San Francisco is imploding

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And what do you suggest they do to fix it, PP? Lock up every man, woman, and child on the streets in a for-profit prison?

Well, if you read the article, SF now clearly thinks hiring more cops is going to help. So amazing that now even SF is realizing what a stupid mistake kowtowing to the defund the police crowd was.

Hire more cops.
Make stealing over $100 a felony.
Get rid of all of the tolerance for open drug use.
Get rid of tent cities.
Many more foot patrols by police.
Get rid of lenient judges letting out one man crime waves over and over again.


Why is it that all of the so called progress in SF looks like regression. Stealing, drug use, and violence is now so bad that community members now have lost a highly convenient place to shop for basic necessities like food because stupid voters there keep voting for more of the same, which is pro open drug use and leniency for crime and punishment. The predictable is happening, and now the city's coffers are in serious trouble. It will be hard to enact progress when you have no money.

Send the homeless and criminals back to the states that shipped them to California…

TX & FL?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And what do you suggest they do to fix it, PP? Lock up every man, woman, and child on the streets in a for-profit prison?

That would be dreamy, but even better, put them to work to turn a profit!

DP.

1. it's a vicious circle: no one wants to hire a homeless person, and even if they can get a job, it doesn't pay enough to pay for housing
2. a lot of homeless people have either mental illness, substance abuse, or both -- would you hire someone like this?

So, again, what do you suggest to fix it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DH and I were in San Francisco last October and the homeless population scared the hell out of us. I say this with compassion and without any intention to blame the homeless population. It's the city's fault. We could not walk to dinner without being accosted or even followed.

Very sad situation.

I lived there for years but always found the homeless in DC to be more aggressive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It has NOTHING to do with liberal politics ffs. This is about not sufficiently taxing California's many billionaires, and not using that extra tax money for all the resources necessary to prevent vulnerable people from falling through the cracks.

"Liberal" is a cloak for greed in California, not an actual lived ideal. It's hypocrisy and abandonment of the vulnerable where it really counts.

It’s really simple,

San Fran and Cali have some of the highest taxes in the country already. You raise taxes or tax “billionaires” more and they simply just move to Texas, Colorado. Even companies like Tesla have moved headquarters as well as dozens of others.



Gotta get over the notion that more taxing fixes problems. It’s how you spend the money that matters. If you waste the money or start promising billions of freebees like free medical and college for illegals, wasteful projects, so many other promises the state has made that can’t back up financially, Thai is what u get.

Well cutting them like the GOP has done over the past 50 years doesn't seemed to have helped us much either. Things here seemed a lot better back when Ike was President and billionaires had to shoulder a fair burden.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How much of San Francisco’s housing problem was caused by unregulated foreign money in real estate. We need to stop selling our country to other countries and non-citizens.

I remember having to write rent checks to a bank of china account so rings true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It has NOTHING to do with liberal politics ffs. This is about not sufficiently taxing California's many billionaires, and not using that extra tax money for all the resources necessary to prevent vulnerable people from falling through the cracks.

"Liberal" is a cloak for greed in California, not an actual lived ideal. It's hypocrisy and abandonment of the vulnerable where it really counts.

It’s really simple,

San Fran and Cali have some of the highest taxes in the country already. You raise taxes or tax “billionaires” more and they simply just move to Texas, Colorado. Even companies like Tesla have moved headquarters as well as dozens of others.



Gotta get over the notion that more taxing fixes problems. It’s how you spend the money that matters. If you waste the money or start promising billions of freebees like free medical and college for illegals, wasteful projects, so many other promises the state has made that can’t back up financially, Thai is what u get.

Oh, you haven’t heard. Elon Musk moved the new engineering headquarters back to California. Newsome and Musk did a big PR event about it. https://www.cnet.com/google-amp/news/tesla-returns-to-california-for-new-engineering-headquarters/

Turns out people with talent also have options and prefer not to live in the hellhole red states.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And what do you suggest they do to fix it, PP? Lock up every man, woman, and child on the streets in a for-profit prison?

Well, if you read the article, SF now clearly thinks hiring more cops is going to help. So amazing that now even SF is realizing what a stupid mistake kowtowing to the defund the police crowd was.

Hire more cops.
Make stealing over $100 a felony.
Get rid of all of the tolerance for open drug use.
Get rid of tent cities.
Many more foot patrols by police.
Get rid of lenient judges letting out one man crime waves over and over again.


Why is it that all of the so called progress in SF looks like regression. Stealing, drug use, and violence is now so bad that community members now have lost a highly convenient place to shop for basic necessities like food because stupid voters there keep voting for more of the same, which is pro open drug use and leniency for crime and punishment. The predictable is happening, and now the city's coffers are in serious trouble. It will be hard to enact progress when you have no money.

Send the homeless and criminals back to the states that shipped them to California…

TX & FL?

they both have their own homeless problems.

https://www.fox7austin.com/news/homeless-encampments-austin-texas

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It has NOTHING to do with liberal politics ffs. This is about not sufficiently taxing California's many billionaires, and not using that extra tax money for all the resources necessary to prevent vulnerable people from falling through the cracks.

"Liberal" is a cloak for greed in California, not an actual lived ideal. It's hypocrisy and abandonment of the vulnerable where it really counts.

It’s really simple,

San Fran and Cali have some of the highest taxes in the country already. You raise taxes or tax “billionaires” more and they simply just move to Texas, Colorado. Even companies like Tesla have moved headquarters as well as dozens of others.



Gotta get over the notion that more taxing fixes problems. It’s how you spend the money that matters. If you waste the money or start promising billions of freebees like free medical and college for illegals, wasteful projects, so many other promises the state has made that can’t back up financially, Thai is what u get.

Oh, you haven’t heard. Elon Musk moved the new engineering headquarters back to California. Newsome and Musk did a big PR event about it. https://www.cnet.com/google-amp/news/tesla-returns-to-california-for-new-engineering-headquarters/

Turns out people with talent also have options and prefer not to live in the hellhole red states.

The electrical grid is only on about 4 hours a day in Texas. 3rd world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

"Crime is worse than the data shows," Charles "Cully" Stimson, Heritage Foundation senior legal fellow and former prosecutor in San Francisco, told Fox News Digital.

"People do not report these crimes because when you have a DA who's pro criminal and not going to enforce the law, the cops aren't going to go out and arrest somebody when they know the case is going to be no papered."

The first problem, according to Stimson, was the election of a Soros-backed D.A. with a reputation as soft of crime.

Stimson was referring to former San Francisco District Attorney George Gascón, who served in that role from January 2011 until October 2019. Stimson argued that Gascón's term ushered in a new era of rising crime in San Francisco, which had been experiencing nearly two decades of tumbling crime rates at the same time as many other major cities across the country.

Stimson argued that as Gascón's policies started to take hold in the city, crime started to rise around 2015 and 2016. The city's residents got no reprieve from the problem when Gascón left office, thanks to similar policies of former District Attorney Chesa Boudin from January 2020 until he was recalled in July 2022.

"Those policies include not prosecuting any misdemeanors, watering down most felonies to misdemeanors, not asking for long prison sentences even for people who are convicted of the worst crimes, never asking for bail," Stimson said.

Citing FBI and Justice Department data, Stimson pointed out that in the five years before Gascón took office in 2011, there were 757 reported rapes, an average of 151 per year, in San Francisco. But in Gascón's last five years in office, the city had a total of 1,731 reported rapes, or 346 per year.

"You always know with rape … the number of people actually raped is much higher than the number of people who report that they were raped," Stimson said.

He also pointed to aggravated assaults, which, in the five years before Gascón's tenure, tallied up to 11,921 reported incidents, or 2,384 per year. In the last five years of Gascón's term, that number jumped to 13,070, or 2,614 per year.

Such policies continued under the watch of Boudin, producing crime numbers that continued to hover well over pre-2011 rates.

San Francisco's crime issues did not stop with violent crime. The city has also had a surge of retail thefts that have forced many businesses to close their doors in recent years.

"Gascón and Boudin refused to prosecute retail thefts," Stimson said, citing a policy in which retails thefts under $1,000 went unprosecuted.

"You've seen the videos of people just engaging in the five-finger discount, walking into Target, walking into Nordstrom Rack … and just walking out during daylight with $950 worth of stuff," Stimson said. "They refused to prosecute any of that."

The lack of any serious threat of prosecution led many city residents and businesses to stop reporting the crimes altogether, a reality that has resulted in what is likely a vast undercount of such crimes in available statistics, he claimed.

lol, sure

But it has to be true becuz Faux news said so! It couldn't be propaganda, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And what do you suggest they do to fix it, PP? Lock up every man, woman, and child on the streets in a for-profit prison?

Well, if you read the article, SF now clearly thinks hiring more cops is going to help. So amazing that now even SF is realizing what a stupid mistake kowtowing to the defund the police crowd was.

Hire more cops.
Make stealing over $100 a felony.
Get rid of all of the tolerance for open drug use.
Get rid of tent cities.
Many more foot patrols by police.
Get rid of lenient judges letting out one man crime waves over and over again.


Why is it that all of the so called progress in SF looks like regression. Stealing, drug use, and violence is now so bad that community members now have lost a highly convenient place to shop for basic necessities like food because stupid voters there keep voting for more of the same, which is pro open drug use and leniency for crime and punishment. The predictable is happening, and now the city's coffers are in serious trouble. It will be hard to enact progress when you have no money.

Send the homeless and criminals back to the states that shipped them to California…

TX & FL?

they both have their own homeless problems.

https://www.fox7austin.com/news/homeless-encampments-austin-texas

I know and their gov's love to bus them to CA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It has NOTHING to do with liberal politics ffs. This is about not sufficiently taxing California's many billionaires, and not using that extra tax money for all the resources necessary to prevent vulnerable people from falling through the cracks.

"Liberal" is a cloak for greed in California, not an actual lived ideal. It's hypocrisy and abandonment of the vulnerable where it really counts.

It’s really simple,

San Fran and Cali have some of the highest taxes in the country already. You raise taxes or tax “billionaires” more and they simply just move to Texas, Colorado. Even companies like Tesla have moved headquarters as well as dozens of others.



Gotta get over the notion that more taxing fixes problems. It’s how you spend the money that matters. If you waste the money or start promising billions of freebees like free medical and college for illegals, wasteful projects, so many other promises the state has made that can’t back up financially, Thai is what u get.

Well cutting them like the GOP has done over the past 50 years doesn't seemed to have helped us much either. Things here seemed a lot better back when Ike was President and billionaires had to shoulder a fair burden.

Came here to say this. Cutting taxes doesn't work either and that has been demonstrated time and again. So we don't tax under your proposal and what is the solution? Still waiting for an answer to that.

The "lock them up" poster is an idiot and that would be blatantly unconstitutional.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It has NOTHING to do with liberal politics ffs. This is about not sufficiently taxing California's many billionaires, and not using that extra tax money for all the resources necessary to prevent vulnerable people from falling through the cracks.

"Liberal" is a cloak for greed in California, not an actual lived ideal. It's hypocrisy and abandonment of the vulnerable where it really counts.

It’s really simple,

San Fran and Cali have some of the highest taxes in the country already. You raise taxes or tax “billionaires” more and they simply just move to Texas, Colorado. Even companies like Tesla have moved headquarters as well as dozens of others.



Gotta get over the notion that more taxing fixes problems. It’s how you spend the money that matters. If you waste the money or start promising billions of freebees like free medical and college for illegals, wasteful projects, so many other promises the state has made that can’t back up financially, Thai is what u get.

Well cutting them like the GOP has done over the past 50 years doesn't seemed to have helped us much either. Things here seemed a lot better back when Ike was President and billionaires had to shoulder a fair burden.

Cutting? BS. We've spent so GD much on welfare over the decades, it's not funny.

Hell, Obama doubled food stamps from 24 million to 47 million and you leftists immediately said it's not enough.

This welfare state is coming off the rails and the only thing you idiot democrats can say is more more more.

You democrats have a thousand schemes to spend and waste other people's money. Climate change, national health care, decades of intergenerational welfare payments, universal basic income, kindercare, free college, this care, that care, womb to tomb entitlements, and on and on and on. It's f'n disgusting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Small price to pay for being so progressive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Small price to pay for being so progressive.

Then why is San Francisco safer than Alaska? Facts are inconvenient, huh?