Remix.run Logo
▲ threethirtytwo 4 hours ago

The way you said “face reality” implies a lot of delusion.

There’s a lot of nostalgia. Both for what the city used to be and what I potentially can (but most likely won’t) become. The delusion is so rampant that it’s really what causes people to vote you (and me) down. Like objectively speaking sf is a terrible city and many people agree. At best you can like the city but you cannot ignore the fact that there are some pretty horrible downsides for living here and that many many people hate the city.

I will say if you work in tech or are a liberal extremist or you’re gay then it may be worth it to live here but I wouldn’t call it wonderful. You can’t make the city better if you don’t admit the faults.

▲mint5 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

TIL I’m a “liberal extremist” for liking the weather, the walkability, views, and plentiful activities that comes with so many people in a small area.

▲mbgerring 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

San Francisco is one of three cities in America where you can walk to things. A lot of people don’t value that, and that’s fine, those people should all leave

▲mh2266 2 hours ago | parent [-]

The second (or rather, first) is obviously New York, but the third is… Boston, Cambridge (if counted separately), Philly, DC, Chicago, Seattle…? There are more than three cities where “you can walk to things”.

▲threetonesun 2 minutes ago | parent [-]

Some Californians seem to think snow is fatal, but yes to all of these. I will acknowledge that SF has a pretty wonderful mix of city and nature but if I made a living out there I'd probably head to Spain/Portugal for a truly walkable city.