Comment by pdx6 | Hacker News Reader

Comment by pdx6 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

For those that think this is the end of San Francisco, take a deep breath. The empty office space and worries about expiring leases only applies to companies that can't work remote. SF has a huge service industry, swaths of culture, and some pretty nice weather.

A bunch of chair warmers and button pushers moved to Tahoe or Mazzula, so what? It is nice to have a huge house and some land, but city living is are a tradeoff. Living around a bunch of people means food, entertainment, and social options that simply can't be had from a Zoom room.

If CRE prices drop, the offices will still get filled to the brim with new companies in a couple of years. Will there be some CRE bankruptcies? Certainly. But has anyone looked at on time payments of office REITs? Keep an eye on those for dividend cuts as a predictor.

Thinking of starting a business here? I'll beat my drum once again -- it has never been a better time to setup shop here. Take risks when others panic.

Eras like this are about survivors. Anyone who was here in 2009 would prefer that era to dot-com 1999 or FAANG 2019. So as far as they’re concerned - faster, please.

Consider this a test whether you are a Californian or San Franciscan or someone from somewhere else here to rake in the google dollars. If the latter, I’m sorry your demands were not accomodated. Enjoy the farm in upstate NY or the frowns you get in Tahoe or Austin.

>or the frowns you get in Tahoe or Austin

Austinite here who moved from New York, and previously from California. People actually talk to you out here in general and have been nothing but pleasant. There's also far less of a homeless issue and you can actually buy a house with a low six figure salary. Austin is great.

Austin was great.

REAL San Franciscans love tents on downtown sidewalks.

Wish I could be as cool as them.

I don’t think everyone who lives in San Fran wants do life in San Fran. They’re here because that’s where the jobs are.

"I don’t think everyone who lives in San Fran wants do life in San Fran. They’re here because that’s where the jobs are."

I live in San Francisco and I want to do life here. I moved here very specifically to set down roots and raise my family in the SFBA.

I have the option to live anywhere in the world and I believe that the confluence of the west marin national seashore and the city center of San Francisco is unique in all the world for contrasting landscape, and energy boundaries, all within fifteen minutes driving.

On top of it all, Squaw Valley - the set location of all my childhood ski heroes - is just three hours away.

> I moved here very specifically to set down roots and raise my family in the SFBA.

To a raise a family, you moved to a city with more dogs than children[1] and more drug addicts than high school students? [2] Or are you planning on moving to Marin County (close, very expensive, very nice), one of the southern suburbs (close, expensive, not nice), or Dublin/Pleasanton (far, less expensive, nice) once the kids are born?

Seriously asking. (About me: I prefer dogs; If I have a kid I prefer my kid hang out with dogs; my extended family is spread out in the SFBA from Daly City to Dublin; I grew up there; I left; I miss the weather).

[1] https://www.kqed.org/news/11669269/are-there-really-more-dog... [2] https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/philmatier/article/San-F...

Sure some people live in SF because they want to be here. Others live (in my case lived) there because of a job. I don't care for SF the city, but I do like the greater bay area.

Having said that, your driving time estimates are incredible optimistic. Squaw is not 3 hours from SF, not even with no traffic (this scenario doesn't really exist) and good weather. Getting anywhere in the bay area also takes significantly longer due to traffic which is pretty bad most of the day.

> Squaw is not 3 hours from SF, not even with no traffic (this scenario doesn't really exist) and good weather.

I'm sure this is mainly due to the pandemic, but I just drove back from there last month (slightly farther than Squaw, actually), and it took 3 hours and a single-digit number of minutes. Hell, the travel time Google is showing from Squaw right now is 3 hours and 9 minutes.

I do agree that's atypical. But... so what? "Correct" the parent's statement to "4 hours" and the argument is just as valid. Seems like you're nitpicking and missing the forest for the trees.

Disagree. I love SF. The Symphony is phenomenal, love the Opera and Ballet too.

The parks are beautiful, and you can get out into nature in about an hour's drive.

Living in SF is expensive, but salaries are high too. Especially if you're in tech like most on HN, you can have a very nice lifestyle here.

I like SF, but symphonies, operas, ballets, and beautiful parks are like the common denominator of major US cities.

But anyways I agree SF is beautiful in many areas, and no one should listen to any opinions of SF from anyone who calls it "San Fran" :)

Yes, I agree that most major cities have these things, but I truly believe the SF Symphony is special, almost as brilliant as the NY Philharmonic.

They regularly host top performers from around the world -- Itzhak Perlman, Gustavo Dudamel, Yuja Wang, and so many more. And Michael Tilson Thomas is a treasure. Anyway, I can ramble about this forever and I appreciate the response :)

I wish I would've went to one, I think my wife was slated to go since her company was sponsoring the symphony. I'm a casual classical music fan. I play some violin and have played in symphony before, watch TwoSet, and watch stuff like Ray Chen and Hilary Hahn. I wanted to become part of those public drop-in symphonies too.

There is a huge difference between being a classical music fan in SF and being a classical music fan in Denver or Kansas City. We're talking world-class performances.

This is either ignorant or disingenuous. There are plenty of us who live in SF and want to continue living here, and it has nothing to do with jobs.

I do welcome the departure of people who don't actually like the city and have been "forced" to live here due to their job. I feel like the city will be a lot healthier from a community standpoint with a higher percentage of people who want to live here.

I agree. I lived in San Fran for two years for the job, mostly.

My bigger concern with SF is property crime and homelessness. I don't feel safe in this city. It's been getting worse every year and there is no end in sight. Major conferences already relocated because of it.

Interestingly, the "visible homeless" population has decreased substantially over the course of the pandemic, and is now below pre-pandemic levels: https://missionlocal.org/2020/10/citys-homeless-tent-count-d...

The pandemic has managed to cure a few of San Francisco's ills. Rents and real estate prices are trending down towards sanity, the city/county government has managed to get a large number of homeless folks situated indoors, restaurants are getting outdoor seating space, and initiatives to massively reduce the amount of red tape small business have to work through are getting fast tracked. All that, and the number of COVID-19 cases and deaths are extremely low relative to the rest of the country, even as businesses re-open. The post-pandemic San Francisco has a decent shot at being a livable city again (though the property crime problem isn't yet on a path to being solved).

I agree on most points. My guess is that some homeless were put into hotel rooms, which is why there are fewer on the street. I don't know how sustainable that is or what will happen when the pandemic is over. Will they be allowed to stay there indefinitely? Who will pay for all that? I have a hard time believing that the homeless population actually decreased during COVID with all the generous social programs going on.

Just need to recall Chesa and we're off to the races..

Still shaking my head that he won; what a sad day for the city.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com