Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I clicked the link, saw Fox news on some vague article of San Francisco not being perfect, and clicked off.
The horrors of San Francisco still attract legions of some of the most talented people every year forcing property prices up to 2nd to Manhattan. Whatever is being said in the article is obviously placing different values on what the residents of San Francisco believe is important.
I think there was something about the homeless. The homeless are rampant in San Francisco, but that's for the government to deal with. Everyone freely pays high taxes so they don't have to deal with things like that, unless your friend has a not-for-profit to raise awareness and a fancy ball. The government is not needed for the economy here. The government is the nanny to clean up what nobody else wants to deal with. That's why we have huge blinders to things. Is there a problem....assign it to the government and raise some taxes. Problem solved. Did the government jobs get staffed with a bunch of flunkies that couldn't get it done? That's not my problem, I paid my taxes, I didn't attack the program, I did my part.
That's the main difference in the economies. This Bay Area is the ultimate hedonism for CEOs with an ego. There's nothing too rich, nothing out of line, you just have to pay money for your sins, which many readily do. It's like a subset of libertarian-ism at the very top that acknowledges that after it wreaks havoc, there's a hangover to pay for. Let the uneducated care for one another, here's some programs to do it with.
Beyond that, do not forget your place. We're the most feudal subculture I've ever seen. Introductions are important. Open door offices are non-existent. I remember one job I took where I wasn't allowed a single meeting with my actual boss. You have to know your place. Now, I'm the guy that is fine not having the spotlight and collecting a check. I'm a worker that knows things. That gives me a spot at the table, but I'd be a fool to not allow my handlers distribute credit as they see fit.
People leave all the time. The ones that couldn't cut it. The ones that couldn't keep up. The ones that came for money, got theirs, and cashed out. Threatening to leave and take jobs with falls on deaf ears. Nobody cares. We'll just make more jobs and we've got someone new that's going to pay more rent for your space.
That's the power of having half the country's investment fall within a 50 mile radius.
The worst of us smugly wonder why others don't do the same. Many honestly don't know that this place is different from most of the country. Oh, can't Detroit, Pittsburg and Cleveland all get 50% of the country's investment to fund mostly money losing companies? Quaint, but a loser topic. What's next? Ahh lunch....how many starts did Michellen give it again?
Welcome to paradise of the geeks, Kings Landing, the city of individuals....whatever. Your opinion doesn't matter. Nobody's opinion matters unless it does.
That's why nobody answered. Keeping some touch of places where I used to live is one of the reasons I chat here. I'm converted, but I still want to remember.
I believe no one answered because they are embarrassed for the state. My time working there included on the last trip working in the tourist area along the water where we could see both the GG Bridge and Alcatraz. The homeless defecating on the streets was just unbelievable as well as many other issues. Homeless inside Starbucks with their dogs running loose and on tables was sickening to see and there is no bigger dog lover than myself. I've been in other areas in Cali and I love some of it and find some pretty unlivable but San Fran was beyond despicable and an embarrassment for the state. I'll take some of the issues we see in the southern states over what I've seen in San Fran, LA and Oakland.
One has to keep in mind that the Democratic Party worked very hard to try to "divide and conquer" and the people have spoken and told them "NO!" that "united we will stand". The Dems tried to make the election about "illegals vs citizens", "men vs women", "blacks vs whites", and in an attempt to revive the cold war, "Russia vs America", so it wasn't really "elitists vs deplorables" at all.
The election boiled down to nationalism (everything we are as a people and a country) vs globalism (the selling of everything we are as a people and a country to the highest bidder by our politicians).
The country isn't divided at all like it was played out to be as that was used as a diversion from the real issues involved with this election. Most did not fall for it. "Cream always rises to the top."
I have an engineering degree, so I'm well aware of what a practical degree can achieve. I know people who have both student debt and no job as well. The entire country can't be white collar. There's 330 million of us. If Germany can figure out how to respect and reward their blue collar workers there's no reason we can't.
The problem is that it renders a lot of sociology, psychology and humanities professors redundant. Colleges and universities are in charge of post-secondary education and they won't yield their turf without a fight.
BMW started their own apprenticeship program in SC when they built their plant there. The locals knew nothing about factory work or building cars. SC is also a right to work state (which is why Boeing built there). In NY there are apprentice programs but they are run by unions to control entry into their trades.
US labor law might need updating to make apprentice training actually functional. It needs it anyway. VW negotiated 30,000 job cuts in Germany with its union, replacing some with other projects. Their union is a partner as well as an adversary and US unions should be too. Maybe by giving them board seats like in Germany. Whether US unions can ever be partners in private enterprise is speculative at best.
It's too bad because the Democrats used to be the party of the working man. From FDR to LBJ they had a lock on union households. Today's Democrats no longer need them and, to read some of the "elitist" posts here, feel working people are no longer are good enough for them anyway.
The problem is that it renders a lot of sociology, psychology and humanities professors redundant. Colleges and universities are in charge of post-secondary education and they won't yield their turf without a fight.
