zakuivcustom
Posts: 2511
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:32 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Tue May 28, 2019 3:07 pm

I personally never understand the BS talking point of "Everyone is moving out of (insert your large city here)".

You know housing price has to do with supply and demand, right? The SF problem has to do with geography (But then, what do people that lived in flatlands with absolutely nothing for 50mi knows about real mountains anyway?), NIMBY (Which has no left-right divide), a flood of high tech jobs bringing in a bunch of people that have money and will pay any asking price.

Hack, if "loony" left has their way, all houses should be heavily subsidized and everyone doesn't have to work but still get a cushy flats with nice view of the SF Bay. Wait, you're telling me that's not the case right now?

Ultimately, if everyone is moving out, I should be able to buy a house there for <1k like I can do in Detroit. Right now I probably can't even get a motorcycle parking spot for that price in SF Bay Area.
 
apodino
Posts: 3484
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 2:11 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Tue May 28, 2019 3:26 pm

seb146 wrote:

And, yet, people still struggle even in rural America. The cost of living vs. wages have not been equal for a very long time. IF there are jobs in rural areas, they are low wage or highly skilled. Low wage jobs will not pay for basics. Highly skilled jobs are not being filled because they are difficult to fill or find people to move.

There are people living in Stockton who take the train to San Jose daily. It is cheaper. Good for them. We still do not see people leaving San Francisco in droves because of policies. It is housing prices.

This also has another effect that we have not discussed much, and that's environmental. The longer and longer people have to commute, the more and more time they spend in their cars, meaning that they burn more and more fuel, which contributes to climate change. One of the best ways I can think of to help fight climate change is to shorten commutes and have more housing available closer to work so people aren't commuting as much.

I understand where the thread title comes from and while I sympathize with what the OP is trying to say, to claim that San Francisco's problems are caused by liberal policies is a bit of an oversimplification. First of all, income inequality is becoming a bigger problem in this country, and if you take a look at the places in this country that are the most inequal, they tend to be large cities, such as San Francisco, Boston, New York, Washington, and Seattle. One issue you have is when you attract a lot of high paying jobs to one area, everyone goes to these places seeking the high paying jobs. This drives the cost of housing up. The problem becomes as the high paying jobs increase, the middle class jobs pay does not increase. Reasons for this include commercial real estate prices also going up, the fact that many of these businesses paying middle class wages are operating on tight margins as is, so they cannot afford the pay increases, etc. So because they can no longer afford rent, they are driven out of the city.

Another big problem that no one talks about is foreign real estate investment. Much of the money being invested in San Francisco real estate is coming from overseas, and this flood of cash is helping drive up real estate prices. These investors are people who have no interest whatsoever in the well being of people in San Francisco, they just want to make money on real estate. The much touted Prime Minister of New Zealand, Jacinda Ardern, put a stop to this practice there and it helped a lot.

The other issue is zoning laws. This is something city hall does have control over. The problem that they have as politicians is, do they change zoning laws to help the most vulnerable, or do they taylor them in a way to benefit their campaign donors?

The Washington Post wrote a great article about this the other day. Worth a read.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/how-san-francisco-broke-americas-heart/ar-AABGKVD?ocid=spartanntp
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 11530
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Tue May 28, 2019 3:44 pm

I've never been to SF (will go there in October) but you often get images of typical rows of houses. In a dense city you would expect many of these to give way to bigger buildings.

In fact it's happening in my suburb, 25Km away from Paris' center.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
zakuivcustom
Posts: 2511
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:32 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Tue May 28, 2019 4:00 pm

Aesma wrote:
I've never been to SF (will go there in October) but you often get images of typical rows of houses. In a dense city you would expect many of these to give way to bigger buildings.


I would say Earthquake resistance would be the issue - i.e. the additional cost is definitely astronomical if you want to build a mid-height (i.e. ~10 floors) building. If you want to go taller, though (i.e. 30+ floors), you then run into NIMBY issues.

It's the same reason why you see tons of tall buildings in Hong Kong but not Tokyo (Although Tokyo is more comparable to LA Basin - i.e. some tall building in the city center, a few tall buildings in some office district, then otherwise miles and miles of sprawls).
 
LMP737
Posts: 5900
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Tue May 28, 2019 4:25 pm

stratclub wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySAabjpl160
San Francisco is in trouble. Decades of Liberal legislation has created an atmosphere where the middle class are moving away from San Fransisco because they can't afford to live there because of back breaking taxation and sky high housing costs coupled with that it is a sanctuary city and has a horrific homeless problem resulting in law enforcement developing a do not engage policy on non capital crimes such as burglary, theft, shoplifting, etc.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eulLDqLrtYM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6dODE0khUw


So were playing this game again? Seems like a couple times a year threads like this appear on non-av. Quite frankly I find it a bit silly. But since this is the game we are playing I figured I would join in.

What have conservative policies gotten a conservative paradise like Alabama? Lets see here, one of the highest infant mortality rates in the country, one of the highest poverty rates, poorly performing public schools, low life expectancy which ties into a high obesity rate and lets not forget hook worm which results in poor public sanitation. See, I can play this game too.
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
LMP737
Posts: 5900
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Tue May 28, 2019 4:30 pm

stl07 wrote:
Nobody is leaving CA because of leftist policies like sanctuary cities, they are leaving for places with a lower cost of living so they can live "rich". Same reason why many retirees from Texas go down to Mexico


I lived in Orange County back in the late 90's early 2000's. Great place to live, if you had the money. Cost of living was sky high so when the company I was working for made me relocate I did not put up much of a fight.
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
LMP737
Posts: 5900
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Tue May 28, 2019 4:37 pm

stratclub wrote:

One danger for places these people move to is that they may not have understood how liberal policies are destroying San Fransisco and California in general and promote the same policies in the cities they move to.


I've been listening to the people are leaving California in droves argument for years. Yet their population keeps increasing,
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
wingman
Posts: 3696
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 4:25 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Tue May 28, 2019 4:47 pm

Aesma wrote:
I've never been to SF (will go there in October) but you often get images of typical rows of houses. In a dense city you would expect many of these to give way to bigger buildings.


