• yeather
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    9 months ago

    That’s the point, the people doing the jobs leave, the market fall in turn, and then new people or others return to the lower rates. The only problem is keeping people away the second time around to ensure the process doesn’t need to be repeated. You can move on the cheap, there are ways to do things cheap if you know how.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 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
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        9 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
          ·
          9 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.

    • KingJalopy @lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      9 months ago

      I hate that you’re being downvoted. I don’t agree with everything you say but you are the only one offering solutions. Everyone else is just doing the “oh I see so people should just…” Followed by taking what you said out of context completely. For what it’s worth I think you’re right about people not being able to afford shit like Starbucks should just make their own, fuck that’s what I do. I don’t do shit I can’t afford because I can’t afford it.

      • yeather
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        9 months ago

        It’s fine. Lemmy is mostly a commie safehaven, i dont really care abt the downvotes it’s just nice watching them seethe.

        • stoly@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          LOL nobody is as angry as a conservative. Nobody on the planet is so full of hate as a conservative.

          What’s really sick is this whole “I did it to make people angry so there” perspective as if you were, what, a 10 year old? Is that as far as you developed that your entire goal in life is to make people uncomfortable by saying horrible things? What do you gain from it other than proving your own intolerance and insecurity? I’ll answer that for you: nothing. You stay just as empty, so you may as well save your energy and be a nice person instead.