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.
And it’s a PITA for a bunch of people. My point is, and you just agreed at least in part, that the growth and valuation continues unabated. Meanwhile most of 900,000 residents don’t go to the symphony, MoMA, etc. the symphony and Asia Art Museum sure wished the whole population did. But they don’t.
Again, I haven’t denied a thing except the idea that downtown homelessness is destroying San Francisco QOL. It is putting a strain on some aspects for now. But with all the growth and extreme gentrification and unbelievable wealth centering in the City, this challenge will be met ... the City will not be destroyed.
The messiah for the criminals, the violent homeless, for chronic drug abusers, and for the purposefully lazy has spoken. Forget enforcing the laws. To hell with quality of life. Accept it. Accept the worst from the laziest, most violent, most drug addled, purportedly because every square inch of the city "will not be destroyed."
Do you think this apologist would employ the same reasoning, the same yardstick, to his own personal property? "Oh, your house was broken into and a few things were stolen? Don't worry, your house wasn't 'destroyed' and you still have the vast majority of your stuff. It's just a 'strain.' Accept it and move on." Is this an acceptable response to any sane reader?
The messiah for the criminals, the violent homeless, for chronic drug abusers, and for the purposefully lazy has spoken. Forget enforcing the laws. To hell with quality of life. Accept it. Accept the worst from the laziest, most violent, most drug addled, purportedly because every square inch of the city "will not be destroyed."
Do you think this apologist would employ the same reasoning, the same yardstick, to his own personal property? "Oh, your house was broken into and a few things were stolen? Don't worry, your house wasn't 'destroyed' and you still have the vast majority of your stuff. It's just a 'strain.' Accept it and move on." Is this an acceptable response to any sane reader?
I think that's exactly how a sane person reacts to something like a burglary.
No doubt, there is work to do and SF is in need of more intense attention than some other places. It is not being overrun, though. SF is very compact. The part of town causing all the trouble is right next to the main tourist district. So, that amplifies the perception that the problem is bigger. SF is also a walking city, so you have more face-to-face contact with all kinds of people.
The part of town causing all the trouble is right next to the main tourist district.
This is the same gross understatement that Tulemutt keeps making. No, the problem is not limited to the Civic Center area or Union Square. Not even close. Not even remotely close by any stretch of the imagination. I'll tell you the same thing I told Tulemutt: go to Google maps, and start marking of the problem areas and let me know what percentage of the city is affected.
This is the same gross understatement that Tulemutt keeps making. No, the problem is not limited to the Civic Center area or Union Square. Not even close. Not even remotely close by any stretch of the imagination. I'll tell you the same thing I told Tulemutt: go to Google maps, and start marking of the problem areas and let me know what percentage of the city is affected.
Not trying to get into an argument, as they seem to happen here rather easily.
I din't mean the problem is "limited to" those areas. I mean that the area around the Tenderloin is the area represented by that TV report. And yes, that is the area that causes most of the trouble, from what I've seen. Nowhere else do I see any of the "filthy diseased streets overrunning the city."
Characterizations like that are overstated in my opinion. Most of the people making these statements don't live in SF proper either, so they're going on a limited impression or are otherwise motivated.
I live about 10 blocks from the Tenderloin and my neighborhood is spotless, safe and walkable 24 hours a day. I love it! Just one example, I know, but that's how compact cities work. I've seen it in NYC, London, Paris, etc. You make a turn and find yourself unexpectedly in a bad neighborhood.
It is unfortunate that SF's bad neighborhood is in such a prominent position. It's like Hell's Kitchen used to be in NY. It was one block away from the Theater District. SF could maybe take a page from NY in cleaning up parts of the Tenderloin.
Then again, I went to an awesome jazz club the other night on the edge of the Tenderloin and I walked home after the show at about 12:00. It was clear that I was in a different neighborhood and I should be aware of my surroundings, but I wasn't creeped out at all, walking west and up the hill. It got nice again within about 3 blocks.
I din't mean the problem is "limited to" those areas. I mean that the area around the Tenderloin is the area represented by that TV report. And yes, that is the area that causes most of the trouble, from what I've seen. Nowhere else do I see any of the "filthy diseased streets overrunning the city."
I didn't see the TV report, but of course any TV report on filthy diseased streets in SF is going to go there first. Everyone agrees that is the worst area, and it is really, really, really bad. I am not speaking in terms of danger, but in terms of filth, feces, and overt drug use.
Quote:
I live about 10 blocks from the Tenderloin and my neighborhood is spotless, safe and walkable 24 hours a day. I love it!
There *are* spots like that in the city, but also many more areas that are very bad, but not quite as bad as the tenderloin. South of market is a large one that comes to mind. And just bout the entire length of market street is bad to very bad. The Castro, Haigh and Mission have areas that are quite bad. As well as Hayes Valley. I guess it all depend on where you draw the line on calling a neighborhood bad. But again, I am not talking about outright dangerous neighborhoods (we don't have many of those in SF), but neighborhoods with ranting homeless, needles, feces, etc. are all over the place.
Quote:
Then again, I went to an awesome jazz club the other night on the edge of the Tenderloin and I walked home after the show at about 12:00. It was clear that I was in a different neighborhood and I should be aware of my surroundings, but I wasn't creeped out at all, walking west and up the hill. It got nice again within about 3 blocks.
Do you think this apologist would employ the same reasoning, the same yardstick, to his own personal property? "Oh, your house was broken into and a few things were stolen? Don't worry, your house wasn't 'destroyed' and you still have the vast majority of your stuff. It's just a 'strain.' Accept it and move on." Is this an acceptable response to any sane reader?
