|
etalian posted:title of this thread should be "I hate california's major population centers"
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 22:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 19:09 |
|
|
Cities. Yuck. Back to the country livin' for everyone, amirite? http://places.findthehome.com/l/95799/The-United-States#featured%20visualization&s=3Gzdrp Oh, hmm, that's odd. Violent crime rates are actually highest in the central, rural counties, when you consider them as a rate per 100,000 people. California is doing pretty poo poo compared to a lot of the country, though. Maybe overcrowding our privatized prisons with 3rd strikers and then dumping them back out the other side with little or no attempt at rehab is a bad strategy. Then again, at least we're not Florida. Or... what the gently caress is going on in South Carolina? And, eskimos be gangstas. At least we're doing pretty good on the ol rape-o-meter:  EDIT ZOOM: ENHANCE  OK, so San Francisco is still tiny on this map (this is violent crime again) but hoverover says 864.1 violent crimes per 100k, which is... the highest in the state. Probably in part an artifact of the county of SF's size - it is entirely urban, whereas most of the other counties include a mix of cities and rural areas. Leperflesh fucked around with this message at 23:08 on May 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 23:01
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Cities. Yuck. Back to the country livin' for everyone, amirite? Kentucky's looking surprisingly good.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 23:12
|
|
|
Those statistics have to be taken with a lot of salt. These are the FBI's crime statistics, but they rely on state-by-state reporting, and the states differ on exactly how they classify crimes, as well as what actually constitutes a reported crime. So when you see entire states with markedly better (or worse) numbers, there's a decent chance it's just a difference in how that state classifies things.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 23:15
|
|
|
Or just live in the suburbs and don't deal with getting pissed on every time you step outside, yup sounds good to me.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 23:37
|
|
|
FCKGW posted:Or just live in the suburbs and don't deal with getting pissed on every time you step outside, yup sounds good to me. yeah but something something culture
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 23:55
|
|
|
So what exactly makes Sunset and Ocean Beach qualify as urban and not suburban?
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 23:57
|
|
|
FCKGW posted:Or just live in the suburbs and don't deal with getting pissed on every time you step outside, yup sounds good to me. Pshh I'd rather live in the city so I have targets to pee on (it's the families in matching San Francisco fleece jackets).
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 00:01
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:
Yeah it's kind of misleading measuring by the county level, because SF is the only city-county in CA. But when you measure by city limits, SF still has the third highest violent crime rate of medium/large CA cities (population of 250,000+): Total reported violent crime rate per 100,000 residents, in 2013: Oakland - 1,976.8 Stockton - 1,208.2 San Francisco - 847.1 Sacramento - 656.0 Bakersfield - 513.2 Fresno - 501.5 Long Beach - 499.5 Los Angeles - 426.0 Riverside - 420.3 San Diego - 393.0 Santa Ana - 336.8 Anaheim - 327.2 San Jose - 324.0 http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/uc...y_city_2013.xls Despite being third overall though, SF has the second highest robbery rate in CA, after Oakland. SF also doesn't report aggravated assaults correctly (they've been re-categorizing all aggravated assaults related to domestic violence, so that they're absent from the year-end reports), so the real violent crime total is probably more in the range of 900-1000 incidents per 100k residents. I'm sure many other cities do stats-fixing too, but I know for sure that for a long time the SFPD was (and apparently still is) doing it. Trabisnikof posted:So what exactly makes Sunset and Ocean Beach qualify as urban and not suburban? Because it's more densely populated than 95% of everything else that's called "urban" in America (going by census tract, we're talking anywhere from 10,000 to 50,000 people per square mile in the sunset district), is covered in wall-to-wall unbroken development and concrete, has decent public transit that is really good by suburban standards, and it's within SF city-proper? Rah! fucked around with this message at 00:36 on May 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 00:06
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:So what exactly makes Sunset and Ocean Beach qualify as urban and not suburban? Absolutely nothing. We need to get a bart line out there and get them some of that culture quick. Also, I lived in San Francisco for half a decade, and in Oakland and Berkeley, too, and never saw all the pissmudding that you guys did. And I lived there back when the Castro was gay and not posh muscovites angling for a new neighborhood. You all must have lived in the Tenderloin or something.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 00:06
|
|
|
TildeATH posted:Absolutely nothing. We need to get a bart line out there and get them some of that culture quick. Nope, never lived in the Tenderloin....it's not like you have to be there to see some pissmuddin', though it is a great place for it. I live in the outer sunset district now, have also lived in the Inner Sunset, and grew up in Noe Valley, The Castro, and the Mission District, before they were overrun with rich yuppies and hipsters (though the mission is still pretty rough and working class east of Valencia...for now). Of course I've also been all over the city too, including some really hosed up areas, and I've been riding Muni regularly for 20 years, which has contributed a lot of gross/shady incidents to my life. And yeah we need more BART. Like, everywhere. Rah! fucked around with this message at 00:37 on May 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 00:13