The article that Apodino posted is indeed heartbreaking, but a good read for anyone planning to visit as a tourist. I really can't encourage you enough to limit your sightseeing in the "hot" neighborhoods of the Castro, Mission, SOMA, downtown by the Ferry Building and Wharf etc. I lived in SF for 17 years and that article cuts to the bone. I go back on business every week supporting customers in the start-up space and every week I'm happy to get out and come back home. But I spend all my time in the epicenter of everything that's gone "wrong" in SF..but..but..but, there are still places in town and beyond that still remain close to the ideal of SF that attracted me and my wife way back in the 90s. You probably won't read much about these places in the travel books but neighborhoods like the Richmond (inner and outer), Sunset, Clement Street, 9th and Irving, Golden Gate Park, the beach..I visit friends in these areas and just by virtue of lacking decent public transportation they seem to resist change much better than the neighborhoods closer to town. For me, choose a midweek day and walk from the Panhandle in Golden Gate Park all the way to the beach and back and you can detour to 9th and Irving on the way out and then Clement on the way back (pick your lunch and dinner spots to know when to leave the park on either side). This whole swath is still SF to me. Not sure if current residents would still agree but one of my favorite eateries on Clement around 30th Ave? is PPQ (whole King Crab Vietnamese style). Get the Salt and Pepper version with crab fried rice and garlic noodles on the side (good for 3 people).

And if you leave town and have the time to explore beyond Napa and Sonoma, I highly recommend hwy 128 out to Boonville and Anderson Valley. There are some great Pinots and dry German whites out this way. Time permitting keep driving until you hit the coast and have dinner at Cafe Beaujolais in Mendocino. That coastal area and driving is at least on par with Big Sur and mid week you'll have most of it to yourself. I don't recognize my old neighborhoods in SF anymore but Northern California is still one the greatest and most beautiful places on Earth. Enjoy your trip!
 
zakuivcustom
Posts: 2511
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:32 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Tue May 28, 2019 4:50 pm

LMP737 wrote:
I've been listening to the people are leaving California in droves argument for years. Yet their population keeps increasing,


Come on...we all know the entire population of Mexico (all 129M of them) is moving to California :duck:

LMP737 wrote:
I lived in Orange County back in the late 90's early 2000's. Great place to live, if you had the money. Cost of living was sky high so when the company I was working for made me relocate I did not put up much of a fight.


OC may not be rural NorCal (The like of Yuba City/Chico/Redding), but isn't OC a Republican bastion up until the last election? Although definitely different type of Republicans than those in Bama (i.e. OC Republicans resembled more of those Republicans from Staten Island than one of those economically depressed town in the middle of Bama or Georgia or the state that Bama is very happy to exist call Mississippi).
 
seb146
Posts: 19982
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Tue May 28, 2019 4:55 pm

Homelessness is a problem everywhere. People are not leaving cities in droves because of homelessness. I just spent a week in right wing eastern Oregon and eastern Washington. Guess what? Crime and homelessness are rampant there, too! Does that mean people are leaving right wing small towns because there is homeless problems there? No. People leave low population areas (that just happen to be right wing) for cities because of work and education opportunities.

We live in a high crime area. Right wing, on the coast, few minorities. Blaming "liberals" and minorities is a red herring.
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
BN747
Posts: 6423
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2002 5:48 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Tue May 28, 2019 4:56 pm

EA CO AS wrote:
seb146 wrote:
The same could be said for brain dead conservative policies in places like Phoenix, Dallas, Miami, Detroit, St. Louis, Houston, New Orleans, Salt Lake City.......


You are once again talking out your ass. I live in the metro Phoenix area and it’s booming, with a budget surplus, and people are leaving CA in droves to come here.


Yeah, the ones that can't cut it here...I know a couple that followed your cue a year ago, it appears because of that very reason - a divorce is imminent.

BN747
"Home of the Brave, made by the Slaves..Land of the Free, if you look like me.." T. Jefferson
 
seb146
Posts: 19982
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Tue May 28, 2019 5:02 pm

wingman wrote:
Aesma wrote:
I've never been to SF (will go there in October) but you often get images of typical rows of houses. In a dense city you would expect many of these to give way to bigger buildings.


The article that Apodino posted is indeed heartbreaking, but a good read for anyone planning to visit as a tourist. I really can't encourage you enough to limit your sightseeing in the "hot" neighborhoods of the Castro, Mission, SOMA, downtown by the Ferry Building and Wharf etc. I lived in SF for 17 years and that article cuts to the bone. I go back on business every week supporting customers in the start-up space and every week I'm happy to get out and come back home. But I spend all my time in the epicenter of everything that's gone "wrong" in SF..but..but..but, there are still places in town and beyond that still remain close to the ideal of SF that attracted me and my wife way back in the 90s. You probably won't read much about these places in the travel books but neighborhoods like the Richmond (inner and outer), Sunset, Clement Street, 9th and Irving, Golden Gate Park, the beach..I visit friends in these areas and just by virtue of lacking decent public transportation they seem to resist change much better than the neighborhoods closer to town. For me, choose a midweek day and walk from the Panhandle in Golden Gate Park all the way to the beach and back and you can detour to 9th and Irving on the way out and then Clement on the way back (pick your lunch and dinner spots to know when to leave the park on either side). This whole swath is still SF to me. Not sure if current residents would still agree but one of my favorite eateries on Clement around 30th Ave? is PPQ (whole King Crab Vietnamese style). Get the Salt and Pepper version with crab fried rice and garlic noodles on the side (good for 3 people).

And if you leave town and have the time to explore beyond Napa and Sonoma, I highly recommend hwy 128 out to Boonville and Anderson Valley. There are some great Pinots and dry German whites out this way. Time permitting keep driving until you hit the coast and have dinner at Cafe Beaujolais in Mendocino. That coastal area and driving is at least on par with Big Sur and mid week you'll have most of it to yourself. I don't recognize my old neighborhoods in SF anymore but Northern California is still one the greatest and most beautiful places on Earth. Enjoy your trip!


Should probably start a different thread for this but:

Maybe because we lived there for six or seven years, I never thought 128 was that exciting. The drive along Pacific Highway from Mendocino to Mill Valley is great. Especially around Point Reyes, where the fault line is. I am not a wine guy but there are some great breweries in the North Bay. As far as the city, we always try to go to Japantown to eat. There is also a great Mexican place on either Taraval or Judah between 19th and the beach.
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 9193
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Tue May 28, 2019 5:11 pm

California has been a good economic driver and provider for the United States. San Fransisco in particular has created more wealth and moved the wealth and the jobs it leads to across the USA.

