• Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Why on Earth do you think “every service worker in San Francisco should just move away and find another job and another home somewhere else” is even feasible?

    You are talking about at minimum hundreds of thousands of people. Many of the ones who aren’t homeless (and many of them are homeless) don’t have any form of transportation other than public transportation because they’re too poor to afford a car. Are they supposed to walk to another place to get a job?

    Do you think maybe there’s a solution that isn’t cruel to pretty much everyone in San Francisco at any income level, but especially the poor? Is there any solution you can possibly come up with that doesn’t involve making poor people walk out of San Francisco until they get to another place and hope they find a job there?

    • yeather@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      I highly implore you reread my posts. To clarify again, people who currently cannot afford to live in San Fransisco should not live there. If that includes every Starbucks barista than so be it, but many make ends meet and live within their means. The extras, or leftovers, who cannot rent a place, and are not making enough to cover rent in the bay area, should move away to places where their wages go farther and they can afford.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        people who currently cannot afford to live in San Fransisco should not live there.

        Again, how do you expect someone who can’t afford a bus ticket, let alone a car, because their income is really low, to move somewhere else? Because it sill sounds like you expect poor people to walk to another place and hope they can find a job there.