Comment by cjensen | Hacker News Reader

Comment by cjensen | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

SF has always been a far worse place to live and work unless you are young and like nightlife and restaurants and lots of socializing outside of the office. Yes, SF has gotten worse because too many petty crimes have been de-criminalized which has lead to the rational decision of bad actors to commit many petty crimes.

Outside of SF, life goes on as it always has. The major crime issues are (a) catalytic converter theft which costs the victim thousands and (b) car window breaks to grab any visible bags because too many techs leave their laptops in a visible bag.

Housing prices have always been rising, traffic is always getting worse. It's annoying, but not new. Companies have always been leaving and new places are always touted as the new "Silicon XYZ." The Silicon Glen. The Silicon Prairie. Silicon Forest.

I'm old. All this has happened before. All this will happen again.

> SF has always been a far worse place to live and work unless you are young and like nightlife and restaurants and lots of socializing outside of the office.

You can replace "SF" with any developed city and you make the same point. It sounds like you're more against urban living in general than SF specifically.

The details and tradeoffs vary by city but I think I generally agree. You tend to have at least many of the same tradeoffs in many major cities and the tradeoffs are such that cons tend to become weightier with age and the pros less compelling.

On the contrary, I find older people who live in cities to be much more engaged in life (and interesting as a result) than older folk who moved out to a suburb or rural area. When you're older in the city, you can walk or take public transport to interesting cultural events, have more frequent conversations with neighbors, and continue to have unique daily stimulus in your life. And as you get older, not being dependent on a car is a huge deal.

Without unique events taking place, people more often than not settle into a set routine that causes them to recede mentally at a much faster rate.

It really depends on what sorts of activities you like. I know a lot of non-urban older folks who are extremely active with hiking, paddling, etc.

And "dependent on car" varies. If you can easily walk distances and take public transit, not being dependent on a car can be a plus. But if you can safely drive but aren't very mobile otherwise, using a car can be more liberating.

Very true - I think the common ground here though is as people get older, they need to stay engaged in something on a regular basis outside of their home.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com