The Worst-Run Big City in the U.S. – San Francisco (2009)

Re:The Worst-Run Big City in the U.S. – San Francisco (2009) by spc476 on Friday January 25, 2013 @02:46AM (#5114490)

I find it hard to believe that any city could be run worse than Detroit.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Worst-Run Big City in the U.S. – San Francisco (2009) by geogra4 on Friday January 25, 2013 @10:01AM (#5115679)

Detroit is extremely poor. It's not in the same class as cities like SF, Chicago or NYC in the sense that these cities have money and can spread it around to functional services.

For what it has, Detroit isn't run THAT poorly. Trash still gets taken out.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Worst-Run Big City in the U.S. – San Francisco (2009) by cloudwizard on Friday January 25, 2013 @03:40AM (#5114602)

They both do a crappy job but Detroit does it more efficiently.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Worst-Run Big City in the U.S. – San Francisco (2009) by dionidium on Friday January 25, 2013 @11:26AM (#5116159)

Detroit has the land area, housing stock, and general infrastructure for a peak population of 1,849,568. Only 713,777 people live there today. Consider for a minute that that's a very difficult problem.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Worst-Run Big City in the U.S. – San Francisco (2009) by saturdaysaint on Friday January 25, 2013 @07:03AM (#5115047)

It doesn't help that it's much poorer than any of the other cities mentioned yet is far bigger than SF and Chicago combined...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Worst-Run Big City in the U.S. – San Francisco (2009) by refurb on Friday January 25, 2013 @11:19AM (#5116103)

But it didn't start out poor.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Worst-Run Big City in the U.S. – San Francisco (2009) by marcosvm on Friday January 25, 2013 @03:32AM (#5114589)

Well, there's São Paulo.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Worst-Run Big City in the U.S. – San Francisco (2009) by negrit on Friday January 25, 2013 @03:55AM (#5114635)

Damn Sao Paulo is now in the US. Expansion goes fast.

[ Parent | on HN ]