My childhood home was burglarized twice (that I remember) in San Mateo Park... we basically responded like that, and didn't let it ruin our lives! Maybe my parents eventually installed a better alarm system, but it wasn't the end of the world. Just a few things were taken, and we were all unharmed/not home.
How do you think people should respond to personal theft? Have you ever had anything stolen, and if so, did you allow it to vastly affect your life? In addition to those burglaries at our home, I've had my car broken into more than once, and again didn't let it bother me that much. I just make sure not to leave valuables in the car.
I didn't see the TV report, but of course any TV report on filthy diseased streets in SF is going to go there first. Everyone agrees that is the worst area, and it is really, really, really bad. I am not speaking in terms of danger, but in terms of filth, feces, and overt drug use.
There *are* spots like that in the city, but also many more areas that are very bad, but not quite as bad as the tenderloin. South of market is a large one that comes to mind. And just bout the entire length of market street is bad to very bad. The Castro, Haigh and Mission have areas that are quite bad. As well as Hayes Valley. I guess it all depend on where you draw the line on calling a neighborhood bad. But again, I am not talking about outright dangerous neighborhoods (we don't have many of those in SF), but neighborhoods with ranting homeless, needles, feces, etc. are all over the place.
Must have been the Black Cat. A great place.
Yes! Black Cat. Awesome place. I almost didn't go because of the neighborhood, but some people at work highly recommended it. It's actually pretty fancy. Not what you'd expect in the worst neighborhood in SF.
And I know what you mean about South of Market. That's a construction zone, though. As the construction winds down and people move back in, it should improve, right?
I think Hayes Valley is nice! I heard it used to be ghetto from a guy at the bar at Absinthe a few weeks ago, when I told him I walked there from Pac Heights. He who told me I wouldn't have done that about 15 years ago.
Mission seems a little gritty, but not filthy to me. I checked out The Alamo Theater (Texas transplant) there and it's a nice one. The street is lively and busy. I'm much more comfortable in a gritty kind of environment when there are a lot of people around.
When I first moved into my place, I walked for blocks and blocks in every direction for days, to get to know my way around. I'd go about 10 or more blocks in every direction, grab drinks or something to eat, shop around and come back down different streets. With the exception of a few parts of the Tenderloin, nowhere did I encounter anything on the order that people are describing here as "overrunning the city."
In fact, I mostly saw giant Victorian houses and hip boutiques mixed in with dive bars and restaurants of all levels. There was even a McDonald's with a real drive-through, which people at work told me did not exist anymore here.
So, my admittedly small sample size of roughly 400 square blocks seems to suggest that the nice parts of SF aren't limited to just a few "spots" encircled by many more bad neighborhoods, Just as the TV report suggested, by showing 150 blocks of the Tenderloin to suggest that the opposite was true.
I think that's what Tulemutt was trying to say. At least that's how I read it.
I think that's exactly how a sane person reacts to something like a burglary.
No doubt, there is work to do and SF is in need of more intense attention than some other places. It is not being overrun, though. SF is very compact. The part of town causing all the trouble is right next to the main tourist district. So, that amplifies the perception that the problem is bigger. SF is also a walking city, so you have more face-to-face contact with all kinds of people.
The fact is that large swaths of the central city are a sea of detritus. The point about it being 'only' near the main tourist district isn't necessarily true, and even if it were, San Francisco, simply put, deserves better. Re the 'tourist district' - that also reads important cultural, and economic parts of town. Probably, worthy of some concern. I visit New York and London often, and, as familiar as things are, am always struck with the pre-revolutionary Shanghai vibe, on my return home. One last afterthought, I see you attribute part of the problem to San Francisco being a walking city, 'so you have more face-to-face contact with all kinds of people'. I'm not sure if you're aware of how that comes across. A 'suburban', walled community perspective, is perhaps not the most useful prism through which to contribute an opinion.
The fact is that large swaths of the central city are a sea of detritus. The point about it being 'only' near the main tourist district isn't necessarily true, and even if it were, San Francisco, simply put, deserves better. Re the 'tourist district' - that also reads important cultural, and economic parts of town. Probably, worthy of some concern. I visit New York and London often, and, as familiar as things are, am always struck with the pre-revolutionary Shanghai vibe, on my return home. One last afterthought, I see you attribute part of the problem to San Francisco being a walking city, 'so you have more face-to-face contact with all kinds of people'. I'm not sure if you're aware of how that comes across. A 'suburban', walled community perspective, is perhaps not the most useful prism through which to contribute an opinion.
Yes. I agree that SF deserves better than she gets these days. I also think she is being shortchanged for what she is in shorthand descriptions of "large swaths of detritus." Even the sensationalist TV report that fueled this discussion only focused on a few blocks.
As for using a lens of a "suburban, walled community" to view SF, I have no idea what you are talking about. I made reference only to the fact that this is a walking city and thus, is apt to be judged on a more tactile level than those experience behind the wheel of a personal auto. I, for one, enjoy the street life of SF much more than the auto-centric place I come from.
Yes. I agree that SF deserves better than she gets these days. I also think she is being shortchanged for what she is in shorthand descriptions of "large swaths of detritus." Even the sensationalist TV report that fueled this discussion only focused on a few blocks.
As for using a lens of a "suburban, walled community" to view SF, I have no idea what you are talking about. I made reference only to the fact that this is a walking city and thus, is apt to be judged on a more tactile level than those experience behind the wheel of a personal auto. I, for one, enjoy the street life of SF much more than the auto-centric place I come from.
I suspect we agree on quite a bit, however, the sidewalk traffic aspect being cited as vaguely exceptional pre-supposes a certain view (I note your auto-centric reference). The other two cities I referred to, London and Gotham, also happen to be largely 'walk friendly' towns.
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.
