I read that. But they said "it's not real life". It is, and not just in SF/Oakland. Plenty of weird experiences to be had in New York or Toronto, for example.
Ah, you interpreted cookiecaper as saying "this problem doesn't happen, period". In which case, your response makes sense - "of course it happens in these parts of SF under discussion".
I read that comment as more narrowly disputing "most mid to large size American cities have it". Revisiting, I do think my initial reading was correct. If cookiecaper was denying the problem existed, why would imagining it be "a nice way to comfort yourself about living [...] in either SF or Oakland"? The comment makes substantially more sense as asserting that 1) the problems in SF are not problems elsewhere, and 2) a view that they are problems everywhere (and thus maybe not solvable) is not reality based, so SF and Oakland must be "Doing It Wrong". I don't agree with that comment - as you can see from my direct response to it - but the logic of it is coherent in a way it would not be if it were supporting the other point.
I read that comment as more narrowly disputing "most mid to large size American cities have it". Revisiting, I do think my initial reading was correct. If cookiecaper was denying the problem existed, why would imagining it be "a nice way to comfort yourself about living [...] in either SF or Oakland"? The comment makes substantially more sense as asserting that 1) the problems in SF are not problems elsewhere, and 2) a view that they are problems everywhere (and thus maybe not solvable) is not reality based, so SF and Oakland must be "Doing It Wrong". I don't agree with that comment - as you can see from my direct response to it - but the logic of it is coherent in a way it would not be if it were supporting the other point.