Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 39

Thread: What $2 million gets you in San Francisco

  1. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    6,242
    Rosa, my brother's condo in Cambridge is 760 square feet and one in the building identical to his just sold for 670,000.

  2. #22
    Senior Member iris lilies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Always logged in
    Posts
    21,489
    Quote Originally Posted by jp1 View Post
    You’d love living in San Francisco. We’re big on telling people what they can and can’t do with their property.

    But I get your point. And I admit, San Francisco is the most attractive city in the country to me. Precisely because of that street scape that looks like nowhere else.
    That is why you (the generic you) have to be careful where you buy.

    We get people who buy into our neighborhood because it is beautiful and charming, and then spout off libertarianish nonsense when our code restricts what they can do to the exterier of their house. Umm, no. A GOOD libertarian restricts Big Government, one size fits all with laws made from far away, but supports local regulations tailored to the locale, made by residents there.

    My friends and neighbors made this city law, our historic code, and we regularly get together every decade and review and change it.

    thank you for coming to my TED talk.

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    3,512
    We have those historic neighborhoods. In fact, I live in one. Very noticeable where there are no limitations. One neighborhood just next to a big historic one has three story modern candle looking tower houses being built in the middle of one story low sloped roof affordable houses. It looks incredibly weird. In fact, a brand new container house by a nationally known architect was built on one of these tiny lots with small old houses all around it. The big complaint here is the taxes on the little affordable houses are pushing up fast due to the new construction fill ins around them.

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    7,381
    Quote Originally Posted by iris lilies View Post
    A GOOD libertarian restricts Big Government, one size fits all with laws made from far away, but supports local regulations tailored to the locale, made by residents there.
    I like what Charlie Cook said about being a fairly strict libertarian at the federal level, much less strict at the state level, and even less strict at the local level.

    If a city wants to dictate the shape of doorknobs while junkies defecate on the sidewalks outside, that should be mostly a matter for the residents and the U-Haul logistics staff.

  5. #25
    Senior Member Teacher Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    12,291
    I used to love San Francisco. I used to go yearly. The last time I was there about 5 years ago it was so dirty and disgusting that I havenít been back. I can barely smell anything and the urine smell was awful. There was overflowing garbage in many places, saw someone shooting up and massive homeless.

  6. #26
    Senior Member iris lilies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Always logged in
    Posts
    21,489
    Quote Originally Posted by Teacher Terry View Post
    I used to love San Francisco. I used to go yearly. The last time I was there about 5 years ago it was so dirty and disgusting that I haven’t been back. I can barely smell anything and the urine smell was awful. There was overflowing garbage in many places, saw someone shooting up and massive homeless.
    The Correct term these days is “unhoused.”

    Must not put the burden for his status on the victim. Must put the burden on society where it belongs! Apparently “unhoused” means society is not doing its job by providing housing for all, but “ homeless” implies street people are not providing a home for themselves from available resources.

    Thank me for your Wokeness lesson today! If you can’t see the difference, well, I can’t say that I do either.

  7. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    9,351
    Well the last time I was in San Francisco was (no I correct myself it was 6 years ago), but it was a beautiful, beautiful city. I was like wow, why can't we have nice things?

    Whether the house could/should be fixed kinda depends on the structural condition of the house IMO. I mean it is old, and obviously wasn't maintained that well, and that's not a great combination. But I also have no way of knowing much more. And a lot of how badly it *looks* could be fixed with paint.

    That's silly about homeless, I mean single words don't convey a whole political philosophy, uh more if they are words for a political philosophy I guess, but they don't' really either. And I thought twitter had length limits. What if they restricted all dialogue to one word.
    Trees don't grow on money

  8. #28
    Senior Member jp1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    7,995
    Quote Originally Posted by iris lilies View Post
    The Correct term these days is “unhoused.”

    Must not put the burden for his status on the victim. Must put the burden on society where it belongs! Apparently “unhoused” means society is not doing its job by providing housing for all, but “ homeless” implies street people are not providing a home for themselves from available resources.

    Thank me for your Wokeness lesson today! If you can’t see the difference, well, I can’t say that I do either.
    Well, when the housing market is such that a rundown unlivable dump of a house sells for $2M is it any surprise that there are people without housing?

  9. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    3,512
    San Francisco is the only city I have visited where I felt totally unsafe. Did not feel that way in NYC, Bangkok, Mexico City, Chicago, etc. But SF scared me and this was a long time ago. Used to love it. Was there for weeks in the 70s where the cable cars were actually used for commuting to work and Union Square was a safe place to sit and have lunch.

  10. #30
    Senior Member iris lilies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Always logged in
    Posts
    21,489
    The San Francisco house is perfectly fine structurally. My God it is really nice inside! It has an original Victorian door original floors original plaster and original woodwork.

    Our close friends lived in a kitchen that looked very much like that for more than a decade.


    The absence or presence of finishes does not indicate in any way structural soundness.


    Here are two photos from our own house when we bought it. The first is our living room. The second is the second floor with no staircase in the stairwell because it was removed by the previous Rehabber who got tired of the project and put it up for sale. All of our little houses have been some version of this.


    That’s why I was so thrilled by our ( by most standards) modest Hermann House where you could actually move in, use plumbing, a fireplace, and wonder of wonders, use central air conditioning!

    26BF702A-F902-4938-A41C-D7E8DD62DFE9.jpg

    375A0B3C-C340-4914-82C0-E1B9F8457F08.jpg
    Attached Images Attached Images

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •