Re:San Francisco Torn as Some See “Street Behavior” Worsen
by ZanyProgrammer on Sunday April 24, 2016 @10:02PM
(#11562231)
I have a very pessimistic view of how shitty (literally) SF is run, but this strikes me as being just as wrong in the opposite direction. The NYPD strikes me as the law enforcement branch of a police state. Surely there are other big cities that have a decent quality of life that aren't SF or NYC.
Re:San Francisco Torn as Some See “Street Behavior” Worsen
by yummyfajitas on Monday April 25, 2016 @12:14AM
(#11562494)
Can you name any big cities with an underclass of antisocial criminals, without a crime problem, and also without aggressive law enforcement to keep them in check?
Re:San Francisco Torn as Some See “Street Behavior” Worsen
by Mandatum on Monday April 25, 2016 @07:06PM
(#11568109)
Would Tokyo count here? It's a case of if-you-can't-beat-'em though, which probably isn't the example you want.
Re:San Francisco Torn as Some See “Street Behavior” Worsen
by yummyfajitas on Monday April 25, 2016 @07:41PM
(#11568276)
I've never been to Tokyo and have no idea. How does Tokyo avoid disorder caused by undesirables?
Re:San Francisco Torn as Some See “Street Behavior” Worsen
by Mandatum on Wednesday April 27, 2016 @12:56AM
(#11577907)
The Yakuza is heavily integrated into the government and it has become tolerated by the people. A few decades ago the government cracked down on the Yakuza as they had too much hold on how the government was run, so they splintered and different chapters took different parts of crime (ie Yamaguchi-gumi are heavily against drug trafficking and Dojin-kai are heavily involved in it).
Japan is one of the most crime-free countries in the world, because serious crime is monopolised by the criminals (and penalties for cutting their lunch are pretty heavy, which is common amongst most Asian gangs) and "respect" or "honour" is considered sacred. They don't romanticise or make "being an asshole" look fun or positive (ala "Wolf of Wall Street" is a perfect example).
A lot of the balancing comes from development. It's rare for e.g. a city block to come together to demand better policies. When they do, it's often a NIMBYist backlash against productive policy. Developers, on the other hand, care about the impact of policies on their aggregate holdings. Since they're typically developing a pipeline, their NIMBYist instincts tend to be relatively dulled.
Everything seems to point in the same direction. Cities which refuse to grow, instead transferring the fruits of growth to a land-owning elite, fail.