As much as people want to complain about California, you cannot deny that. Texas and Arizona, among many others, have been direct beneficiaries of the jobs and industries that California has grown or created.

So gloat all you want, quote the cost of moving vans into and out of the state, the simple truth is California and for certain San Fransisco, has helped many other regions in the USA. California contributes far more to the USA and its coffers than it takes.

California is job creator and an economic powerhouse.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. - W. Shatner
Productivity isn’t about getting more things done, rather it’s about getting the right things done, while doing less. - M. Oshin
 
wingman
Posts: 3696
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 4:25 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Tue May 28, 2019 5:17 pm

seb146 wrote:
Should probably start a different thread for this but:


I hear you, I just don't want the guy to spend a week walking around Market and the Wharf. That would be an unfortunate impression of SF. Now a bike ride out to GG Park listening to Santana, Janice and some Journey and would be closer to my own memory.

PS Aesma: go to La Taqueria on 25th and Mission if you want to see what a burrito really is. On the side make sure to get a small corn quesadilla with carne asada (trust me, you won't find that shit in Paris).
 
LMP737
Posts: 5900
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Tue May 28, 2019 5:25 pm

Tugger wrote:
California has been a good economic driver and provider for the United States. San Fransisco in particular has created more wealth and moved the wealth and the jobs it leads to across the USA.

As much as people want to complain about California, you cannot deny that. Texas and Arizona, among many others, have been direct beneficiaries of the jobs and industries that California has grown or created.

So gloat all you want, quote the cost of moving vans into and out of the state, the simple truth is California and for certain San Fransisco, has helped many other regions in the USA. California contributes far more to the USA and its coffers than it takes.

California is job creator and an economic powerhouse.

Tugg


Very true. In fact did you know that the economy of California is worth more than Russia's? A country with abundant natural resources and three times the population.
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 11530
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Tue May 28, 2019 5:27 pm

Thanks for the advice ah ah, I'll be there two weeks, the initial reason is a wedding so I have not planned much yet.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
User avatar
Francoflier
Posts: 4819
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2001 12:27 pm

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Tue May 28, 2019 8:10 pm

So SF is a victim of its own success and has become so popular that people have to go further afield to find cheaper housing?

Yeah, those out of control commies have really done a number on that place now, haven't they...
:rotfl:
I'll do my own airline. With Blackjack. And hookers. In fact, forget the airline.
 
jetwet1
Posts: 2823
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:42 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Tue May 28, 2019 8:18 pm

Hang on a second, I am seeing certain members posting here that the wacky liberals are running the poor folk out of the bay area due to rising housing costs, there is a need for affordable housing for everyone etc....In my mind, the current situation is a capitalist system at work and what they are suggesting is a socialist solution to a free market problem....

I am confused, I thought socialism was bad ????


BTW, there is a solution to high housing prices...Companies have to pay more to attract employees, heck my wife is employees by a Bay area bank, paying Bay area wages while living in NV...Best of both worlds...
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 17129
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Tue May 28, 2019 9:56 pm

OriginalFalcon wrote:
The loony left?


This is what I find so hilarious about American politics. The right wing (very) conservative Republicans complain about the Democrats using terms like 'socialists', 'libtards' and 'loony left'.

Newsflash - there is no left wing politics in America. In most of the rest of the World, the Democrats would be a centrist party at worst.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
User avatar
stl07
Posts: 1416
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 8:57 pm

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Tue May 28, 2019 10:02 pm

scbriml wrote:
OriginalFalcon wrote:
The loony left?


This is what I find so hilarious about American politics. The right wing (very) conservative Republicans complain about the Democrats using terms like 'socialists', 'libtards' and 'loony left'.

Newsflash - there is no left wing politics in America. In most of the rest of the World, the Democrats would be a centrist party at worst.

Communist is also thrown around a lot when describing democrats :lol:

^^Exactly, I was reading about the Conservative party in Britain and they seemed more left wing than some of the Democrats
Interesting how every thread is spammed with "bring back paid membership, there are too many spammers"
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 9163
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Tue May 28, 2019 10:03 pm

LMP737 wrote:
Tugger wrote:
California has been a good economic driver and provider for the United States. San Fransisco in particular has created more wealth and moved the wealth and the jobs it leads to across the USA.

As much as people want to complain about California, you cannot deny that. Texas and Arizona, among many others, have been direct beneficiaries of the jobs and industries that California has grown or created.

So gloat all you want, quote the cost of moving vans into and out of the state, the simple truth is California and for certain San Fransisco, has helped many other regions in the USA. California contributes far more to the USA and its coffers than it takes.

California is job creator and an economic powerhouse.

Tugg


Very true. In fact did you know that the economy of California is worth more than Russia's? A country with abundant natural resources and three times the population.


It’s stronger even than that - the CA economy overtook the UK in 2018, with 20+ million fewer in population.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 9163
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Tue May 28, 2019 10:05 pm

scbriml wrote:
OriginalFalcon wrote:
The loony left?


This is what I find so hilarious about American politics. The right wing (very) conservative Republicans complain about the Democrats using terms like 'socialists', 'libtards' and 'loony left'.

Newsflash - there is no left wing politics in America. In most of the rest of the World, the Democrats would be a centrist party at worst.


This should not be surprising - only 36% of Americans hold a valid passport. The fishbowl lens view of the world is indeed difficult to overcome.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 9163
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Tue May 28, 2019 10:12 pm

zakuivcustom wrote:
Aesma wrote:
I've never been to SF (will go there in October) but you often get images of typical rows of houses. In a dense city you would expect many of these to give way to bigger buildings.


I would say Earthquake resistance would be the issue - i.e. the additional cost is definitely astronomical if you want to build a mid-height (i.e. ~10 floors) building. If you want to go taller, though (i.e. 30+ floors), you then run into NIMBY issues.

It's the same reason why you see tons of tall buildings in Hong Kong but not Tokyo (Although Tokyo is more comparable to LA Basin - i.e. some tall building in the city center, a few tall buildings in some office district, then otherwise miles and miles of sprawls).


SF firms have long experience building for earthquakes, I would argue the cost of doing business and construction are more limiting factors.

