It's hilarious to read all these militaristic wordings about techies waging "battles", and "conquering" the city, as if it's about barbarian hordes which came down on peaceful SF, pillaged, raped, and burnt everything to the ground. Sure, why scritinize California's, or the city's political theater, why questioning law enforcement inefficiency. Can it be somehow related to drugs, prostitution, and theft? No, it's all software developers' fault.
I find it amazing that "locals" can get away with blaming "tech workers" for rising rents and homelessness. The rents and the house prices only rise because the wealth that the workers generate is blocked from being used to build new houses.
>A million-plus for a home with $300,000 down? Then when we have kids, $30,000 a year for private school?<p>This quote totally confounded me. Why is it a given that their kids have to go to private school? If you're optimizing your budget for home-ownership, why not just send your kids to the schools your taxes are paying for?
When I first visited 7 years ago, it was already an insufferable combination of homeless detritus and Java talk at dive bars. I was finally able to find the alternative scenes the city was [previously] famous for, but all around was an encroaching sense of 'other' smothering the unique identity of the city. And the rent was already too damn high. Soon after, Oakland was being inundated by its escapees. I felt badly for the locals, but more than anything I wanted never to live there. I would work as a high school network admin in Ohio before I would join the tech gold rush.<p>I've been mostly happy on the east coast, but gentrification's steady gears are erasing local culture here too. I'm pretty sick of cities now - the noise, crime, filth, expense, lack of green space and clean air. But terrible public transportation outside of cities requires paying the ecological, monetary, and in-convenience costs of cars. Suburbia has its own negative effect on society, by drawing away tax revenue from cities and abandoning small businesses. 'Escaping' would come with its own costs, and only help myself.<p>I don't see a clear solution, but it has to start with a focus on improving society as a whole. More and better public transportation, housing, food, and education will greatly help things, but it needs to be integrated everywhere; not doled out like alms, or in whatever the highest taxed county is. We need a balance between the selfish act of consumption and the hard work of improving society for <i>other people</i>, which will actually benefit us more in the long run.
European here. My girlfriend and I are excited to do a tour of the West Coast later this year. As a tech I feel it would be silly to skip San Francisco and Silicon Valley, but I must say the stories I have been hearing have dampened my initial enthusiasm considerably. I now wonder if it is worth our while. If "avocado toast and class warfare" are the main attractions nowadays, we can probably spend our time more wisely.
Even though people think SF as some kind of tech hub, the reality is that Tech's share of employment and tax revenue in SF is going down year on year.
"It should be noted that Zoe, who asked not to be identified by her real name because she was not authorized by her employer to speak to the press, is not the stereotypical tech bro who moves to San Francisco for a job and immediately starts complaining about the city’s dire homelessness crisis. She arrived in 2007 to study at San Francisco State University and had a career in musical theater before attending a coding bootcamp and landing a job as a developer advocate at a major tech company."<p>Um, how is she not exactly that? Except that she is a girl, so I guess not a bro. What would you say to girls? "Tech chick"? Or just "Tech sis"?<p>"It’s just not sustainable for a couple to live here"<p>Then don't? I write this as somebody who also moved away from his hometown and now can't afford to go back.<p>"she says she is terrified to walk at night."<p>And how exactly did Tech workers cause that?<p>Is there even data showing the homeless and drug addicts are former residents of SF, who were then displaced by rising housing costs because of tech workers?<p>I don't know why SF with all its money can't get a grip on the problem. But it also seems likely to me that many homeless were simply attracted by the rich people, who can donate more than people elsewhere?
What's the overlap between techies and San Fran's politicians and politically active individuals who prevent the necessary steps from being taken regarding housing policies?<p>EDIT for clarity: What percentage of those responsible for the horrible laws there were actually techies?