Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by beatpanda 2655 days ago
In every article like this, I'm always looking for the author's orientation to place. It's important to me whether they consider the Bay Area, or any other place, an actual home, with some transcendent quality besides a collection of objectively measurable attributes. This author clearly does not.

The author is annoyed that people like him (according to him, the smart people, the good people, the people on whom the entire society and economy depends!) are treated with such disrespect. But how does this author treat the people around him?

He writes about the Bay Area like he's observing it from an alien spacecraft, as if he's entirely separate, outside of time and space. He evaluates the various objective factors of the Bay Area solely in terms of their benefit to him, and finds it wanting. And the author, with an unlimited ability to simply uproot himself, darkly insinuates that he, and all the other good, smart people like him, are going to do it, and soon.

But why should anyone care? By the author's own admission, he and his fellow good, smart people aren't meaningfully a part of the culture or the social fabric of the place. The author clearly has contempt for the people around him ("If you can afford Pacific Heights rents and rideshare everywhere you can pretend you don't live here!"). He clearly has no intention of contributing to the place. He clearly sees it as a pool of resources for extraction and nothing else.

It's clear that the author sees it this way because if this wasn't the case, he would be involved in some effort, any effort at all, to fix some of the problems that he's describing. Yes, California and the Bay Area have their problems. And our problems and our fortunes are the result of generations-long processes. Whatever comes next will be the outcome of people digging in, working to fix the problems, putting their shoulders to the wheel, and not just bailing out because moving somewhere else would maximize certain values in their personal spreadsheets.

A few people that I consider friends were doing that work before the current round of good times. They're people who've been in San Francisco back when it was considered frightening and dangerous, and the set of problems the city had were completely different than the current ones. They stuck it out. They made the city a much better place. As a result, we now have a new set of problems to fix. The cycle repeats itself.

Right now, we don't need any more people who are just looking to extract resources for themselves. We need people who are willing to engage, to become part of the social fabric of this place, and to figure out what the future looks like. So I want to enthusiastically encourage this author, everyone else who's written a functionally identical article in the last few years, and everyone on Hacker News who constantly complains about how much they hate San Francisco, to get out.

If you're among that group, and you don't leave, you're actually cheating yourself. There's likely some place in the world with which you could find the same profound, transcendent connection that I and many others have with San Francisco.

It's a tragic waste of a life to live in a place you hate, and that you have neither the commitment nor the desire to make any better. It doesn't benefit you, and it doesn't benefit the people around you whose home you hate so much. Everyone would be so much better off if you would simply show yourself the door, and find a place you can call home, for better or worse.

3 comments

Note that the author lives in New York, not SF. He writes about the Bay Area like he is observing it from a distance because he is.
While I think this is a valid critique of many of the comments in this thread (including the current top one about SF being "dystopian"), I think you're being uncharitable to the author. Nowhere does he say he hates SF and is desperate to leave; though he is predicting decline if the housing and COL issues don't eventually get addressed.

Hopefully if you believe that the solutions to SF's problems are folks being positive, committed, and pitching in, you'll also agree that we need more inclusive land use policies (zoning and tax) that aren't aggressively pro-incumbent.

Your comment resonated deeply with me as it put into words something I’ve been trying to express for a while now - so thank you!

I too think that it’s odd as well as discouraging that people so often express their disdain of a place (SF seems to be the popular punching bag as of late) in the context of “What can this place do for me?”. It’s in sharp contrast from a perspective of “This is my home. I’m a part of the inherent fabric of the city. What do we all need to do together to make our home a better place and how are we falling short?”