When I was paying $6,000/month for a publicist, we had articles written like this
and would also conveniently be number 2 or 3 in buzzfeed listicles, but that wasn’t really for humans
never number 1, we would put our competitors at number 1 and assume their google alerts or network picked it up. then congratulate them for winding up in the same article, and use that coincidence with conference organizers to have us or our publicist invite them to be on the same fireside chats on stage. that was for humans.
our Google results look impeccable
great for our other assumption that our dates would cyberstalk us, I mean investors
I dont pay the publicist anymore but all those assumptions were true and still pay dividends
The local political scene in San Francisco is beyond broken, but the idea that it's a failed city was always a media fabrication. Based on yet more terrible politics, but just political wish casting from outside of San Francisco.
To be surprised, you'd have to believe the media and propaganda more than your own eyes and ears.
> but the idea that it's a failed city was always a media fabrication.
Let me copy a piece of my comment I already wrote as a reply to a different comment deeper in this thread:
> Homelessness, drugs, expensive housing, traffic, car break-ins, theft in broad daylight (you can steal up to I think $800 worth of stuff and not get punished), underground street racing gangs (they block intersections in broad daylight to do donuts and cops just stand there and watch unable to do anything about them), red light traffic cameras everywhere, paid freeway lanes, gender politics is being forced on elementary/middle school kids while science like math is being simplified (instead of encouraging smart kids to study harder material they bring curriculum to a lower level to match the level of kids who struggle with math).
So no, it’s not just “media fabrication”. San Francisco is in a state of chaos and lawlessness and it is getting worse.
> but the idea that it's a "failed city" was always a media fabrication.
And you mention:
> Homelessness, drugs, expensive housing, traffic, car break-ins, theft in broad daylight (you can steal up to I think $800 worth of stuff and not get punished), underground street racing gangs (they block intersections in broad daylight to do donuts and cops just stand there and watch unable to do anything about them), red light traffic cameras everywhere, paid freeway lanes, gender politics is being forced on elementary/middle school kids while science like math is being simplified (instead of encouraging smart kids to study harder material they bring curriculum to a lower level to match the level of kids who struggle with math).
"Things I don't like" does not make SF a failed city, it doesn't mean property values will fall (let alone go to zero) as everyone flees. It does mean that SF will continue being a city not for everyone.
> So no, it’s not just “media fabrication”. San Francisco is in a state of chaos and lawlessness and it is getting worse.
Again, that's really just your opinion and outlook, you don't have to live in SF, you probably don't.
First time driving through San Francisco I saw someone shooting up heroin on the sidewalk. Seen lots of stuff in NYC, Trenton, Camden, etc., but never such obvious issues with drug addiction and homelessness.
Drove through Hollywood and saw a man pull over on a very busy and well-lit street, open his car door, and proceed to piss between his car and the busy sidewalk. That's just normal city stuff. Has a certain charm to it imo
The first time I saw someone shooting up in public was in Vancouver BC back in the 90s. But then I found out they had a bunch of safe needle exchanges and repositories and such.
Really? I lived there. It felt pretty failed to me. Utter corruption at the planning department. Lawlessness, open injection of opioids in broad daylight on city streets. No police response for anything. People just stop reporting theft and property crime because police obviously don’t give a shit. Speaking of shit. All over the streets. Smash and grab theft so rampant that there’s a cop on every corner downtown during Christmas season.
The only thing they can get done is the one city service that is cash flow positive. Writing you tickets for street cleaning.
Honestly, couldn’t get out of there fast enough.
The solution is pretty simple, don't go to downtown. Downtown, at least many parts of it, is a containment zone for the homeless and the addicted and their various services. It's not that different from Skid Row/Flower District in DTLA.
You can enjoy Pac Heights, Noe, the Dogpatch, the Sunset, the Richmond, North Beach etc. etc. just fine without ever making contact with downtown, the same way most people don't hang out on 5th and San Pedro in LA and can still enjoy Silver Lake. You can pretend it doesn't exist and never cross paths, unless you really insist on spending quality time on 6th and Mission and other fine intersections.
Would I like it better if the Tenderloin was more Fifth Avenue and less World War Z? Sure, but that's not happening with the way SF politics work, so I might as well live with the cards we were dealt.
The Haight, Cole Valley, Hayes Valley, Chinatown, Valencia Street, the Sunset District, the Embarcadero, Van Ness Avenue, Ocean Beach, the Golden Gate, Golden Gate Park, Lake Merced, Mission Bay, Fort Mason etc.
I was harassed at the SF Public Library in the Civic Center so I do avoid the library. I drive through the Tenderloin although I try not to walk there.
Police not giving a shit actually has a reason. I know that many officers quit SFPD because they grew tired of the DA not prosecuting anything. Criminals know this and openly taunt cops. So the best cops who actually cared have quit the force. Source: know people at a South Bay police department that has a lot of SFPD refugees.
Yes, many I say. When you see the poverty, malcontent, and crime right before your eyes every day on the streets of your city, it is a problem. Atlanta does not have the level of open lawlessness than San Francisco does. Atlanta has its problems but it's a nice place to live for anyone. San Francisco is only a place to live for the wealthy, everyone else is crushed by the insanity.
It’s easy to dismiss everyone who doesn’t like being surrounded by fentanyl and meth addiction and crime as “right wing,” but it just makes them sound pretty sensible.
All my friends moved away over a span of about three years. I held on as long as I could but I finally threw in the towel too.
you'd have to believe the media and propaganda more than your own eyes and ears.
So basically, you'd have to be any human. We parrot propaganda all the time. Rarely is any of it fact based.
You don't need facts to get people to buy into your narrative. You just need a story that fits your world view. Truth or falsehood is largely irrelevant.
Public transport isn’t world class, but it’s functional and better than most US cities. Public safety also isn’t really an issue for anyone that doesn’t identify as an unattended backpack in the backseat of a locked car with out of state plates.
> Public safety also isn’t really an issue for anyone that doesn’t identify as an unattended backpack in the backseat of a locked car with out of state plates
Don't travel to San Francisco, your car will be vandalized and robbed, got it.
I mean, why is that the standard? Nowhere I go do I ever have to worry about something like that.
> Public safety also isn’t really an issue for anyone that doesn’t identify as an unattended backpack in the backseat of a locked car with out of state plates.
You have got to be shitting me. SF crime is third world level, obvious to anyone within first 30m of visit. My two previous employers instituted buddy system bc female employees got jumped on the street repeatedly. Stores are closing bc of high crime, etc. i mean ffs
Sure, but also, maybe don't come, the cost of living for locals doesn't need to get any higher. Maybe wait until there's new construction, so it's not a zero sum situation where the only way to get in is to elbow someone else out. Let's not go back to 8 grand per mo for a 2br at Nema.
SF does everything in its power to not grow, to restrict access. The city population grew barely 20% over the last 70 years, while places like Austin TX went up by 830% during the same time period. Might as well be on different planets.
SF is very dense, only behind NY in the US. It's quite a bit denser than Tokyo and London. If SF wants to build then we need a massive public works project for London-class public transportation. Which does not exist anywhere in the US.
> Let's not go back to 8 grand per mo for a 2br at Nema.
Interesting. That would be considered cheap for Manhattan depending on some factors: south of 90th St, 5 mins walk from a subway station and ~1250 sq ft.
Manhattan's density of housing and massive tax base allows much better services in almost every respect in walking (and certainly public transit) distance.
* The fact that a "two bedroom" would be called "one bedroom a living room, a bathroom, and a kitchen" anywhere that's civilized, so I expect you're getting maybe 800 square feet.
in a pretty crummy location (which is even worse now with the collapse of Downtown and FiDi).
Fake Edit: Actually, bullet point #2 is totally incorrect. The two-bedrooms that are currently (or soon) available are actually "two bedroom, living room, kitchen, and at least one bathroom" at ~1300 sq ft. I'm fucking shocked.
The building is _still_ in a pretty crummy location, though.
Readit News
and would also conveniently be number 2 or 3 in buzzfeed listicles, but that wasn’t really for humans
never number 1, we would put our competitors at number 1 and assume their google alerts or network picked it up. then congratulate them for winding up in the same article, and use that coincidence with conference organizers to have us or our publicist invite them to be on the same fireside chats on stage. that was for humans.
our Google results look impeccable
great for our other assumption that our dates would cyberstalk us, I mean investors
I dont pay the publicist anymore but all those assumptions were true and still pay dividends
To be surprised, you'd have to believe the media and propaganda more than your own eyes and ears.
Let me copy a piece of my comment I already wrote as a reply to a different comment deeper in this thread:
> Homelessness, drugs, expensive housing, traffic, car break-ins, theft in broad daylight (you can steal up to I think $800 worth of stuff and not get punished), underground street racing gangs (they block intersections in broad daylight to do donuts and cops just stand there and watch unable to do anything about them), red light traffic cameras everywhere, paid freeway lanes, gender politics is being forced on elementary/middle school kids while science like math is being simplified (instead of encouraging smart kids to study harder material they bring curriculum to a lower level to match the level of kids who struggle with math).
So no, it’s not just “media fabrication”. San Francisco is in a state of chaos and lawlessness and it is getting worse.
> but the idea that it's a "failed city" was always a media fabrication.
And you mention:
> Homelessness, drugs, expensive housing, traffic, car break-ins, theft in broad daylight (you can steal up to I think $800 worth of stuff and not get punished), underground street racing gangs (they block intersections in broad daylight to do donuts and cops just stand there and watch unable to do anything about them), red light traffic cameras everywhere, paid freeway lanes, gender politics is being forced on elementary/middle school kids while science like math is being simplified (instead of encouraging smart kids to study harder material they bring curriculum to a lower level to match the level of kids who struggle with math).
"Things I don't like" does not make SF a failed city, it doesn't mean property values will fall (let alone go to zero) as everyone flees. It does mean that SF will continue being a city not for everyone.
> So no, it’s not just “media fabrication”. San Francisco is in a state of chaos and lawlessness and it is getting worse.
Again, that's really just your opinion and outlook, you don't have to live in SF, you probably don't.
What part of sf do you still enjoy?
You can enjoy Pac Heights, Noe, the Dogpatch, the Sunset, the Richmond, North Beach etc. etc. just fine without ever making contact with downtown, the same way most people don't hang out on 5th and San Pedro in LA and can still enjoy Silver Lake. You can pretend it doesn't exist and never cross paths, unless you really insist on spending quality time on 6th and Mission and other fine intersections.
Would I like it better if the Tenderloin was more Fifth Avenue and less World War Z? Sure, but that's not happening with the way SF politics work, so I might as well live with the cards we were dealt.
I was harassed at the SF Public Library in the Civic Center so I do avoid the library. I drive through the Tenderloin although I try not to walk there.
Real question here, is there a city who's residents don't say this?
it's in the interest of the right-wing media to push the narrative that san fran is failing due to the left's "interference".
I used to live there and now I don't.
The homeless situation really did get out of control after 2015 or so. I hear it's only gotten worse.
Maybe owning a home shouldn't take longer than a SWE's working lifespan.
If you're very wealthy and can afford to be isolated in SF, it's probably still a lovely experience.
All my friends moved away over a span of about three years. I held on as long as I could but I finally threw in the towel too.
there was a real problem. the city as a whole thought it and voted to recall their district attorney for his policies of not prosecuting crimes
So basically, you'd have to be any human. We parrot propaganda all the time. Rarely is any of it fact based.
You don't need facts to get people to buy into your narrative. You just need a story that fits your world view. Truth or falsehood is largely irrelevant.
Dead Comment
TLDR
The GDP of the city is way up. Everything else still sucks.
Don't travel to San Francisco, your car will be vandalized and robbed, got it.
I mean, why is that the standard? Nowhere I go do I ever have to worry about something like that.
You have got to be shitting me. SF crime is third world level, obvious to anyone within first 30m of visit. My two previous employers instituted buddy system bc female employees got jumped on the street repeatedly. Stores are closing bc of high crime, etc. i mean ffs
SF does everything in its power to not grow, to restrict access. The city population grew barely 20% over the last 70 years, while places like Austin TX went up by 830% during the same time period. Might as well be on different planets.
It's the core problem of pretty much every issue it has.
Instead of building a city on exclusion, it needs to be accepting again, become a city that wants to welcome every human.
Interesting. That would be considered cheap for Manhattan depending on some factors: south of 90th St, 5 mins walk from a subway station and ~1250 sq ft.
* That price (8K? Jesus Fucking Christ.)
* The fact that a "two bedroom" would be called "one bedroom a living room, a bathroom, and a kitchen" anywhere that's civilized, so I expect you're getting maybe 800 square feet.
in a pretty crummy location (which is even worse now with the collapse of Downtown and FiDi).
Fake Edit: Actually, bullet point #2 is totally incorrect. The two-bedrooms that are currently (or soon) available are actually "two bedroom, living room, kitchen, and at least one bathroom" at ~1300 sq ft. I'm fucking shocked.
The building is _still_ in a pretty crummy location, though.
Deleted Comment