And I’m not sure when you were last in Tokyo, but it is basically Manhattan fanned out over a 2000 sq km area. 80% or more of buildings in this photo are 8 or more floors.

Image
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
SL1200MK2
Posts: 53
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 11:00 pm

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Tue May 28, 2019 11:38 pm

You see, us in SF prefer it this way as it keeps out stupid rednecks. I'd take homeless junkies any day over the filth that comes from the south.
 
irelayer
Posts: 1115
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:34 pm

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Tue May 28, 2019 11:54 pm

stratclub wrote:
Spar wrote:
"Looney" is a pretty good description for anyone who repeatedly rants about a place they don't know very much about.

What you "Loony" Liberals can't seam to understand is that there are thousands of homeless individuals that need our help and you want to throw open the borders so that everyone including drug smugglers, human smugglers and hard core criminals should have unrestricted access to our country. And yes, I understand about places like San Francisco.

My own city of Seattle is suffering from the decline caused by Liberal agendas. What we need to do is take care of American citizens first. I could care less about people that have no right to our country when there are American born citizens that are living a marginalized existence.

I get so tired of you Liberals trying to turn America into a third world country. Americans are all ready crapping in the streets in San Fransisco and Seattle just like they do in India. When will you people have had enough of destroying America?


I had a co-worker once. Let's call him Larry. All Larry wanted to do is rant and rave about the new laws passed in California. So he got a list of them from some website and started getting really angry as he went down the list. California is doing this, California is doing that. Larry lived in Florida. I told Larry that he didn't have to live in California if he didn't want to. Don't be Larry.

But seriously Larry Jr...this is the thing that really gets me. Why don't you do something to fix the problem? It isn't going to be fixed by itself.

You have a right-wing President with extremist tendencies, a majority in the Senate (you wasted your dominance of both houses bickering) AND now you have a right leaning court for the first time in a while. No excuses Larry Jr. If all of you righties stopped ranting and raving (same goes for the left by the way) and started doing something we'd be a lot better off. Come up with a better solution and stop complaining.
 
dfwjim1
Posts: 2164
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2011 8:46 pm

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Wed May 29, 2019 12:37 am

Pi7472000 wrote:
EA CO AS wrote:
seb146 wrote:
The same could be said for brain dead conservative policies in places like Phoenix, Dallas, Miami, Detroit, St. Louis, Houston, New Orleans, Salt Lake City.......


You are once again talking out your ass. I live in the metro Phoenix area and it’s booming, with a budget surplus, and people are leaving CA in droves to come here.


I am Phoenix now and.it is awful! Feels like horrible suburban sprawl with no central core. One of the worst U.S. cities I have visited.


I know...I have a friend who moved from the Bay Area to Phoenix. I visited him last year and I am still asking myself why he moved to such a wasteland.
 
flyguy89
Posts: 2534
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:43 pm

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Wed May 29, 2019 2:29 am

jetwet1 wrote:
Hang on a second, I am seeing certain members posting here that the wacky liberals are running the poor folk out of the bay area due to rising housing costs, there is a need for affordable housing for everyone etc....In my mind, the current situation is a capitalist system at work and what they are suggesting is a socialist solution to a free market problem....

I am confused, I thought socialism was bad ????


BTW, there is a solution to high housing prices...Companies have to pay more to attract employees, heck my wife is employees by a Bay area bank, paying Bay area wages while living in NV...Best of both worlds...

I really don't see how that's the case when "capitalist" builders are straining at the neck to build more in a market with so much spent up demand, yet are stymied by local regulations. If the current situation was indeed the capitalist system at work, you'd be seeing A LOT more housing construction in SF.

Aaron747 wrote:
zakuivcustom wrote:
Aesma wrote:
I've never been to SF (will go there in October) but you often get images of typical rows of houses. In a dense city you would expect many of these to give way to bigger buildings.


I would say Earthquake resistance would be the issue - i.e. the additional cost is definitely astronomical if you want to build a mid-height (i.e. ~10 floors) building. If you want to go taller, though (i.e. 30+ floors), you then run into NIMBY issues.

It's the same reason why you see tons of tall buildings in Hong Kong but not Tokyo (Although Tokyo is more comparable to LA Basin - i.e. some tall building in the city center, a few tall buildings in some office district, then otherwise miles and miles of sprawls).


SF firms have long experience building for earthquakes, I would argue the cost of doing business and construction are more limiting factors.

And I’m not sure when you were last in Tokyo, but it is basically Manhattan fanned out over a 2000 sq km area. 80% or more of buildings in this photo are 8 or more floors.

Image

SF should definitely take a page out of Tokyo's playbook. Also being a large, expensive city it has still managed to keep average rents for a one-bedroom apartment far below SF.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 9163
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Wed May 29, 2019 2:34 am

flyguy89 wrote:
jetwet1 wrote:
Hang on a second, I am seeing certain members posting here that the wacky liberals are running the poor folk out of the bay area due to rising housing costs, there is a need for affordable housing for everyone etc....In my mind, the current situation is a capitalist system at work and what they are suggesting is a socialist solution to a free market problem....

I am confused, I thought socialism was bad ????


BTW, there is a solution to high housing prices...Companies have to pay more to attract employees, heck my wife is employees by a Bay area bank, paying Bay area wages while living in NV...Best of both worlds...

I really don't see how that's the case when "capitalist" builders are straining at the neck to build more in a market with so much spent up demand, yet are stymied by local regulations. If the current situation was indeed the capitalist system at work, you'd be seeing A LOT more housing construction in SF.

Aaron747 wrote:
zakuivcustom wrote:

I would say Earthquake resistance would be the issue - i.e. the additional cost is definitely astronomical if you want to build a mid-height (i.e. ~10 floors) building. If you want to go taller, though (i.e. 30+ floors), you then run into NIMBY issues.

It's the same reason why you see tons of tall buildings in Hong Kong but not Tokyo (Although Tokyo is more comparable to LA Basin - i.e. some tall building in the city center, a few tall buildings in some office district, then otherwise miles and miles of sprawls).


SF firms have long experience building for earthquakes, I would argue the cost of doing business and construction are more limiting factors.

And I’m not sure when you were last in Tokyo, but it is basically Manhattan fanned out over a 2000 sq km area. 80% or more of buildings in this photo are 8 or more floors.

