Ah, but this is just a blog about OUR neighborhood, so I cease and desist. But, one analogy from a friend of mine who grew up in the Marina district prior to what it became today…

That neighborhood was comprised of a variety of classes and ethnic groups. Today, its not the only hipsters that those residents frown on (only regarding their clothing lifestyle choices, not their approach to community and city planning—if that ever came into their shortsighted heads) it was the yuppies whose sole interest was self-serving and basically destroyed the cohesion of tenants, property owners, and small businesses in the area. While the yuppies were educated claimed the intent of cleaning up and modernizing the neighborhood, they did so at the cost of the community that was thriving there instead bringing in outside businesses that took over what was.

Change is welcome, only of it benefits most to all those involved.

1. And yes, we do still call it Boalt (despite Berk’s attempts at relabeling the school).

2-3. If you think culture = purchasing power then you don’t understand what the word culture means. There have been several dominant subcultures in SF in the last 30 years that eschew pp as a way of measuring worth. I think what you’re seeing here is a backlash from a part of SF’s counter-culture. If you reread what I wrote, you’d see I clearly stated that it’s not about actual bank balances, it’s about how people exercise that balance. Cool and lame are always going to be arbitrary in a certain sense. I’m ok with that.

I could give you reasons for why Ed Hardy and cookie-cutter condominiums are lame. They would be well reasoned, but we’d never be able to completely universalize them. It’s an aesthetic argument that has meaning. You can choose to ignore that, the same way you can choose to enjoy bad art.

4. Here’s the point: SF (and cities in general) are homogenizing. I think this is a bad thing. I don’t want the Mission to be exactly like the Marina (and vice versa, it’s cool to be able to go to a different part of town that feels different).

The great thing is that you sound like a racist, yuppie douchebag. I’m sure in your little cookie-cutter big(shit)law world people couldn’t possibly disagree with your assessment of the situation and still be intelligent. Seems like you really benefited from your education.

2. “the new loaded people are lame. therein lies the problem.” the line of demarcation separating cool from lame is arbitrary and capricious (I too went to law school) at best. just because what you have deemed “lame” is now supplanting what you call “cool” is adding nothing to the argument (your option on lame/cool is no more valid than Kiya’s for example).

3. your distinction between “purchasing power” and “culture” is a distinction without a difference. specifically, purchasing power dictates culture/trend/style. just because your point of view is losing ground does not mean the culture winning is wrong or bad. in fact, this is the form of selfish thinking I was alluding to in my previous post.

4. just because there is another neighborhood equipped to serve the needs of a particular clientele, that fact alone, is not dispositive on whether the mission should/could also serve that same clientele.

what i have learned is that jimbeam’s intellectual prowess is rather weak especially for someone from a top 10 law school. although I did not attend “boalt” (my law school was on the east coast) my experience with attorneys that have graduated from your purported institution leads me to believe that you either 1) don’t attend “boalt” or 2) you got into the school based on something other than merit (e.g., nepotism or affirmative action).

If I were you I would probably pry for condos too.

it’s less about purchasing power and more about culture. this is where people simply don’t get it. there have always been loaded people in the mission (in the last 10 years, at least), except they were cool. the new loaded people are lame. therein lies the problem. they want cookie-cutter condos and chain pizza places and probably upscale cocktails. we have a neighborhood like that already in sf (several) and we don’t need another one.

also, i am at boalt, so the poor/dumb argument doesn’t work in this case. (well, i am currently poor).

- jimbeam (laughing my way to the poorhouse, oops i mean bank)

Seriously though, don’t give me some shit about yuppie this, yuppie that. Fact is, those jeans are hella expensive. It makes sense that you would want people with more money in closer proximity to the jeans. This was Kevin’s point after you called him names.

Seriously though, why does anyone think this is a who’s lived here the longest contest? You can live here a long time and still suck.

If it were the way it was 25 years ago — your car would have been broken into dozens of times each year. If you don’t have a car, your bike would have been stolen over and over again, or pieces ripped off it. If you went to the [insert hipster bar name here] you would have been the only guy there under the age of 50 — and no hot chicks in sight. You would have to be content with only two types of food — burritos and chinese, or a couple of extremely greasy eggs at Jim’s. Yes, it was still sunny back then, I’ll give you that.