Not to mention re emergence of medieval diseases like Typhoid [1], large and widely spread amount of human feces (which is a biohazard), and lack of housing supply which contributes to untenable housing costs.

[1]: https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2019/03/typhus-tu...

Yep. Can’t wear sandals anywhere either for fear of stepping into a used needle and contracting something.

Counter-point: every fourth person wearing Birkenstocks this weekend.

Counter-counter-point, of course you'll see people in open footwear but in many busy, populated areas (especially near where people work) such as around market, civic center, soma you'll see needles and feces everywhere. Open toed shoes near those things is probably unadvisable

That's not a counter-point, it's movement of goalposts.

I stepped on a piece of metal in FiDi and in my limp to the ER to get it removed I thought long and hard about how much I like wearing sandals and what works have happened if that was a needle. I don't anymore in the city.

This is also Fleet Week, when you have people coming in from the suburbs and out-of-town who won't be as prepared.

I don’t understand what this proves other than the individual risk tolerance of every fourth person you saw this weekend.

At this point it's strange how the property price in SF haven't been affected by a homeless population almost as large as the housed population.

I haven't been to SF anytime recent, but upon visiting New York I found that McDonalds there doesn't have _anything_ within public reach, no fountains, no trays, not even napkins, and I imagine that is totally justified judging by the amount of homeless people residing in/around it. It would be a nightmarish place to live and I'm surprised people would pay so much for properties in these environments.

It’s a gold rush town. People put up with a lot when there’s billions to be made.

For the most part, I already know how to not step in shit on the sidewalk, but I don't know which way to jump when a scooter comes barreling through, or whether or not I can throw a scooter in the garbage if I find it in my yard. Dealing with new issues shouldn't be contingent on solving every prior issue.

It’s called prioritization

Nobody said those aren't a problem. Is SF only allowed to work on one problem at a time?

No but with limited resources what they prioritize is telling. Scooters should be near the bottom the list, not the top.

> and there is $250,000 in the current fiscal year’s budget to fund the effort.

Uhm

SF spends 2 orders of magnitude more on homeless and housing annually

Feel free to check I dont mind being wrong, the actual point is that this whole article and thread is about a new office on a $250,000 budget and people think this materially effects the city’s resources at all

This actually makes this announcement even worse. A $250k budget is an utter joke, so it begs the question if this was all done as a troll move toward the entire startup ecosystem in SF to get everyone riled up.

One form of obstructionism that has been used by Peskin is to require a new or expanded type of permit and then decline to fund the permitting agency, so it doesn't have the resources to issue any permits.

No, but it seems like SF has made the choice to ignore one and restict the other, and most residents would probably prefer the opposite.

Well ups & downs in petty crime have been going on forever, and we’ve been policing it the best we know how for years and ... it doesn’t stop & society hasn’t failed.

If you have a better plan than “sit and complain about how everyone else isn’t focusing on undefined3840 priorities”, put it out there.

Is there any thing novel to our social methodology you’d like to see considered? Or ya just gonna highlight a problem as you see it and leave it to others to deal with (while still being dissatisfied?)

Seems like being forward thinking about NEW problems is at least partially what you want.

It’s not as if one city can solve problems that are societies as a whole.