Image

SF should definitely take a page out of Tokyo's playbook. Also being a large, expensive city it has still managed to keep average rents for a one-bedroom apartment far below SF.


That has little to do with development policy and more to do with 28 years of economic stagnation. In the 1980s Tokyo was more expensive than Manhattan.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
seb146
Posts: 19982
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Wed May 29, 2019 2:41 am

Aaron747 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
jetwet1 wrote:
Hang on a second, I am seeing certain members posting here that the wacky liberals are running the poor folk out of the bay area due to rising housing costs, there is a need for affordable housing for everyone etc....In my mind, the current situation is a capitalist system at work and what they are suggesting is a socialist solution to a free market problem....

I am confused, I thought socialism was bad ????


BTW, there is a solution to high housing prices...Companies have to pay more to attract employees, heck my wife is employees by a Bay area bank, paying Bay area wages while living in NV...Best of both worlds...

I really don't see how that's the case when "capitalist" builders are straining at the neck to build more in a market with so much spent up demand, yet are stymied by local regulations. If the current situation was indeed the capitalist system at work, you'd be seeing A LOT more housing construction in SF.

Aaron747 wrote:

SF firms have long experience building for earthquakes, I would argue the cost of doing business and construction are more limiting factors.

And I’m not sure when you were last in Tokyo, but it is basically Manhattan fanned out over a 2000 sq km area. 80% or more of buildings in this photo are 8 or more floors.

Image

SF should definitely take a page out of Tokyo's playbook. Also being a large, expensive city it has still managed to keep average rents for a one-bedroom apartment far below SF.


That has little to do with development policy and more to do with 28 years of economic stagnation. In the 1980s Tokyo was more expensive than Manhattan.


That and the Japanese are more open and willing to use public transit. Americans want everything now but don't want to pay for it. Americans want 20 lane freeways but don't want anyone else on them.
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 9163
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Wed May 29, 2019 3:36 am

seb146 wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
I really don't see how that's the case when "capitalist" builders are straining at the neck to build more in a market with so much spent up demand, yet are stymied by local regulations. If the current situation was indeed the capitalist system at work, you'd be seeing A LOT more housing construction in SF.


SF should definitely take a page out of Tokyo's playbook. Also being a large, expensive city it has still managed to keep average rents for a one-bedroom apartment far below SF.


That has little to do with development policy and more to do with 28 years of economic stagnation. In the 1980s Tokyo was more expensive than Manhattan.


That and the Japanese are more open and willing to use public transit. Americans want everything now but don't want to pay for it. Americans want 20 lane freeways but don't want anyone else on them.


As you probably know, public transit was pretty commonplace in US cities until the 1950s, replaced by the current failing single-mode development pattern. It’s no mystery why some of the most desirable and valuable neighborhoods in many cities remain the ‘inner’ former streetcar suburbs.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
apodino
Posts: 3484
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 2:11 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Wed May 29, 2019 3:37 am

seb146 wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
I really don't see how that's the case when "capitalist" builders are straining at the neck to build more in a market with so much spent up demand, yet are stymied by local regulations. If the current situation was indeed the capitalist system at work, you'd be seeing A LOT more housing construction in SF.


SF should definitely take a page out of Tokyo's playbook. Also being a large, expensive city it has still managed to keep average rents for a one-bedroom apartment far below SF.


That has little to do with development policy and more to do with 28 years of economic stagnation. In the 1980s Tokyo was more expensive than Manhattan.


That and the Japanese are more open and willing to use public transit. Americans want everything now but don't want to pay for it. Americans want 20 lane freeways but don't want anyone else on them.


If this were anywhere else in the US I would buy this, but we are talking San Francisco which has one of the better developed public transit systems in the country with both the Muni and Bart. If I lived in San Francisco I would be one who would use public transit more than a car.

You do bring up an excellent point which is somehow this nation that had a once great transit system in every city had it decimated by the Automobile lobby. The Auto is a great means of transit, but it seems like only a few big cities in the US (Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Washington, Chicago, and San Francisco) have a public transit network that can serve its people fairly well. I live in the metroplex. The Dart is a good system, but one thing I notice about it is the system seems to be in the background and its almost like you have to go out of your way to find the actual stations. If you don't know the system exists, it makes it hard to really use. And it sadly only covers one side of the metroplex, where Fort Worth just opened the Texrail, but its service area is limited, and Fort Worth is growing like there is no tomorrow. Also of note is that there is no public transit in Arlington, one of the other major cities in the metroplex. You can thank Jerry Jones for that, because by keeping transit out, he can gouge you for parking at Cowboys games.

I would like to see more and more public transit options in this country. We cant keep adding more and more highways. It is only going to delay the inevitable. And I might add, a lot of these highways have been outsourced to foreign companies. Meaning the toll money from a lot of these highways doesn't even go into the highway fund, it goes into the profits of overseas corporations, and out of the reach of American Tax collectors.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 9163
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Wed May 29, 2019 3:41 am

apodino wrote:
seb146 wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:

That has little to do with development policy and more to do with 28 years of economic stagnation. In the 1980s Tokyo was more expensive than Manhattan.


That and the Japanese are more open and willing to use public transit. Americans want everything now but don't want to pay for it. Americans want 20 lane freeways but don't want anyone else on them.


If this were anywhere else in the US I would buy this, but we are talking San Francisco which has one of the better developed public transit systems in the country with both the Muni and Bart. If I lived in San Francisco I would be one who would use public transit more than a car.

You do bring up an excellent point which is somehow this nation that had a once great transit system in every city had it decimated by the Automobile lobby. The Auto is a great means of transit, but it seems like only a few big cities in the US (Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Washington, Chicago, and San Francisco) have a public transit network that can serve its people fairly well. I live in the metroplex. The Dart is a good system, but one thing I notice about it is the system seems to be in the background and its almost like you have to go out of your way to find the actual stations. If you don't know the system exists, it makes it hard to really use. And it sadly only covers one side of the metroplex, where Fort Worth just opened the Texrail, but its service area is limited, and Fort Worth is growing like there is no tomorrow. Also of note is that there is no public transit in Arlington, one of the other major cities in the metroplex. You can thank Jerry Jones for that, because by keeping transit out, he can gouge you for parking at Cowboys games.

