Remix clone Hacker News

Having sufficient housing doesn’t mean you can’t also have basic law enforcement. SF is doing neither. I am saying to do both.

We can have beautiful, clean and safe cities that are much more affordable. It is a choice not to.

▲

xp84 3 days ago | parent [-]

You can only have beautiful, clean and safe cities if you're willing to forbid people - who can walk in from anywhere at any time no matter how much you subsidize yesterday's batch with free housing - from making them ugly, dirty, and unsafe, and SF doesn't have the heart to make anybody do anything. They used to halfheartedly try to go through the motions, and for about 10 years now, they have given up even that.

▲

janalsncm 3 days ago | parent [-]

I think some people should get subsidized housing, but when I say build more housing I’m talking about increasing the supply and putting it on the market so that regular people can afford it.

As it stands now housing is completely unaffordable. The median income in San Francisco is $120k which means half the people there don’t even make that. I would like my kid’s elementary school teacher to be able to afford not to have roommates.

Also for what it’s worth 70% of the homeless in SF are from SF.

	▲	xp84 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		> 70% of the homeless in SF are from SF. (Self reported) - and why would you tell some survey taker you came in on a Greyhound from Bakersfield because you know they have far better amenities for you in SF?