BMW started their own apprenticeship program in SC when they built their plant there. The locals knew nothing about factory work or building cars. SC is also a right to work state (which is why Boeing built there). In NY there are apprentice programs but they are run by unions to control entry into their trades.
US labor law might need updating to make apprentice training actually functional. It needs it anyway. VW negotiated 30,000 job cuts in Germany with its union, replacing some with other projects. Their union is a partner as well as an adversary and US unions should be too. Maybe by giving them board seats like in Germany. Whether US unions can ever be partners in private enterprise is speculative at best.
It's too bad because the Democrats used to be the party of the working man. From FDR to LBJ they had a lock on union households. Today's Democrats no longer need them and, to read some of the "elitist" posts here, feel working people are no longer are good enough for them anyway.
The IAM (Machinists union) worked tirelessly with Boeing on a pile of initiatives that resulted in the so called "Joint Programs" through the eighties, nineties and beyond. Boeing was relentless in it's search for techno solutions to their "labor problem," a thinly disguised effort to rid themselves of the human worker wherever and whenever possible. This is the future all workers face, union busting was once a not so technical task, today the machine is the new proletariat and humans have no political voice because of that fact.
Politicians can't "save" jobs any longer with tax breaks, state paid training, or labor pacification programs, and labor is politically cast aside in that realization, today it's all about a new paradigm of technology and its impact on jobs. Sadly, the government nor corporations seem too worried about the facts surrounding that course of events. All of us in the working class are, in that sense, deplorables..
We were in a holding pattern for a long time after WWII. Computing technology originated in the post-war era, but it took decades for it to actually start displacing jobs in large numbers. At the same time our immigration was historically low for 50 years. The Great Depression basically killed immigration, and they didn't start coming again in large numbers, mostly from Latin America, until the 1970s. I was reading a book about U.S. workplaces in the 1970s and there was still a lot of factory work back then, that paid okay... the equivalent today of 1500-2000 a month. There was increasing input from overseas but the primary assembly jobs were holding on in the U.S.
In the 1980s that process really ramped up, factory jobs really started to die. Also we start to see some states getting browner since that Latin American immigration started ramping up in the 70s and hasn't stopped. Is this related? Then college education becomes more of a necessity, but we're not building very many brand-new colleges. The existing ones try to expand but that just increases their costs. Tuition skyrockets.
But for a brief shining moment in the 1990s maybe we were going to be okay! We won the Cold War and it looked like the economy might not be so bad after all because these new computer jobs were coming online.
Then the 2000s hit with a bunch of unpleasantness. Terrorism, coming from the middle east, a culture and religion that few Americans really understand, much less the reasons for the violence. At the same time the technological destruction of jobs starts to hit hard in the 21st century.
Enter Hillary Clinton in 2016, a creature of the establishment with various stains from the grease of the status quo's oily machinations on her clothes. She didn't seem to care and even when she tried to co-opt Bernie's rhetoric, no one believed her... and she told Wall Street it wasn't serious anyway. Then for the past few years, it seems that the Democrats have mostly focused on civil rights issues such as same-sex marriage and transgender rights... as if the economy was better! Can we address that after we have decent jobs that allow us to put away for a rainy day?
What struck me was this: what really matters for jobs: nurturing more entrepreneurs and starter-uppers. I never hear Sanders talk about where employees come from. They come from employers — risk-takers, people ready to take a second mortgage to start a business. If you want more employees, you need more employers, not just government stimulus.
He really didn't get it. He thought that Sanders and Trump were some kind of abberations. He could not understand it. It was simple in reality. Most of us are not entrepreneurs or "starter-uppers," and never can be. There simply CANNOT be more chiefs than Indians. Most of us can't afford to risk the one shelter we have by taking out a 2nd mortgage on it.
For years, basically since the 1980s, Republicans have talked mostly to small business owners, and Democrats have talked solely to "starter-uppers" in Silicon Valley.
Trump (and Sanders) was a message to both - they've both got more Indians than chiefs in both their parties and they need to be listened to.
That said, I think Trump is going to be a terrible president.
I believe no one answered because they are embarrassed for the state. My time working there included on the last trip working in the tourist area along the water where we could see both the GG Bridge and Alcatraz. The homeless defecating on the streets was just unbelievable as well as many other issues. Homeless inside Starbucks with their dogs running loose and on tables was sickening to see and there is no bigger dog lover than myself. I've been in other areas in Cali and I love some of it and find some pretty unlivable but San Fran was beyond despicable and an embarrassment for the state. I'll take some of the issues we see in the southern states over what I've seen in San Fran, LA and Oakland.
Your right, pooping in the street is not ok, but I totally missed that. I guess if you got to go...don't go in my house. Remember when not real friend z totally did that during B2B? So gross.
Maybe the city should build some toilets down there....but not close to my house. Are you starting a petition? I was going to, but I'm so bad at those things...hey maybe you should write it, you're a hella good writer and would do a great job. Let me know if you need any help.
Anyway, everyone already knows California is the best at everything, but we should not harsh on people from other states. That's not nice. It's not ok to do that, you know? Anyway, cool story bro. Love you!!!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