I would like to see more and more public transit options in this country. We cant keep adding more and more highways. It is only going to delay the inevitable. And I might add, a lot of these highways have been outsourced to foreign companies. Meaning the toll money from a lot of these highways doesn't even go into the highway fund, it goes into the profits of overseas corporations, and out of the reach of American Tax collectors.


Oh boy, as a former 22-year resident, don’t get me started on all the things wrong with BART.

Image
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
anrec80
Posts: 1813
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:50 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Wed May 29, 2019 4:27 am

seb146 wrote:
There is a world of difference between a 20-something holding a sign on a corner that says "Vietnam Vet Anything Helps" and the non-English speaking people waiting in Home Depot parking lots. Don't know the difference? One is willing to do an honest day's hard work, the other is a right winger just wanting a hand out for nothing.


I now may sound really brutal and inhumane - but I actually do support outlawing and criminalizing such begging activities. Instead of "collecting donations" - go seek work or seek help.
 
anrec80
Posts: 1813
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:50 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Wed May 29, 2019 4:33 am

Francoflier wrote:
Yeah, those out of control commies have really done a number on that place now, haven't they...


There are no "crazy commies" anywhere around, unfortunately. Otherwise they would have solved all these homelessness and similar problems very fast. Yes, there are fast and efficient solutions to this mess, though probably not pretty.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 9163
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Wed May 29, 2019 5:00 am

anrec80 wrote:
Francoflier wrote:
Yeah, those out of control commies have really done a number on that place now, haven't they...


There are no "crazy commies" anywhere around, unfortunately. Otherwise they would have solved all these homelessness and similar problems very fast. Yes, there are fast and efficient solutions to this mess, though probably not pretty.


Of course we can restrict panhandling in certain locations or require evidence of job efforts to obtain public ssistance, but beyond that you’re forcibly relocating people or declaring an entire group of disparate individuals to be a public health hazard. The libertarian implications are massive, so it’s a no-brainer that such proposals have generally been unsuccessful.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
anrec80
Posts: 1813
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:50 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Wed May 29, 2019 5:21 am

Aaron747 wrote:
Of course we can restrict panhandling in certain locations or require evidence of job efforts to obtain public ssistance, but beyond that you’re forcibly relocating people or declaring an entire group of disparate individuals to be a public health hazard. The libertarian implications are massive, so it’s a no-brainer that such proposals have generally been unsuccessful.


I am not talking libertarian approach here - I am talking experience of USSR, where these problems - homelessness and the likes - simply did not exist. At all. They began spreading together with freedoms of 1990s. Things like mendicancy, vagrancy and the likes - were simply outlawed. And it worked very simple - the state would allocate you a home and a job. They may not necessarily be the kind and quality you like, but you go and live where prescribed, and do the work as prescribed, until you are able to find someone else. And it worked - really well.

Hence, if we had such system here - the first police officer will explain to our newly homeless that nobody lives on the street, or in a shelter for that reason. This is out of question entirely - period. The state could allocate a room (not even necessarily full Section 8 apartment), possibly in another area, another city - and you go and live there. Such housing could be built or rented close to, say, farms or food processing industry - which requires large amount of unskilled labor. This is where you will work, if you can't find any way to support yourself on your own.

That's it - very simple, and even humane. Either you find your home yourself, or we will find it. Either you find work yourself, or we will find it. As the saying used to go: "If you do not know how, we'll teach you. If you don't want to - we'll force you". Not pretty - agree.

The reason why this used to work so well is simple. What is the very root cause of these issues? In the USA, these people are falling out of demand and losing access to upward mobility. USSR system, as unpretty as it seems - solved exactly that: these people remained in demand in society, and maintained upward mobility.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 9163
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Wed May 29, 2019 5:28 am

anrec80 wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
Of course we can restrict panhandling in certain locations or require evidence of job efforts to obtain public ssistance, but beyond that you’re forcibly relocating people or declaring an entire group of disparate individuals to be a public health hazard. The libertarian implications are massive, so it’s a no-brainer that such proposals have generally been unsuccessful.


I am not talking libertarian approach here - I am talking experience of USSR, where these problems - homelessness and the likes - simply did not exist. At all. They began spreading together with freedoms of 1990s. Things like mendicancy, vagrancy and the likes - were simply outlawed. And it worked very simple - the state would allocate you a home and a job. They may not necessarily be the kind and quality you like, but you go and live where prescribed, and do the work as prescribed, until you are able to find someone else. And it worked - really well.

Hence, if we had such system here - the first police officer will explain to our newly homeless that nobody lives on the street, or in a shelter for that reason. This is out of question entirely - period. The state could allocate a room (not even necessarily full Section 8 apartment), possibly in another area, another city - and you go and live there. Such housing could be built or rented close to, say, farms or food processing industry - which requires large amount of unskilled labor. This is where you will work, if you can't find any way to support yourself on your own.

That's it - very simple, and even humane. Either you find your home yourself, or we will find it. Either you find work yourself, or we will find it. As the saying used to go: "If you do not know how, we'll teach you. If you don't want to - we'll force you". Not pretty - agree.

The reason why this used to work so well is simple. What is the very root cause of these issues? In the USA, these people are falling out of demand and losing access to upward mobility. USSR system, as unpretty as it seems - solved exactly that: these people remained in demand in society, and maintained upward mobility.


Granted, that may be a salient example, but the US and state constitutions stand resolutely in the way of such measures. That would be extraordinarily difficult to overcome.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
seb146
Posts: 19982
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Wed May 29, 2019 5:42 am

anrec80 wrote:
seb146 wrote:
There is a world of difference between a 20-something holding a sign on a corner that says "Vietnam Vet Anything Helps" and the non-English speaking people waiting in Home Depot parking lots. Don't know the difference? One is willing to do an honest day's hard work, the other is a right winger just wanting a hand out for nothing.


I now may sound really brutal and inhumane - but I actually do support outlawing and criminalizing such begging activities. Instead of "collecting donations" - go seek work or seek help.


I don't understand something:

The whole "safe spaces" is laughed at by the right because "loonatics will still shoot up schools anyway and my guns are more important than life" but "let's pass laws about handing money to beggars on street corners because that will solve the problem". It is the same solution but one is endorsed by the right and the other is laughed at by the right.

