Hacker News Reader

Comment by ashtonkem | Hacker News Reader

Chicago and Detroit also look pretty different economically. Detroit was overbuilt and depended too heavily on car manufacturing, which left it vulnerable to collapse. Chicago meanwhile is still a pretty decent sized transit hub, and it has the financial markets used to stabilize the price of a bunch of important commodities like grains and pork, which provided a diverse enough economy to stumble forwards despite nakedly corrupt and incompetent leadership.

The question is, how much wealth will leave SF? If some startups leave, it’ll probably look more like Chicago. Clearly bankrupt, but still functioning to some degree. If most startups and their employees leave, it’ll be the Detroit route for SF.

View on HN

"If most startups and their employees leave, it’ll be the Detroit route for SF."

News flash: SF only relatively recently became a startup hub with the web 2.0 and smartphone/apps eras and the advent of free shuttle buses to the likes of Google/FB.

If the startups and their employees leave, it'll be slightly more like the diverse and more affordable SF that it previously was.

If you honestly think it's the Detroit route for SF should most startups and their employees vacate, you are horribly misinformed.

There's a practically unlimited number of people hoping SF prices fall enough for them to move back and/or buy property there. And it has absolutely nothing to do with the startup scene. If most the tech people moved out of SF I'd be far more interested in living there myself. The startup/tech monoculture has ruined the city in many ways.

The romantic East Coast City on the West Coast. Yep. People will always come to San Francisco for the same reason they go to North Park, San Diego or Silver Lake, Los Angeles.

You really have to explain this to me because I'm leaving SF now even though I could save 50% off my current market rate rent if I move to a new place.

What am I missing that I haven't seen in the last 6 years? I've walked/biked the city hundreds of times up and down from GGB to Stonestown and Dogpatch. Visited every nook and cranny of the city, tried living in different neighborhoods and I have always been sorely disappointed by the rampant crime and homelessness. I made life-long friends, attended tens of meetups from hiking, to biking and tech. Tasted food from all over the world, sailed on the bay, saw all the touristy and local spots. Day-tripped all over the bay and hours in every direction. Got an amazing workplace experience that is unlikely to be rivaled anywhere else in the world.

Yet, I can't ignore it forever, I end up driving through downtown to get to Sausalito or eating at a nice restaurant while this person decides I am a demon and begins screaming at me while menacingly coming towards me.

I had my bike stolen from my garage, my car window broken and been threatened by a random person on the street.

You really think most people haven't had enough of this? I tried my best to love SF despite all of it's serious problems but after all these years it got to me and I have to leave, no matter how cheap it would be to stay.

When discussions of housing vacancies pop up at work lots of the individuals who reside in the city report that there's open units at their apartment complexes etc.

I'm really curious what the 2020 census rolls up for us in this area of California migration, etc.

I think the 2020 census will be obsolete because it was done this year... I already completed it so I'm going to show up as a SF resident even though I'm leaving before the end of the year.

No doubt it'll be out of date, but I wouldn't call it obsolete, it'll still be useful. We had a footworker guy from the Census who went around double checking all the vacant units to ensure they didn't shirk their census obligations. They would post these shipping label looking things at the doors and door steps of the units asking them to complete their census forms by whatever deadline was listed.

The guy knocked on our door asking about these neighbors to which we pointed out their moved, died, etc. For the ones who moved he got down to asking about roughly when they moved because residency counts up to some month, like April or something I forget. It was definitely earlier in the year by a few months from when he went double checking on all the residents. Depending on our memory for when the guy moved out he was going to count him as a resident even though he may not even have been in the state anymore nor filled out a census form apparently. We directed the fella to the Managers office to get more precise dates than the rough stuff we had in mind. I remember the guy seeming to be troubled and flustered that there were a boatload of vacancies he had to comb through and didn't want to invest too much time hunting down facts about various residents. We wished him well and he went on his way.

You're right, you should totally GTFO.

I'm open to hearing your experience and if maybe you're just able to overlook the excruciating human suffering that is visible day to day in the city.

I think some people can tolerate it while others can't, nothing wrong with that.

In a post Silicon Valley 2.0 SF, the city becomes more affordable and the disaster you see in the streets will substantially improve.

SF was nowhere near this bad before techies flooded the place and priced everyone out of the housing market.

If I'm not mistaken that's the entire premise of this thread of discussion.

Are you completely blind to the relationship cost of living has to homelessness and crime?

I see, so you're banking on the fact that the living conditions in SF will improve and it will be come desirable again.

That is something we can agree on, I too look forward to such a period but I imagine it'll be 5-10 years from now and only after the local government begins doing radically different things to tackle all these problems. At that time, I too will want to return to SF since again, I love the city, the people and the environment, just not the current living conditions.

Funny how those 3 cities are similarly managed politcially speaking.

If you’re trying to go for a trite left vs. right comment, I’d like to point out that a lot of the cities that people in CA are moving to are also managed by Democrats.

The nature of current US geographic politics means that most cities will be run by a very specific party, both the well run and the poorly run ones. This is one of those situations that escapes easy and convenient narratives, especially ones that happen to support a partisan side.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com