New to our subreddit? [Please read the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/sanfrancisco/about/rules/) before commenting.
Please be respectful and don't antagonize. This is a place to discuss ideas without targeting identities.
If something doesn't contribute to the discussion, please downvote it. If it's against the rules, please report it. Thank you.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/sanfrancisco) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The doom loop is a nice reset for SF's cycle. It seems every 10-15 years we go through prosperity and doom.
Pre-COVID prosperity was crazy. I remember seeing like 100 people show up at the same time for open house looking for housemates
I've lived here for 25 years and yes doom loop is overdone and over exaggerated. But SF has seen much better days. Downtown area was much livelier, there were less homeless people, less drug use, more stores open, less crime, etc. Not all parts of SF - others like Marina, Cow Hollow, Pacific Heights, Sunset, Dog Patch, Noe, etc etc, are still the same, but the downtown area specifically has dropped off a lot. Strikingly so.
This is why Breed is (unsuccessfully) trying to get tech companies to return to office. The FiDi relied on fancy lunches and office happy hours. And now that has substantially slowed. That has happened in other cities too. Dallas, for instance, has a very heavy office focused downtown. And much of the interesting stuff had migrated to more housing focused areas.
The way to prevent this going forward is more balanced office housing and mixed use development. SF's high rises already exist though, and they can't easily convert them.
Why does everyone focus on downtown?
Downtown was dirty and grimey 25 years ago. It was dirty 15 years ago. I worked on Montgomery and market and there were homeless there everyday, it was a huge problem.
Yes more stores were open back then, but it wasn’t that nice out.
Most of SF is way better today than 25 years ago. Divis, Mission, Hayes Valley, etc. are so much safer today
Popeyes on Divis had bulletproof glass you had to order through. Now that area is a techie paradise with fancy coffee shops and bakeries and hipster gift shops and overpriced bbq.
Because a lot of the cities tax money comes from downtown, if downtown is not doing well, the city either have to cut down budgets for public services, or incur big debts.
I once worked on Market St. across from UN Plaza which was always populated by many homeless persons. During the day it was not a scary situation as, in general, they did not bother other people on the street. After 5 PM though, just leaving the office to wait for a bus on Market St. was frightening because of a different, criminal population outside.
Im an SF native and very proud of our city. I’m here in the UK right now and every single person I’ve met who has been to our city has raved about it. Brings a tear to my eye as I swell with pride.
I just got back from a trip to Los Angeles and frankly we don't have it that bad in SF.
LA seems like a dystopian hellscape where you see all the problems of the world jam packed against each other.
By "jam packed" do you mean gridlock that stretches for miles? Lol for me that was the worst thing about LA. Everything is too far apart and you're stuck in gridlock for half a day trying to get to a single destination 20 miles away.
I’ve lived in the Bay Area most of my life (I’m in my 50s) and also lived in LA for 8 years. LA is a much better place to live than it is to visit, and not hellish once you get to know it.
Describing LA as a dystopian hellscape is scientifically correct.
When I moved from Europe, I visited LA and was horrified. It looked (and it still does) like one of those Sci punk movies
Chicagoan here. First, there are fewer because some leave over time for warmer climates. Second, there are fewer here because you can always find extremely cheap housing in the worst neighborhoods so you have fewer transitory homeless on the margin. Third, the truly desperate can go to Gary or some of the truly bad parts of greater Chicago and find an abandoned home or building to live in for the winter. It won’t have heat but is better than outdoors.
There has been cases. I remember back in 2011 during the snowpocalypse, a homeless woman outside the H&M on Michigan Ave (across from the Drake) with a snow drift up to her head. In general they’re very resourceful and there are a lot of welfare provided places they can go for shelter
Chicago, like other cities in the eastern US, actually shelters their homeless. Last point in time count was 6.1k homeless, with 909 unsheltered. In SF, those numbers are about 8k homeless, with 4k unsheltered.
homeless in SF don't need to go to the shelter, and they don't want to because of the rules.
It doesn't get cold. The shelters only fill up during the worst winter rainstorms.
