Swerb wrote:I love visiting San Francisco, actually have another business trip there in the fall. A gorgeous city, a lot to do, with great eats and the awesome Anchor Steam brewery there. And it's a great city to walk.
But you couldn't pay me 500k a year to live there. It's the most liberal city in America, with absolutely no middle class. If there were organized statistics on it, San Fran would lead all major American cities in rich snobby elitest hybrid driving a-holes, and also bums in the street. The streets of San Fran are absolutely littered with homeless people.
And the weather is crazy out there.
You didn't mention any cool stuff like this:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... 577&sn=004It turns out that BART shut them off many months ago because of complaints that homeless people had employed the small drinking fountain for other uses, including personal hygiene. BART has no plans to reopen the fountain, which is in one of the city's busiest shoppings areas. "They were not using it for its intended purpose," said BART spokesman Linton Johnson, who was politely nonspecific about how the fountain was used. But a veteran beat cop said people used the fountain to wash up, to rinse out syringes and even to urinate. "That wasn't popular with all those tourists and shoppers from Union Square," said the officer, who asked not to be named.
That city is a hell-hole, and the only way people outside of it will care about it is if the big earthquake finally sinks it. They actually pay homeless people to live there, if you can believe that.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0305/p01s02-uspo.htmlFor example, while most municipalities offer benefits to the homeless in the form of a small cash stipend and other benefits such as vouchers or shelter beds, San Francisco still gives about one-third of its homeless population its benefits all in cash - as much as $395 a month.