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:California is doing pretty poo poo compared to a lot of the country, though. Maybe overcrowding our privatized prisons with 3rd strikers and then dumping them back out the other side with little or no attempt at rehab is a bad strategy. edit: San Francisco proper isn't quite fair as a comparison because they draw so many people who do not live there, including criminals. San Francisco also has pretty amazing rehab programs, sends almost no one to prison, and has oodles of empty beds in the jail, so if your theory that being tough on crime doesn't work (which to be clear, it doesn't), San Francisco is not the city you want to cite. nm fucked around with this message at 04:05 on May 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 04:01
|
|
|
Frisco was also used a lot in the 60's / 70's too (Hunter S. Thompson, Wolfe, Kesey and others). The ones who get all up in a huff about it now are usually Marina trustafarian Ausländers from the East Coast.  I lived in SF during the 90's and worked there again in 2007-2008 and only had some bad bus experiences going through the hood (bangers about to bang my "yuppie white rear end".) I lived in Oakland in 2002-2004 and surprisingly never had a single run in. I do get some weirdos on the buses every week when I'm back in Oakland though, no pooping/fapping though, just weirdos. Keyser_Soze fucked around with this message at 04:18 on May 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 04:15
|
|
|
nm posted:edit: San Francisco proper isn't quite fair as a comparison because they draw so many people who do not live there, including criminals. So does every central city in any metropolitan area. Suburbs attract commuter criminals too. Rah! fucked around with this message at 05:21 on May 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 04:44
|
|
|
You should only be surprised if someone stops masturbating on public transit. That's how you know something terrible is about to happen.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 06:23
|
|
|
Rah! posted:So does every central city in any metropolitan area. Suburbs attract commuter criminals too. True, but I would venture that San Francisco draws far more people per resident than places like LA.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 07:10
|
|
|
LA is just more spread out. That's part of the reason why I live in Oakland. There are places for the crazy to go. SF is pretty geographically constrained so where else are you gonna poop?
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 08:43
|
|
|
nm posted:True, but I would venture that San Francisco draws far more people per resident than places like LA. SF does draw more people, but doubt it spikes the crime rate so much that we should treat SF as a special case when comparing it to other cities. I would bet that if you put all big CA cities (city-limits only, not metros) in a vacuum, SF would still be near the top for violent crime. The vast majority of the people who come into any city during the day are normal people going to a normal job, not commuter criminals. Here's the daytime population change for a bunch of US cities, as of 2010: http://www.sccommunityprofiles.org/census/daylead.php Sacramento grows the most as a percentage for big CA cities, with SF close behind, while SF grows the most in raw numbers, followed by SD and then LA (and SJ is the only big city to lose people to suburban job centers during the day, instead of gaining population). And there are more cities around the US that draw more people per resident than SF does. The idea that SF's crime is largely the fault of "outsiders" is just something I've heard a lot throughout my life, usually from people with little to no experience with SF's bad side (and they usually blame SF's crime on Oakland, or just "the east bay", unsurprisingly). I grew up with a decent amount of exposure to the hosed criminal side of SF (friends who were surenos/nortenos, drug dealers...and all that poo poo i posted about on the last page, among other things), and I'm pretty sure most of SF's crime is committed by SF residents. I've never found any stats on the topic, but I do remember a news article from several years ago, about a weeks-long drug bust operation in the Tenderloin and Mission districts, which are almost certainly the neighborhoods in SF that see the most commuter criminals, because they're on BART lines, have gang presence from statewide/national gangs like the Nortenos/Surenos/MS-13 (so you might have some members from say Richmond or something showing up to hangout in the old hood if they used to live in SF, or if they have family/friends in SF), and they have lots of poor residents, which equals a big drug market. I know lots of Oakland dealers like to hit up the Tenderloin (not that they outnumber the SF dealers), and SF dealers/criminals go to Oakland too, and elsewhere in the bay. Anyways, of the 100+ arrested drug dealers in that operation, 69% were SF residents....so i'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that for SF as whole, the number of criminals who are SF residents is also going to be at least at 70%, if not higher. And on a related note: for metropolitan areas with over 1 million people, the SF-Oakland-Fremont MSA has the highest violent crime rate in CA (incidents per 100k residents, 2011): San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA - 508.3 Sacramento-Arden-Arcade-Roseville, CA - 420.2 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA - 405.4 Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA - 354.9 San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA - 351.5 San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA - 256.1 If you go below 1 million people, Stockton and Fresno take the number 1 and 2 spots. Stockton by far, too. That city has problems. Crime chat is serious business  Shbobdb posted:LA is just more spread out. That's part of the reason why I live in Oakland. There are places for the crazy to go. SF is pretty geographically constrained so where else are you gonna poop? That's a good point about density too, which can definitely skew perception of how much crime there is one way or another. Rah! fucked around with this message at 09:43 on May 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 08:43
|
|
|
Also for LA the Santa Monica area is the single biggest employment concentration so by the definition of "city limits only" has a lot of reverse commuting from LA to West Hollywood, Santa Monica, Beverly Hills, or Burbank. These are all artifacts of the loose city of LA boundaries. Edit: Here is population vs. employment density for LA.  
