Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Move along, nothing to see here folks. SF is perfectly fine and healthy:

https://www.reddit.com/r/sanfrancisco/comments/12l66oq/a_weeknight_stroll_through_market_street_at_200_am/


Progressive policies making SF look like Snake Plisken’s hood, or Robo Cop’s dystopian nightmare city.

Utterly dystopian.

So there are some homeless people hanging out? Looks like it could be any city.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Move along, nothing to see here folks. SF is perfectly fine and healthy:

https://www.reddit.com/r/sanfrancisco/comments/12l66oq/a_weeknight_stroll_through_market_street_at_200_am/


Progressive policies making SF look like Snake Plisken’s hood, or Robo Cop’s dystopian nightmare city.

Utterly dystopian.

So there are some homeless people hanging out? Looks like it could be any city.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Move along, nothing to see here folks. SF is perfectly fine and healthy:

https://www.reddit.com/r/sanfrancisco/comments/12l66oq/a_weeknight_stroll_through_market_street_at_200_am/


Progressive policies making SF look like Snake Plisken’s hood, or Robo Cop’s dystopian nightmare city.

Utterly dystopian.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Typical Democrat strategy. One would think it was white racists turning beautiful cities into hellholes. Oh, wait.
They’re establishing the need for 15 minute cities.

Why don't we want 15 minute cities? I just moved to one in the south and my life is so much better.

Which city? I’d love to visit.

It's immaterial. The point is, living in a small-ish town (mine is 40k people) has a lot of time benefits. When I lived in the DC metro, just getting my kids to their various lessons was often a 1 hour round trip endeavor. Cities and sprawling suburbs are completely overrated and if there's a "conspiracy" to get people out of cities and into towns, I can get behind this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Typical Democrat strategy. One would think it was white racists turning beautiful cities into hellholes. Oh, wait.
They’re establishing the need for 15 minute cities.

Why don't we want 15 minute cities? I just moved to one in the south and my life is so much better.

Which city? I’d love to visit.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Typical Democrat strategy. One would think it was white racists turning beautiful cities into hellholes. Oh, wait.
They’re establishing the need for 15 minute cities.

Why don't we want 15 minute cities? I just moved to one in the south and my life is so much better.

Anonymous wrote:Typical Democrat strategy. One would think it was white racists turning beautiful cities into hellholes. Oh, wait.
They’re establishing the need for 15 minute cities.

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.

What a travesty. And Gavin has the audacity to run for president.

+1
“Travesty” is an understatement. So shameful what “progressives” have done to our cities. And yet idiots will continue to vote for them.

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.

What a travesty. And Gavin has the audacity to run for president.

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.

Anonymous wrote:Move along, nothing to see here folks. SF is perfectly fine and healthy:

https://www.reddit.com/r/sanfrancisco/comments/12l66oq/a_weeknight_stroll_through_market_street_at_200_am/


Progressive policies making SF look like Snake Plisken’s hood, or Robo Cop’s dystopian nightmare city.

Anonymous wrote:Move along, nothing to see here folks. SF is perfectly fine and healthy:

https://www.reddit.com/r/sanfrancisco/comments/12l66oq/a_weeknight_stroll_through_market_street_at_200_am/


Progressive policies making SF look like Snake Plisken’s hood, or Robo Cop’s dystopian nightmare city.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LA homeless situation is pretty bad too.
I’m in Boston and the homeless take over Harvard Square in the evenings.

The income gap is growing.

Homeless is not a function of income gap. Whether people make 300K max or $1B max there will still be the same drivers of homelessness.

So what's your solution? Yes, lots of these people CHOOSE to live on the street despite the dangers. You literally cannot convince these mentally ill people to make the right choice, let alone hold down a job and save for a security deposit.

Look, the real reason Reagan shut down the mental hospitals is that he wanted to go on a tax cutting binge. Literally one of the first things he does when he gets into office is shut down a massive source of tax spending - community mental health institutions.

Who is volunteering for their taxes to go up? None of the Republicans I know who incessantly complain about the homeless in DC, LA, NYC, etc.

It was not just a cost cutting decision by Reagan
.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deinstitutionalisation