San Franciscans think San Francisco is turning around. The last GrowSF poll showed San Franciscans who think the city is on the right track went from 36% to 51%. The fall in violent crime by 13.6% this year, and the decline in property crime by 25% explain a lot of this. @ahmedchalabilives411323 I take your point that talking about the doom-loop narrative may reinforce the worst exaggerations of SF's demise, but the pressure for change created the conditions for what's happening now. Now we need people to register that cities can improve. That's what's happening quickly in SF.
Interesting and great data, but this is a dumb paragraph, "... a city that much of America had written off. The doom loop. The home of ‘bipping’ and smash-and-grabs. The national media treating San Francisco as shorthand for urban failure. And in year one, he delivered something remarkable: proof that the pessimists were wrong." Um, your whole Substack is about San Francisco yet you base its reputation on.....what outsiders think? A storyline those who already hated San Francisco pushed with glee because they already hated The City and have for 60 years? Things were certainly rough in the city; your data shows that. But why give credence to a storyline created and reinforced by outsiders in a Substack about....San Francisco? People appreciate the turnaround that your data describes. The data is all pointing in the right direction, but why not stick to what San Franciscans think instead of outsider garbage? Really strange.
San Francisco is a city of ups and downs, booms and busts. People who bet against it always end up on the wrong side of the bet. The question I have is whether you’re just tracking the inevitable upswing or if there’s actually policy driving it.
San Franciscans think San Francisco is turning around. The last GrowSF poll showed San Franciscans who think the city is on the right track went from 36% to 51%. The fall in violent crime by 13.6% this year, and the decline in property crime by 25% explain a lot of this. @ahmedchalabilives411323 I take your point that talking about the doom-loop narrative may reinforce the worst exaggerations of SF's demise, but the pressure for change created the conditions for what's happening now. Now we need people to register that cities can improve. That's what's happening quickly in SF.
Interesting and great data, but this is a dumb paragraph, "... a city that much of America had written off. The doom loop. The home of ‘bipping’ and smash-and-grabs. The national media treating San Francisco as shorthand for urban failure. And in year one, he delivered something remarkable: proof that the pessimists were wrong." Um, your whole Substack is about San Francisco yet you base its reputation on.....what outsiders think? A storyline those who already hated San Francisco pushed with glee because they already hated The City and have for 60 years? Things were certainly rough in the city; your data shows that. But why give credence to a storyline created and reinforced by outsiders in a Substack about....San Francisco? People appreciate the turnaround that your data describes. The data is all pointing in the right direction, but why not stick to what San Franciscans think instead of outsider garbage? Really strange.
San Francisco is a city of ups and downs, booms and busts. People who bet against it always end up on the wrong side of the bet. The question I have is whether you’re just tracking the inevitable upswing or if there’s actually policy driving it.