Bip Roberts fucked around with this message at 18:55 on May 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 18:46
|
|
|
I've been forcing my friends to take the subway and slowly introducing them to the insanity of public transit in LA. Slowly pulling the veil of real society back on them via mass public transit has been quite the  experence for me. I love public transit and will vote in the future for another tax hike.Build loving subways and light rail everywhere.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 21:22
|
|
|
I currently live in Zürich, Switzerland but will be moving to Riverside, CA in about a year. This thread certainly has been an...interesting...read for attempting to understand what my new home will be like.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 22:27
|
|
|
Anonymous Zebra posted:I currently live in Zürich, Switzerland but will be moving to Riverside, CA in about a year. This thread certainly has been an...interesting...read for attempting to understand what my new home will be like. I hope it's a really truly great job/significant other.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 22:28
|
|
|
Bip Roberts posted:I hope it's a really truly great job/significant other. It better be the Pope or Steve Jobs or Jack Bauer that ordered him to make that move.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 22:34
|
|
|
Anonymous Zebra posted:I currently live in Zürich, Switzerland but will be moving to Riverside, CA in about a year. This thread certainly has been an...interesting...read for attempting to understand what my new home will be like. I shudder to think what terrible life choices you have made that require you to move to Riverside.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 22:37
|
|
|
Riverside honestly didn't look that bad when I toured around it. Lots of huge roads, and no public transport, but that's basically America. Go forth and tell me everything wrong with it if you must.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 22:38
|
|
|
Anonymous Zebra posted:Riverside honestly didn't look that bad when I toured around it. Lots of huge roads, and no public transport, but that's basically America. Go forth and tell me everything wrong with it if you must. No, most of America is nice. Edit: I mean really the problems are just traffic, smog, temperature, and the people who live there. It would be nice without those and some more rain.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 22:41
|
|
|
I have no idea about this weekly but I saw it at a kebab house earlier: 
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 22:44
|
|
|
Anonymous Zebra posted:Riverside honestly didn't look that bad when I toured around it. Lots of huge roads, and no public transport, but that's basically America. Go forth and tell me everything wrong with it if you must. Yeah, if you lived in Switzerland and you had this stereotype of America as being culture-less, polluted, racist, undereducated, non-civic minded, suburban and filled with the worst people on the face of the Earth, then I can see how Riverside wouldn't surprise you.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 22:44
|
|
|
I dunno man. Getting out of Switzerland, even if it means moving to Riverside, seems like a net positive to me.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 22:49
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:I dunno man. Getting out of Switzerland, even if it means moving to Riverside, seems like a net positive to me. He better be here on the behest of an international crime ring looking to procure the next great european rave drug.... and all he comes back with is meth.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 23:10
|
|
|
Buy a "909 Edition" Bro Truck and get some Affliction stickers and you'll fit right in.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 23:12
|
|
|
Jesus didn't tap t-shirt.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 23:13
|
|
|
Jerry Manderbilt posted:I have no idea about this weekly but I saw it at a kebab house earlier: That's Larry Agran's Pravda-equivalent. Use it to line a birdcage or housetrain a puppy. e: Seriously, that useless corrupt fucker and his scumbag cheering squad have done everything they can to cover up or deflect from their massive corruption. gently caress Larry Agran.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 23:24
|
|
|
SporkOfTruth posted:That's Larry Agran's Pravda-equivalent. Use it to line a birdcage or housetrain a puppy. Ah so it's his mouthpiece? Got it. Though I'm not registered to vote here anyway.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 23:26
|
|
|
For the IE old riverside (the wood streets, etc) isn't that terrible. It has trees and The Salted Pig. Redlands is somewhat better. But note the qualifier, "for the IE." I just got out of there, may God have mercy on your soul. Watch out for bro-dozers. Put Jesus stickers on your truck to fit in.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2015 00:19
|
|
|
Also if you're going to be faculty at UC riverside I have a few friends who work there. They all say fantastic undergrads, so-so grad students, and great faculty. Get yourself a good post-doc.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2015 00:22
|
|
|
Bip Roberts posted:Also if you're going to be faculty at UC riverside I have a few friends who work there. They all say fantastic undergrads, so-so grad students, and great faculty. Get yourself a good post-doc. If you're gonna be a UC Riverside prof, move to Redlands. Only walkable city in the IE. Edit: when it is not 115.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2015 00:27
|
|
|
nm posted:But note the qualifier, "for the IE." I just got out of there, may God have mercy on your soul. Watch out for bro-dozers. Put Jesus stickers on your truck to fit in. (Actually that might have been Santa Ana? The whole area kind of blurs together for me.) FRINGE fucked around with this message at 00:32 on May 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2015 00:30
|
|
|
orange county is just the IE with more money and less character.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2015 02:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 19:09 |
|
|
Don't you mean....The Orange Curtain.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2015 02:11
|
|