Maybe we have to start teaching our children that work for money is better than simply standing with a sign? The way they do in third world countries? They teach their kids that work is worth something. Here we simply give money freely because someone is standing. What kind of example does that show? The right enables this kind of reckless behavior.
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
seb146
Posts: 19982
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Wed May 29, 2019 5:48 am

anrec80 wrote:
Hence, if we had such system here - the first police officer will explain to our newly homeless that nobody lives on the street, or in a shelter for that reason. This is out of question entirely - period. The state could allocate a room (not even necessarily full Section 8 apartment), possibly in another area, another city - and you go and live there. Such housing could be built or rented close to, say, farms or food processing industry - which requires large amount of unskilled labor. This is where you will work, if you can't find any way to support yourself on your own.

That's it - very simple, and even humane. Either you find your home yourself, or we will find it. Either you find work yourself, or we will find it. As the saying used to go: "If you do not know how, we'll teach you. If you don't want to - we'll force you". Not pretty - agree.


We have that system in the United States. The homeless in large cities are given a one way bus ticket to anywhere else with a lower population. Too bad if they don't like it, that is what they are given. Whether they are mentally ill or simply can not pay rent. Since they are not allowed to sleep in their car, they are forced to move to somewhere they are. Too damn bad if they are forced to keep moving. Just like Soviet Russia. What a country! What a Christian thing to do! United Christian States Of America! MAGA! and all that crap.....
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
anrec80
Posts: 1813
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:50 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Wed May 29, 2019 5:50 am

Aaron747 wrote:
Granted, that may be a salient example, but the US and state constitutions stand resolutely in the way of such measures. That would be extraordinarily difficult to overcome.


I am not a constitutional lawyer, but I do not see why at the state level something similar cannot be implemented. In many legal areas, there is a notion of residency (e.g. where you live). There is no reason why an individual state cannot criminalize behaviors such as begging, or being a factual resident in public property (i.e. streets, parks, shelter), and not in a place you own, rent, have access to, or assigned to you. And a state also can tie providing you your place to your on-the-job performance, and penalize for continued steady unwillingness to perform. American legislature system is 1000 years old, and there are ways to implement most of similar measures, this or another way, by either writing them in legislature and/or setting court precedents.
 
anrec80
Posts: 1813
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:50 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Wed May 29, 2019 6:01 am

seb146 wrote:
The whole "safe spaces" is laughed at by the right because "loonatics will still shoot up schools anyway and my guns are more important than life" but "let's pass laws about handing money to beggars on street corners because that will solve the problem". It is the same solution but one is endorsed by the right and the other is laughed at by the right.


This is not the whole solution, but part of it. The only allowed way in the society to get money is to give something or do something for someone in exchange, not beg. What’s up with that?

seb146 wrote:
Maybe we have to start teaching our children that work for money is better than simply standing with a sign? The way they do in third world countries? They teach their kids that work is worth something.


Sounds like a great theory, but not every parent teaches their kid that. And some kids don’t learn from parents.

seb146 wrote:
Here we simply give money freely because someone is standing.


Well - don’t give. I never do, to anyone.
 
anrec80
Posts: 1813
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:50 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Wed May 29, 2019 6:05 am

seb146 wrote:
We have that system in the United States. The homeless in large cities are given a one way bus ticket to anywhere else with a lower population.


Except this is not even a half-ass. They later come back by cargo trains.

seb146 wrote:
Too bad if they don't like it, that is what they are given. Whether they are mentally ill or simply can not pay rent. Since they are not allowed to sleep in their car, they are forced to move to somewhere they are.

They should sleep not in a car, but in a residential place. This is the law requirement, sorry. Mentally ill and can’t live in a normal society with all its laws - well, just as anywhere else, there is confinement to an institution.

seb146 wrote:
Too damn bad if they are forced to keep moving. Just like Soviet Russia. What a country! What a Christian thing to do! United Christian States Of America! MAGA! and all that crap.....

They should not move, but work. They are free to move of course, if they can support themselves.
 
SL1200MK2
Posts: 53
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 11:00 pm

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Wed May 29, 2019 6:24 am

anrec80 wrote:
seb146 wrote:
There is a world of difference between a 20-something holding a sign on a corner that says "Vietnam Vet Anything Helps" and the non-English speaking people waiting in Home Depot parking lots. Don't know the difference? One is willing to do an honest day's hard work, the other is a right winger just wanting a hand out for nothing.


I now may sound really brutal and inhumane - but I actually do support outlawing and criminalizing such begging activities. Instead of "collecting donations" - go seek work or seek help.


Well, as I’m sure it’s obvious, I’m quite liberal and live here in SF. However, I can understand why you’d say that. It can get a bit exhausting.

The issue is that even if this were to happen, these folks can’t pay fines, and there isn’t room in the jails.
Certainly, something must be done as this is working, but I don’t think jail would work, nor is it possible really.
 
Spar
Posts: 313
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2019 7:37 pm

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Wed May 29, 2019 7:14 am

SL1200MK2 wrote:
The issue is that even if this were to happen, these folks can’t pay fines, and there isn’t room in the jails.
Certainly, something must be done as this is working, but I don’t think jail would work, nor is it possible really.

Exactly.
The cycle in San Francisco is: the police cite them, they don't show up for court on their infraction, the court issues a warrant with a $250 bond and when the police make further contacts with them they don't bring them to jail until the bond amount is over $1,000 because it's just a waste of an officer's time. So dude goes on about his business until he has enough warrants for the SFPD to bring him in (some cop is having a slow day) and he or she goes before a referee (for this low level stuff they don't even get a real judge), the court then might order dude to community service work to pay off a discounted $200.00 fine (there is no chance these people will pay the fine). Dude goes on his way and if this is his 5th or so time he might actually do the community service work, but probably not because he just never gets around to showing up for the work. Eventually he gets a 30 or 45 day sentence and his slate is wiped clean so that he can start all over again (30 days with good behavior credit translates to 15 days in jail). The smarter ones try to manage it so that when they get their little stretches inside it happens in the winter when it's raining anyway.

But keep on mind that this jail time is not trivial to the homeless person, they lose everything they own every time. From a homeless person's point of view, the purpose of the police department is to make sure they never have anything; no car, no bicycle, no bedding no extra clothes, no boom boxes, no nothing. It all gets taken away regularly.

