Ed Lee, 65, SF mayor who had a close relationship with the tech world, has died
techcrunch.com
techcrunch.com
Pretty much everyone dies early if you look at their life expectancy at their last birthday.
http://www.cleveland.com/datacentral/index.ssf/2014/10/us_li...
[1] intended as a general expression of sympathy and sadness, in no way do I wish to imply your question suggested anything otherwise!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirk_Douglas
The average age of death for a US male is 78, which isn't particularly old. Move to Canada and you get a few more years. :-)
No, you've confused life expectancy at birth with average age of death; that is, males who are born today are, on average, expected to live to around 78; when Ed Lee was born, that number was a little over 65.
"Yeah, in 1950 you could die from polio. Half the male population smoked. No seatbelts in cars, ... No treatments for cancer, heart disease... There were a lot of factors. "
(It also doesn't make sense to use life expectancy at @current-age in the year they died, at least if you are trying to portray “premature” death as something other than a near universal norm.)
Who said you should use this as a gauge? That included lots of coal miners who were dying of black lung, etc.
One value isn't a very good indicator. By state and race varies greatly, for example.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_life_ex...
The current life expectancy of an Asian American in California is 86 years old.
Implicitly, all the people in this thread—including you—pointing to the current US male life expectancy at birth.
I just say that if you are going to use life expectancy at birth, at least use one applicable to the birth of the person in question.
Ideally, you’d apply a conditional probability.
https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/768215/conditional-...
If you go to the Social Security site, for example, you can calculate your life expectancy.
https://www.ssa.gov/cgi-bin/longevity.cgi
For a male born on Dec 1, 1952, your current life expectancy is 84 years old.
Life expectancy at birth for males in the US is 75+ (80+ for females) now. In 1950, for males, life expectancy at birth was 65.6 years.
https://www.infoplease.com/life-expectancy-birth-race-and-se...
There were a lot of factors.
I used to think 65 was old. Then I turned 50, and it suddenly seemed kind of young.
-- Born in the last 2 weeks of the Kennedy administration.
Source: SSA.
As for London Breed, I've met her a few times at community gatherings. She seems like she has a good head on her shoulders. We'll see, SF has lots of problems.
What's with mayors and weird campaign videos?
I don't expect improvement anytime soon, but everyone should get on board the YIMBY movement and push hard for change.
SF has a lot of turnover, but the few studies I've seen say it's not particularly high by US standards. Nashville, for one, is higher. (Notably this study is by MSA so it wouldn't consider someone moving from SF to say, Burlingame a departure.) https://www.abodo.com/blog/so-long-to-the-city/
You're right about being able to enjoy the city in many ways. I regularly enjoy it at my leisure, it is 45min door-to-door Bart ride away, and relatively cheap to Uber/Lyft back at any time (Compared to the premium of actually living there).
Edit: I generally agree that SF has many management problems, I just take issue with how this comment was framed. Specifically: "social justice backlash", "villainize hard working Americans", "victimize criminals". I just think that it'd be more constructive if we discussed SF without imposing such a narrow view on a complicated topic. By "references" I meant that it'd be helpful if we had some stories or articles that substantiates these claims of "social justice backlash", "villainizing Americans", "victimizing criminals". Of course it's all relative and I have my own subjective perspective on everything, but I do believe that it's possible for us to discuss this topic without resorting to phrases that trigger knee-jerk emotional responses.
In the simplest case, the 'reference' could just be to live in other cities (not like L.A.). Specifically other cities that weren't all that much in the past decades and had progress in recent years, more or less as an antithesis of SF which I'd categorize as a city that was ahead of its time in 50 years ago and let the hype get too deeply engrained in its psyche and culture and stagnated since, out of a sense of isolation and self superiority.
If you lived in other places and disagree, the meat of our discussion would take entirely different paths.
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/jury-reaches-v...
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/12/06/kate-stei...
Unless, of course, you mean to suggest that juries outside of SF are more apt to ignore the law and the evidence presented.
The different districts have different concerns and often do not overlap, so its hard to get consensus on big items like housing, what to do about the homeless encampments and so no.
Asking for a friend.
Come election time, Lee throws his hat into the ring, to the jeers of people who cried foul.
As for getting on board the YIMBY movement, Fast Co writes that the new mayor "grew up with her grandmother in the city’s housing projects and public housing has been an important part and particular focus of her political career. "
A quick skim of voting records also appears that she supports development: https://sfgov.legistar.com/PersonDetail.aspx?ID=92842&GUID=4....
The best pro-affordable housing policy is plenty of market-rate construction.
While the housing crisis is real in SF, the "YIMBY" movement is a fairly thoughtless, knee-jerk reaction to the problem. In general in SF, developers have been getting exactly what they want since Wille Brown -- they just don't build things that help people who don't have money. SF could use some balance on the other side of the ledger.
[1] http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2014/11/12/150-million-reta...
[2] http://hoodline.com/2017/02/market-street-s-6x6-mall-opens-p...
Wait, what? How is that analogy supposed to work?
Willie Brown : San Francisco :: Donald Trump : ???
Donald Trump is a born-wealthy real estate developer that eventually entered electoral politics, first holding office at an age when people are more likely to retire from electoral politics than begin a career.
Willie Lewis Brown, Jr., was born in segregated Texas, first worked as a shoe-shine boy, became a lawyer, and shortly went into politics, serving 30+ years in the Assembly, about half of it as Speaker. (And a while as kingmaker when the Republicans held a slim majority.)
Trump is perceived as an anti-establishment political figure, Brown was the California political establishment, even when other people held higher offices in the State (and even in the interruption in his time as Speaker.)
Other than both being men, I can't see much that they have in common that would justify the analogy you suggest. They are more opposites than analogs.
But even that hardly supports an analogy to Trump: there are lots of things you can say about Trump, but machine politician isn't one of them.
Brown is unique in many ways, but bouncing back from scandals in SF politics isn't one of them.
He may embarrass establishment types and he may use populism in his appeal but Cheeto is very establishment.
Brown is a power broker. I'm not sure what his legacy is beyond that. He said before he got elected mayor that he would pave San Francisco and he's pretty much done that. He also referred to himself as a pimp and the board of supervisors as his whores. A colorful figure (as is Trump) but basically a broker for development deals.
I know San Francisco well and I even took dance classes from his 'wife' Blanch Brown at Dance Mission. But again, I don't know what his legacy will be. I couldn't say what he's done, outside of deals, and I lived in San Francisco 25+ years. He sure pissed me off when he called in favors to literally line the street with cops, sheriffs and CHP during Critical Mass a month or so before his re-election. Previously, SFPD bike patrol rode CM themselves.
Nope, I don't like the guy. And I'd never call him any sort of liberal.
Witty, I'll give you. But you'll have to give me an example of him being smart.
But what does he have to show for it all? The replacement of the eastern span of the Bay Bridge was $6.5 billion, at least a decade late, up from $250M original, and then he wanted it named after himself. Really. I'm supposed to call that smart? It used Chinese steel (Rose Pak thanks you) that was delayed every time there was a price fluctuation.
Really. The guy was a power broker. But he wasn't an effective politician. He just cut deals.