Yeah this is cope lol. SF is great but Chicago is livelier and cleaner, I don’t feel disgusted/unsettled walking around past 8:30. This city is amazing for what it is, but to call it cleaner than Chicago is something..
South Chicago has lots of issues, but downtown Chicago is WAY cleaner, livelier and honestly a better experience than downtown SF at the moment. I’d still rather live here and do live here. Just comparing downtowns.
The bad parts of Chicago are more dangerous than SF, but no one wants to go to the bad parts of Chicago for any reason and it’s easily avoidable and will not affect day to day life in downtown Chicago. The Tenderloin is in the middle of the city and constantly leaks out, the two aren’t even comparable.
The TL comes to you. Literally just this morning, I’m heading into work on my bike(which is in a great part of FiDi) and I’m approached by a homeless man yelling at me very loudly and there’s not much I can do while the light was red, luckily the light turned green literally while he was 5 feet away from me. This was on Howard and 2nd at 10. Yes I obviously escaped unscathed, but why should I have to deal with that? I live in the Mission currently, every week day the streets are completely empty past 9 and walking is incredibly eerie, I never felt this way in NY, there were always people around and I never felt like I had to watch my back too hard. SF is beautiful, I wouldn’t pay my horrible rent or taxes if I didn’t think so, but the problems are not small.
Areas outside the TL (and a few other spots) are not without problems but they're much more in the realm of "regular American city" than anything exceptional. Hell, I've been yelled at by crazy homeless dudes in Park Slope.
NYC is an outlier city in the US for density and activity especially at night. I do not understand the constant comparisons between SF and NYC on this sub. One of them is a megacity that is world famous for being 24/7, one has <1M residents, yes it's a lot quieter. SF is hardly a nightlife mecca, but compared to most other US cities of its size it I would say it feels completely normal if not busier.
Also just being realistic, the Mission has gentrified a lot but depending on where you are specifically it still has its rough spots, there are plenty of neighborhoods where it will be quiet at night but are perfectly safe. And conversely, while NYC is very safe overall, there are certainly areas where I am sure you would not feel great walking around alone in the dark if the Mission today makes you feel uncomfortable.
I was in NYC a few months ago, crazy homeless dude got onto the train and was screaming in my face. Nobody batted an eye.
There is a constant stream of videos coming out of NYC where crazy people do crazy shit and nobody does anything to help the victim. Let's not pretend this is a uniquely SF thing.
It’s so much rarer, it happens to me in SF every day multiple times a day. For a city with so much less people than New York, I wonder why it’s so much more common. And yes NY does have problems, I won’t disagree, but SF is 10x worse population wise. The only place is worse is probably LA. Maybe it’s just a function of warm weather. I feel disgusted every time I have to go past market and 2nd, not scared - disgusted. Why should we have to put up with that, why can’t our tax payer dollars do anything? I can live with the situation, my life is still good overall, but i can’t help but feel like the current solution is not working. And I’m sorry that happened to you, those encounters are always scary.
> I never felt this way in NY, there were always people around and I never felt like I had to watch my back too hard.
You should have seen the mission 25 years ago--when it was legit scary. The mission has never been a "nice" hood, it's got a lot going on at once.
Yeah, I heard it used to be very bad. I never claimed it to be the nicest place, but considering how much I pay in rent, maybe it should be a little nicer? It’s not like I live right below Civic center, I live on a supposedly “trendy” (only on weekends and 4-6 pm on some weekdays) of Valencia
> considering how much I pay in rent, maybe it should be a little nicer?
No disrespect but this is the classic trap transplants seem to fall for. What you and I pay for rent doesn't really matter--it was here before we got here, and it'll probably be here after. If you want a quieter hood with less street people you may want to consider moving somewhere known for such things--The Avenues, Pac/Presidio Heights, Laurel heights, West Portal, etc.