It costs something like $60,000 a year to keep someone incarcerated so it's cheaper to just give them general assistance and offer them healthcare and dry out programs. There is no such thing as "confinement to an institution" as anrec thinks, because there are no institutions (except for the limited bed space available for the severely mentally handicapped or the criminally insane); Ronald Reagan ended the "institutions".
 
zakuivcustom
Posts: 2511
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:32 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Wed May 29, 2019 12:50 pm

seb146 wrote:
That and the Japanese are more open and willing to use public transit. Americans want everything now but don't want to pay for it. Americans want 20 lane freeways but don't want anyone else on them.


It's not necessarily "more open" but rather they use public transit as a necessity. There's a reason why NYC Subway is used by more people than all the other public transit system in US combined - there's simply no room for cars to go around in city center, and a parking space is at a high premium.

Also, keep in mind that tax/fees of owning a car (along with gasoline) in Japan is a lot higher than US. There's a reason why "kei car" exist in Japan - much lower tax and insurance. Compare that to US where there's zero incentive for people to not drive their F350 for daily commute living in the city.

Aaron747 wrote:
Oh boy, as a former 22-year resident, don’t get me started on all the things wrong with BART.


Come on...for all of BART's problem, it's still better than LA's Metro System.

anrec80 wrote:
There are no "crazy commies" anywhere around, unfortunately. Otherwise they would have solved all these homelessness and similar problems very fast. Yes, there are fast and efficient solutions to this mess, though probably not pretty.


Like sending them to gulags, Russian style?

Or, do things the Chinese way, aka "What problem?" by just moving those people to somewhere where they can't be seen?

Of course...there's the American way, aka just bomb (or shoot) them all.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/rolandtritsch/40380161934
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 17296
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Wed May 29, 2019 10:13 pm

dfwjim1 wrote:
Pi7472000 wrote:
EA CO AS wrote:

You are once again talking out your ass. I live in the metro Phoenix area and it’s booming, with a budget surplus, and people are leaving CA in droves to come here.


I am Phoenix now and.it is awful! Feels like horrible suburban sprawl with no central core. One of the worst U.S. cities I have visited.


I know...I have a friend who moved from the Bay Area to Phoenix. I visited him last year and I am still asking myself why he moved to such a wasteland.

Image
E pur si muove -Galileo
 
DLFREEBIRD
Posts: 1001
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2015 6:07 pm

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Sat Jun 01, 2019 7:45 am

stl07 wrote:
seb146 wrote:
The same could be said for brain dead conservative policies in places like Phoenix, Dallas, Miami, Detroit, St. Louis, Houston, New Orleans, Salt Lake City.......

Huh? Every city you just named is dominated by liberals and Democrats.
i lived in many of those states.
Salt Lake City, is not dominated by liberals its dominated by conservative Mormons that vote republican. Miami is dominated by Republicans, for the past 30 years, they believe in capitalism and voting republican since most came from Cuba. Houston, is definitely conservative at least in the suburbs. the other cities i haven't lived in.
 
seb146
Posts: 19982
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Sat Jun 01, 2019 4:17 pm

DLFREEBIRD wrote:
stl07 wrote:
seb146 wrote:
The same could be said for brain dead conservative policies in places like Phoenix, Dallas, Miami, Detroit, St. Louis, Houston, New Orleans, Salt Lake City.......

Huh? Every city you just named is dominated by liberals and Democrats.
i lived in many of those states.
Salt Lake City, is not dominated by liberals its dominated by conservative Mormons that vote republican. Miami is dominated by Republicans, for the past 30 years, they believe in capitalism and voting republican since most came from Cuba. Houston, is definitely conservative at least in the suburbs. the other cities i haven't lived in.


And the homeless problem in those cities is just as bad or worse than San Francisco. The last time we were in SLC, we got off FrontRunner downtown and what we saw shocked me. That is hard to do having seen all that before. Drug deals, hookers, needles, people passed out in doorways..... And it was mid-morning.
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 17296
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Sat Jun 01, 2019 4:28 pm

seb146 wrote:
DLFREEBIRD wrote:
stl07 wrote:
Huh? Every city you just named is dominated by liberals and Democrats.
i lived in many of those states.
Salt Lake City, is not dominated by liberals its dominated by conservative Mormons that vote republican. Miami is dominated by Republicans, for the past 30 years, they believe in capitalism and voting republican since most came from Cuba. Houston, is definitely conservative at least in the suburbs. the other cities i haven't lived in.


And the homeless problem in those cities is just as bad or worse than San Francisco. The last time we were in SLC, we got off FrontRunner downtown and what we saw shocked me. That is hard to do having seen all that before. Drug deals, hookers, needles, people passed out in doorways..... And it was mid-morning.

SLC ironically ended up being the model for fixing its homeless problem...at least temporarily. They just gave homeless housing, and it worked phenomenally well, at least for the existing homeless population. The problem is it didn't fix the pipeline that continually adds more homeless to the streets of America.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKCN1P41EQ
E pur si muove -Galileo
 
DLFREEBIRD
Posts: 1001
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2015 6:07 pm

Re: Impact of Loony Left Policies on San Francisco

Sat Jun 01, 2019 4:43 pm

seb146 wrote:
DLFREEBIRD wrote:
stl07 wrote:
Huh? Every city you just named is dominated by liberals and Democrats.
i lived in many of those states.
Salt Lake City, is not dominated by liberals its dominated by conservative Mormons that vote republican. Miami is dominated by Republicans, for the past 30 years, they believe in capitalism and voting republican since most came from Cuba. Houston, is definitely conservative at least in the suburbs. the other cities i haven't lived in.


And the homeless problem in those cities is just as bad or worse than San Francisco. The last time we were in SLC, we got off FrontRunner downtown and what we saw shocked me. That is hard to do having seen all that before. Drug deals, hookers, needles, people passed out in doorways..... And it was mid-morning.



your all over the place, so you think SALT LAKE CITY has a homeless problem, where have you been since 1980? when Reagan changed everything when he stopped the federal government from funding mental institutions , that resulted in people rooming the street and talking to themselves. You find that in ever state since 1980. why cherry pick some states when it's happening in all states.

both parties are to blame, since this has been going on for 40 years.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: abfr1, GalaxyFlyer and 20 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos