After a walk around SoMa, I lost what the appeal of working there was to be honest. The touristy parts of the city are great, but you hear all this talk about the offices and startup culture around that area, but one block over from Twitter HQ and there's a rampant homeless issue with people doing all kinds of stuff in full daylight.
Is SF unique in such a large % of the population being mentally ill or addicts?
It's just spit-balling, but there's also a thriving drug culture and ideologically-driven tolerance for all manner of person.
Does SF get prosperous? Serious question; I don't know how SF's taxes work. Does SF get a piece of everyone's income, such that as the people make more money the city gets more money? What actually puts more money into SF's pocket when people in SF get richer?
What - getting a Guiliani to fix it?
When I lived in Manhattan one summer, during a time when the city was "rougher around the edges" than today, I was definitely ready to get out of town on a number of weekends.
Correct my if I'm wrong, but they still put bags of trash out don't they? Those things also attract rats who can easily chew through the bags or they can not be tied up properly in the first place, allowing he smell to escape. Why don't they use tidier, less smelly wheelie bins: https://duckduckgo.com/?t=chakra&q=wheelie+bins&iax=images&i...
The city is remarkably clean and safe for what it is.
Manhattan hasn't had widespread problems on this level for decades. SF, on the other hand, has had feces on the sidewalk level problems for decades.