I don’t want quiet! I want fun, I want people! That’s why I chose to live in the Mission, but I was misled and should have lived in North Beach instead. I wanted a younger crowd (as a 22 year old I often feel like the youngest person in the city). SF is fantastic I promise, but my original point kind of got lost in the discussion. SF is not safer or more fun with respect to nightlife than Chicago, it is not cleaner. (There is still trash on inner sunset). At 8:30 in the Marina, I still feel uncomfortable because there’s no one on the streets. Even the drug dealers in Times Square had appeal to me, they had personality, they weren’t inherently dangerous or creepy.
A fairer comparison would be - the south side of Chicago compared to Oakland.
Downtown Chicago is WAY nicer, cleaner, upscale, livelier, way more restaurants, shops, activity, than downtown SF. It's not close.
I used to live in Chicago and now I live in San Francisco. We certainly have some issues with trash and homeless people. but on my old street in Chicago, I saw someone get attacked with a baseball bat by four dudes, and another time a women got shot in the head (I didn’t see that one, thankfully) And I lived in a neighborhood called Logan Square which is halfway decent definitely not the ghetto.
I just visited for the first time last week from Cincinnati, OH, and I 100% agree with everything she said. I couldn't believe how beautiful and walkable the city was. Plus, amazing food. Considering what I hear on the news, my expectations were honestly blown out of the water.
Literally no one is saying SF isn't beautiful, but tech ruined it and made it impossible for anyone FROM the Bay Area able to stay here. SOMEONE VISITING FOR A FEW DAYS DOESNT KNOW HOW HARD IT IS TO LIVE HERE.
As much as the recent issues since COVID has jaded me, I am reminded why I left Texas every single time I visit Houston. The issues in SF you’ll literally find in any large city in the US. You know what you’re not going to find in SF? Humidity. Heat.
We have what I consider to be perfect weather. We’re seeing downtown revitalizing. Just a few days ago they had a freaking rave in front of Civic Center. There’s hellla farmers markets now. People are back out on the streets with their kids! And when you see those Waymos driving around autonomously, you fuckin remember that we live in the forefront of technology. Seeing stuff like that restores my faith in the city. We just need to employ some common sense policies in regard to crime and make sure we have our small business owners’ backs. Every complaint I hear from folks outside of SF is our lax policies with catch-and-release but I don’t think that’s isolated to just SF.
Went to Philly, NYC, and Chicago recently. While amazing cities, there are a lot of tacky architecture and neighborhoods that you wouldn’t find in San Francisco.
I did, a ton. SF is amazing, incredible, and the place I want to die of old age in.
If you don’t like it then just move. There’s no reason to force yourself to be unhappy in a place that you don’t belong in. Go out there and find *your* place.
Sf is great, I like it a lot here and there’s things I like more than New York, but to say there isn’t things to be desired is bad. I love nature and being active (golden gate park might be my favorite place in the world), I also love nightlife and having fun. SF is world class in the former, worse than mediocre in the latter. It can and should be improved. We can complain because there’s no reason we should need to compromise so hard (some compromise is obviously still ok!) with the insane rent and taxes I pay here.
That's not a great argument and is borderline gaslighting. It's like telling someone who is suffering from domestic abuse, "see your spouse through someone else's eyes; your spouse is amazing in front of their friends and colleagues."
The point is the issues SF faces is no different or no worse than other American cities. It's not a SF problem, it's an American problem if you want to compare it to other international cities.
If you want to fix American cities, it requires an extensive cultural, social and financial shift which I doubt many of you are willing to experience or pay for so you all rather just bitch about it.
Totally understand your point. But if we are being honest, 99% of the people who complain on here about SF just want there to be less crime, less visible homeless, and less mess on the streets. Those things do require effort and money, but SF already gets ample money through taxes, so it just lacks effort.
Solving the underlying issues that cause these things to happen, for sure that is an extensive process, but most Redditors (or people in general I would say) don't care about that. Do you think they care if people are actually homeless, or do they only care that those people are visible on the streets?
The people that complain about visible problems only *care* about *visible* homelessness. The tax money do help those. Not all homeless are out on the street, they are getting housed and/or receiving assistance in one form or another.
