Re:San Francisco’s Slow-Motion Suicide
by closeparen on Tuesday April 09, 2019 @10:18AM
(#19614895)
San Francisco is nowhere near overpopulated. We have the tech and the money for perfectly civilized mid- and high-rise buildings. We just choose not to use it.
Postwar sprawl is grossly underpopulated which makes SF seem like Kowloon by comparison, but it’s still lower density than a standard European capital.
>> The obvious answer seems to be moving to somewhere nearby that's cheaper and roomier. But people seem very resistant to this for some reason.
Because that requires money.
Well, I mean for homeless people or startups, it's a lot cheaper at the fringes. Cities like Sydney have a "greater" area that extends about 1-2 hours drive away. Which seems like a lot, but if they're driving Uber at night to pay the bills, it might be a better deal.
The question with many cities is the same - is it worth saving? A lot of any city's downfall is often the fault of its older residents. Why do the poor stay? Why do the rich not focus on changing it? Why do communities fail to fix it together?
The obvious answer seems to be moving to somewhere nearby that's cheaper and roomier. But people seem very resistant to this for some reason.