid stating the real reason that might cause them to be accountable for a bad decision (perhaps a low grossing store due to poor location market-fit analysis). I'm quite skeptical now when reading these trendy rationalizations.
> I've noticed a pattern of using whatever convenient trendy excuse (crime in SF) for leadership to avoid stating the real reason
Interesting, because I’ve noticed a trend of people bending themselves into pretzels to avoid starting that crime is an issue.
https://www.ktvu.com/news/woman-gives-birth-on-san-francisco...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8a5L4DpXheg
Inhumane conditions aren't unique to SF. Sacramento, Chico, San Jose, Oakland, and LA. These also aren't unique to California.
NYC, PDX, SEA, ATX.. take your pick. Same shit, different city.
Dead Comment
The first week I was here my former CTO was murdered.
Now there's some guy outside my hotel that's screaming at the top of his lungs between 3 and 7 AM every night. Nobody is stopping it.
At least I haven't heard any gunshots, which is the norm in my home city (Atlanta).
At one station, two kids were fighting and one threw the other into the train. No one at the station did anything. I was coming from Tokyo and the scene was so insane that I could only sit and record a video. Like I felt physically unable to move beyond bringing my phone up and hitting the record button.
I still watch the video sometimes and wonder if I should have done something.