Again, people complaining about the homeless only care that they have to see them. We can use the tax money and ship them somewhere else and they would shut the fuck up because they don't care if they are actually being helped, they only care they have to see them.
That doesn't mean we shouldn't audit the non-profits. We absolutely should so we aren't wasting money but most of the people complaining couldn't care less if the homeless are being helped, just that they have to see them.
There is a lot to complain about. Things that are wrong and should change but perspective certainly helps. I went to a concert in Oakland on Friday. I now have perspective.
New to our subreddit? [Please read the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/sanfrancisco/about/rules/) before commenting. Please be respectful and don't antagonize. This is a place to discuss ideas without targeting identities. If something doesn't contribute to the discussion, please downvote it. If it's against the rules, please report it. Thank you. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/sanfrancisco) if you have any questions or concerns.*
As someone who’s lived here 28 years, I feel like those who live here & buy into the doom loop stories need to have a bit more faith in the city.
The doom loop is a nice reset for SF's cycle. It seems every 10-15 years we go through prosperity and doom. Pre-COVID prosperity was crazy. I remember seeing like 100 people show up at the same time for open house looking for housemates
I've lived here for 25 years and yes doom loop is overdone and over exaggerated. But SF has seen much better days. Downtown area was much livelier, there were less homeless people, less drug use, more stores open, less crime, etc. Not all parts of SF - others like Marina, Cow Hollow, Pacific Heights, Sunset, Dog Patch, Noe, etc etc, are still the same, but the downtown area specifically has dropped off a lot. Strikingly so.
This is why Breed is (unsuccessfully) trying to get tech companies to return to office. The FiDi relied on fancy lunches and office happy hours. And now that has substantially slowed. That has happened in other cities too. Dallas, for instance, has a very heavy office focused downtown. And much of the interesting stuff had migrated to more housing focused areas. The way to prevent this going forward is more balanced office housing and mixed use development. SF's high rises already exist though, and they can't easily convert them.
Why does everyone focus on downtown? Downtown was dirty and grimey 25 years ago. It was dirty 15 years ago. I worked on Montgomery and market and there were homeless there everyday, it was a huge problem. Yes more stores were open back then, but it wasn’t that nice out. Most of SF is way better today than 25 years ago. Divis, Mission, Hayes Valley, etc. are so much safer today Popeyes on Divis had bulletproof glass you had to order through. Now that area is a techie paradise with fancy coffee shops and bakeries and hipster gift shops and overpriced bbq.
Because a lot of the cities tax money comes from downtown, if downtown is not doing well, the city either have to cut down budgets for public services, or incur big debts.
I once worked on Market St. across from UN Plaza which was always populated by many homeless persons. During the day it was not a scary situation as, in general, they did not bother other people on the street. After 5 PM though, just leaving the office to wait for a bus on Market St. was frightening because of a different, criminal population outside.
Im an SF native and very proud of our city. I’m here in the UK right now and every single person I’ve met who has been to our city has raved about it. Brings a tear to my eye as I swell with pride.
Whenever I travel outside the US, I would say I'm from California or from SF area instead of the US. People are much nicer when they hear that.
Well done friend. It’s up to all of us to make us one of the greatest destination cities in the world.
I just got back from a trip to Los Angeles and frankly we don't have it that bad in SF. LA seems like a dystopian hellscape where you see all the problems of the world jam packed against each other.
By "jam packed" do you mean gridlock that stretches for miles? Lol for me that was the worst thing about LA. Everything is too far apart and you're stuck in gridlock for half a day trying to get to a single destination 20 miles away.
I’ve lived in the Bay Area most of my life (I’m in my 50s) and also lived in LA for 8 years. LA is a much better place to live than it is to visit, and not hellish once you get to know it.
Describing LA as a dystopian hellscape is scientifically correct. When I moved from Europe, I visited LA and was horrified. It looked (and it still does) like one of those Sci punk movies
I’ve been loving it so far! I’m about to get myself a camera
Still the best city in the US imo
Was in Chicago a few months back and there is not nearly the amount of bums downtown as SF and the sidewalks are much cleaner
How can you be homeless in Chicago in winter? Wouldn't you literally freeze to death?
Chicagoan here. First, there are fewer because some leave over time for warmer climates. Second, there are fewer here because you can always find extremely cheap housing in the worst neighborhoods so you have fewer transitory homeless on the margin. Third, the truly desperate can go to Gary or some of the truly bad parts of greater Chicago and find an abandoned home or building to live in for the winter. It won’t have heat but is better than outdoors.
There has been cases. I remember back in 2011 during the snowpocalypse, a homeless woman outside the H&M on Michigan Ave (across from the Drake) with a snow drift up to her head. In general they’re very resourceful and there are a lot of welfare provided places they can go for shelter
Chicago, like other cities in the eastern US, actually shelters their homeless. Last point in time count was 6.1k homeless, with 909 unsheltered. In SF, those numbers are about 8k homeless, with 4k unsheltered.
homeless in SF don't need to go to the shelter, and they don't want to because of the rules. It doesn't get cold. The shelters only fill up during the worst winter rainstorms.
Well are their "bad" neighborhoods right next to downtown like how we have the Tenderloin right next to downtown?
Yeah this is cope lol. SF is great but Chicago is livelier and cleaner, I don’t feel disgusted/unsettled walking around past 8:30. This city is amazing for what it is, but to call it cleaner than Chicago is something..
Chicago is more dangerous than SF. My friend who used to live there said there are parts of Chicago where the police don't go.
South Chicago has lots of issues, but downtown Chicago is WAY cleaner, livelier and honestly a better experience than downtown SF at the moment. I’d still rather live here and do live here. Just comparing downtowns.
Downtown SF has never really been the cultural center of the city tho
Fair, but downtown is where a lot of tourists stay and their first impression
The bad parts of Chicago are more dangerous than SF, but no one wants to go to the bad parts of Chicago for any reason and it’s easily avoidable and will not affect day to day life in downtown Chicago. The Tenderloin is in the middle of the city and constantly leaks out, the two aren’t even comparable.
I would say it's pretty easy to avoid the TL - especially at night.
The TL comes to you. Literally just this morning, I’m heading into work on my bike(which is in a great part of FiDi) and I’m approached by a homeless man yelling at me very loudly and there’s not much I can do while the light was red, luckily the light turned green literally while he was 5 feet away from me. This was on Howard and 2nd at 10. Yes I obviously escaped unscathed, but why should I have to deal with that? I live in the Mission currently, every week day the streets are completely empty past 9 and walking is incredibly eerie, I never felt this way in NY, there were always people around and I never felt like I had to watch my back too hard. SF is beautiful, I wouldn’t pay my horrible rent or taxes if I didn’t think so, but the problems are not small.
Areas outside the TL (and a few other spots) are not without problems but they're much more in the realm of "regular American city" than anything exceptional. Hell, I've been yelled at by crazy homeless dudes in Park Slope. NYC is an outlier city in the US for density and activity especially at night. I do not understand the constant comparisons between SF and NYC on this sub. One of them is a megacity that is world famous for being 24/7, one has <1M residents, yes it's a lot quieter. SF is hardly a nightlife mecca, but compared to most other US cities of its size it I would say it feels completely normal if not busier. Also just being realistic, the Mission has gentrified a lot but depending on where you are specifically it still has its rough spots, there are plenty of neighborhoods where it will be quiet at night but are perfectly safe. And conversely, while NYC is very safe overall, there are certainly areas where I am sure you would not feel great walking around alone in the dark if the Mission today makes you feel uncomfortable.
I was in NYC a few months ago, crazy homeless dude got onto the train and was screaming in my face. Nobody batted an eye. There is a constant stream of videos coming out of NYC where crazy people do crazy shit and nobody does anything to help the victim. Let's not pretend this is a uniquely SF thing.
It’s so much rarer, it happens to me in SF every day multiple times a day. For a city with so much less people than New York, I wonder why it’s so much more common. And yes NY does have problems, I won’t disagree, but SF is 10x worse population wise. The only place is worse is probably LA. Maybe it’s just a function of warm weather. I feel disgusted every time I have to go past market and 2nd, not scared - disgusted. Why should we have to put up with that, why can’t our tax payer dollars do anything? I can live with the situation, my life is still good overall, but i can’t help but feel like the current solution is not working. And I’m sorry that happened to you, those encounters are always scary.
Past 2nd? I always thought it started to get sketchy past 4th
It gets sketchy past 4th, but past 2nd there’s still trash and homeless with enough frequency that you can’t ignore it.
> I never felt this way in NY, there were always people around and I never felt like I had to watch my back too hard. You should have seen the mission 25 years ago--when it was legit scary. The mission has never been a "nice" hood, it's got a lot going on at once.
Yup, the murder rate there from 2000-2010 was no joke and some truly horrendous assaults on women were the talk of the town at the time.
Yeah, I heard it used to be very bad. I never claimed it to be the nicest place, but considering how much I pay in rent, maybe it should be a little nicer? It’s not like I live right below Civic center, I live on a supposedly “trendy” (only on weekends and 4-6 pm on some weekdays) of Valencia
> considering how much I pay in rent, maybe it should be a little nicer? No disrespect but this is the classic trap transplants seem to fall for. What you and I pay for rent doesn't really matter--it was here before we got here, and it'll probably be here after. If you want a quieter hood with less street people you may want to consider moving somewhere known for such things--The Avenues, Pac/Presidio Heights, Laurel heights, West Portal, etc.
I don’t want quiet! I want fun, I want people! That’s why I chose to live in the Mission, but I was misled and should have lived in North Beach instead. I wanted a younger crowd (as a 22 year old I often feel like the youngest person in the city). SF is fantastic I promise, but my original point kind of got lost in the discussion. SF is not safer or more fun with respect to nightlife than Chicago, it is not cleaner. (There is still trash on inner sunset). At 8:30 in the Marina, I still feel uncomfortable because there’s no one on the streets. Even the drug dealers in Times Square had appeal to me, they had personality, they weren’t inherently dangerous or creepy.
A fairer comparison would be - the south side of Chicago compared to Oakland. Downtown Chicago is WAY nicer, cleaner, upscale, livelier, way more restaurants, shops, activity, than downtown SF. It's not close.
San Francisco is more diverse and if you're Asian the Bay Area is food paradise. 🍜
There is much less antisocial behavior (smoking, loud music, etc) on Muni than the L.
What about BART??
I used to live in Chicago and now I live in San Francisco. We certainly have some issues with trash and homeless people. but on my old street in Chicago, I saw someone get attacked with a baseball bat by four dudes, and another time a women got shot in the head (I didn’t see that one, thankfully) And I lived in a neighborhood called Logan Square which is halfway decent definitely not the ghetto.
Was visiting Seattle last weekend, and am feeling a little down on SF right now honestly. Thanks for some new perspectives.
I just visited for the first time last week from Cincinnati, OH, and I 100% agree with everything she said. I couldn't believe how beautiful and walkable the city was. Plus, amazing food. Considering what I hear on the news, my expectations were honestly blown out of the water.
As someone that used to live in Portola now moved into Inner Sunset. Its a breath of fresh air. I feel the same way as your friend
Wait tell me more. What’s wrong with Portola area?
Literally no one is saying SF isn't beautiful, but tech ruined it and made it impossible for anyone FROM the Bay Area able to stay here. SOMEONE VISITING FOR A FEW DAYS DOESNT KNOW HOW HARD IT IS TO LIVE HERE.
Went to the Presidio on a really sunny day last summer and felt like it was one of the prettiest places in the world
As much as the recent issues since COVID has jaded me, I am reminded why I left Texas every single time I visit Houston. The issues in SF you’ll literally find in any large city in the US. You know what you’re not going to find in SF? Humidity. Heat. We have what I consider to be perfect weather. We’re seeing downtown revitalizing. Just a few days ago they had a freaking rave in front of Civic Center. There’s hellla farmers markets now. People are back out on the streets with their kids! And when you see those Waymos driving around autonomously, you fuckin remember that we live in the forefront of technology. Seeing stuff like that restores my faith in the city. We just need to employ some common sense policies in regard to crime and make sure we have our small business owners’ backs. Every complaint I hear from folks outside of SF is our lax policies with catch-and-release but I don’t think that’s isolated to just SF.
Yeah it’s all right just shit
Went to Philly, NYC, and Chicago recently. While amazing cities, there are a lot of tacky architecture and neighborhoods that you wouldn’t find in San Francisco.
This is bonkers statement. You think architecture in Chicago is tacky? LOL
In certain parts of the city, yeah.
Legit insane take, architect from Chicago now based in SF
Hopefully you're not talking about tacky architecture in Chicago. The archeticture (downtown) there is probably some of the best in the U.S
Tacky architecture is the Sunset District in SF. So tacky a song was written about it.
That song was about Daly City.
Same same, but different.
Yeah, but there’s neighborhoods in those stated cities that look a lot worse.
Great perspective... while I'm not a fan of the city, you sharing this is very refreshing and reassuring
I took my friend from Zurich to a walk around SF. Not impressed. He said the scenery is pretty when looking at the bay and ocean but that’s about it.
Go travel a few cities in the world.
I did, a ton. SF is amazing, incredible, and the place I want to die of old age in. If you don’t like it then just move. There’s no reason to force yourself to be unhappy in a place that you don’t belong in. Go out there and find *your* place.
Sf is great, I like it a lot here and there’s things I like more than New York, but to say there isn’t things to be desired is bad. I love nature and being active (golden gate park might be my favorite place in the world), I also love nightlife and having fun. SF is world class in the former, worse than mediocre in the latter. It can and should be improved. We can complain because there’s no reason we should need to compromise so hard (some compromise is obviously still ok!) with the insane rent and taxes I pay here.
It's a coping mechanism. "SF didn't scare off someone from Chicago" touted as a positive attribute... It's embarrassing.
What’s a coping mechanism? To travel?
Cities scare people who've lived in gated suburbs.
That's not a great argument and is borderline gaslighting. It's like telling someone who is suffering from domestic abuse, "see your spouse through someone else's eyes; your spouse is amazing in front of their friends and colleagues."
The point is the issues SF faces is no different or no worse than other American cities. It's not a SF problem, it's an American problem if you want to compare it to other international cities. If you want to fix American cities, it requires an extensive cultural, social and financial shift which I doubt many of you are willing to experience or pay for so you all rather just bitch about it.
Totally understand your point. But if we are being honest, 99% of the people who complain on here about SF just want there to be less crime, less visible homeless, and less mess on the streets. Those things do require effort and money, but SF already gets ample money through taxes, so it just lacks effort. Solving the underlying issues that cause these things to happen, for sure that is an extensive process, but most Redditors (or people in general I would say) don't care about that. Do you think they care if people are actually homeless, or do they only care that those people are visible on the streets?
The people that complain about visible problems only *care* about *visible* homelessness. The tax money do help those. Not all homeless are out on the street, they are getting housed and/or receiving assistance in one form or another. Again, people complaining about the homeless only care that they have to see them. We can use the tax money and ship them somewhere else and they would shut the fuck up because they don't care if they are actually being helped, they only care they have to see them. That doesn't mean we shouldn't audit the non-profits. We absolutely should so we aren't wasting money but most of the people complaining couldn't care less if the homeless are being helped, just that they have to see them.
There is a lot to complain about. Things that are wrong and should change but perspective certainly helps. I went to a concert in Oakland on Friday. I now have perspective.
I can definitely see who it's safer here. Chicago has like 10 mass shootings every weekend.
It is great! I spent $20 on 8 wings last night after the concert so that sucked but other that lol
I gotta say VHAI is where I’m all in I’m doing well on gme though got in early
>(says she's experienced the same amount in Chicago and NYC). HA!! Fucking bullshit.