
Why Did An Angry Man Punch Me? - jamesjyu
http://www.siliconvalleywatcher.com/mt/archives/2014/01/why_did_an_angry_man.php
======
Crito
Punching random people in the streets is not normal behaviour, that man needs
medical treatment and likely needs to be detained until said treatment takes
effect.

That is not something that companies like Google are equipped to provide. Not
by a long shot. It would not even be legal for them to take that situation
into their own hands. The government of San Francisco is the most immediate
entity actually in a position to do something there.

If the government of San Francisco needs more money to do their job, then you
should be asking the government of San Francisco why the hell they aren't
raising that money by, perhaps, taxing Google.

Asking why Google did not do anything is farcical.

~~~
falcolas
> why the hell they aren't raising that money by, perhaps, taxing Google.

Perhaps because Google hides most of its income from the US and California
governments through various international subsidaries.

And perhaps also because the moment they worked around all these loopholes and
actually started to get money out of Google, Google would simply up and move
away, making things worse.

Google, Twitter, and companies in general, should have some duty to their
communities, if only out of gratitude for providing an environment in which
they could thrive. That they don't speaks volumes on their corporate values.

Personally, I think it's a problem with the "profit for shareholders above all
else" which dominates the discussions about corporate values.

~~~
Crito
They may be hiding most of their international income in Ireland or wherever,
but San Francisco does not need access to _most_ of their income, do they? Tax
the portion that they are able to tax.

If the tax avoidance becomes or is excessive, you refocus your efforts above
local government to seek a solution.

 _" If we increase taxes they'll leave, so there is no point even trying"_ is
a defeatist attitude. And assuming that is how Google _really does_ operate,
then expecting charity from Google is ludicrous _anyway_.

(And you are still ignoring the fact that Google is not in a position to do
anything besides provide money anyway. Your local government is the one that
can actually _do something_ with that money to combat this problem.) _

~~~
greg83
"They may be hiding most of their international income in Ireland"

Bermuda[1]. Google does its best to avoid paying tax in Ireland too.

[1] [http://arstechnica.com/business/2013/10/to-reduce-its-tax-
bu...](http://arstechnica.com/business/2013/10/to-reduce-its-tax-burden-
google-expands-use-of-the-double-irish/)

------
imgabe
I think it's quite a stretch to lay all urban strife at the feet of tech
companies. Twitter's job is to run twitter. They're not a homeless shelter or
a soup kitchen or a free mental health clinic or whatever else this author
thinks they should be. And if they were, they wouldn't be Twitter, and they
wouldn't have the resources to do much of anything.

Why look at homeless people and say Twitter/Google/Apple etc. should fix this
instead of the government should fix this or maybe _I_ should fix this?

~~~
k-mcgrady
>> "Why look at homeless people and say Twitter/Google/Apple etc. should fix
this instead of the government should fix this or maybe I should fix this?"

When you vote in government that don't support a strong social/welfare system
companies and citizens have a social responsibility. I don't think Twitter
should be housing the homeless but doing things like building services inside
the business so employees never have to venture out hurts local businesses and
the local economy. All businesses should be supporting their local
communities, not just tech businesses.

~~~
jerf
"When you vote in government that don't support a strong social/welfare system
companies and citizens have a social responsibility."

Isn't San Francisco pretty "socially aware" already?

~~~
k-mcgrady
I'm not sure but from what I've read about the numbers of homeless people and
those with mental health issues left on the streets I wouldn't say it's that
socially aware.

~~~
wutbrodo
You've got this almost completely ass-backwards. It's a far more complicated
issue than that.

Paradoxically, places with more homeless-friendly policies attract far more
homeless people (for obvious reasons). As a famous example, Santa Monica has a
history of hassling homeless people and effectively criminalizing
homelessness, which has the effect of forcing the homeless population
elsewhere.

Also, relative to a lot of other places in the US, SF's far-more temperate
weather increases the appeal for those living outside. On top of all that, you
get asshole states like Nevada bussing homeless people to places like San
Francisco[1] (SF is actually suing the state of Nevada for this).

Now granted, the way _anywhere_ in the US treats their homeless and mentally
ill is not particularly "socially aware", but looking at SF's relatively large
homeless population and assuming that it comes from a relative lack of social
awareness is a completely wrong-headed approach.

[1] [http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/09/11/2602391/san-
franc...](http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/09/11/2602391/san-francisco-
sues-nevada-patient-dumping/)

------
eeeeaaii
"Why are our cities suffering from the same problems that every other city
faces?"

I don't even know what to say to this. How can the author even be asking this
question?

Here's a basic outline. It feels weird typing this because it should be
obvious, but here goes.

Northern California cities are cities just like any other. There are people of
all income levels doing all sorts of different jobs, or not doing any jobs.
There are a disproportionate number of tech workers in that region, but other
than that it's pretty much the same as anywhere else. People are still people
are still people. The reason a shirtless man randomly punched you is because
he was crazy. The more people you have concentrated in a small area, the more
likely you are to meet up with a crazy person when you're walking down the
street (that's just statistics/probability). I live in NYC, a much bigger
city, and I see crazy people all the time. When you see someone not wearing a
shirt in public, babbling or shouting, hanging around on a street corner by
themselves, etc., etc., they are most likely crazy. If you see a crazy person,
stay as far away from them as possible and do not make eye contact. Definitely
do not engage with them in any way (this includes taking pictures of them)
because it will provoke them. Welcome to city life!

------
dasil003
I'm all for tech companies giving back more and helping with community
building, but I don't see that a bunch of tech-obsessed individuals with
autistic tendencies are going to be best at solving the incredibly serious and
deep-rooted social problems we face in this country.

I totally understand why tech people are a lightning rod for frustration in a
place like San Francisco, but I don't see tech as the cause _or_ the solution
of these problems. That's not to absolve tech people of responsibility—I think
everyone with money in this country has a responsibility—but it's just that we
can't do it alone.

------
carsongross
Alrighty, Tom. What, exactly, do you want the tech companies to do?

Reopen the mental institutions? Maybe under private management? California
closed them when Reagan's budget slashing lined up with the counter-culture's
"Who are we to judge them?" mindset.

Give this guy some money and see how it turns out?

Hire people to reason with him?

It's easy to see there's a problem. The answers to these problems are harder,
and certainly less popular, than asking the tech community to "fix" them.

~~~
DanBC
80s style insane asylums were abusive and were rightly closed.

The lack of suitable community treatment and smaller, better mental health
hospitals is the problem, not the closing of horrible institutions.

------
theorique
Connecting the dots between an act of a single mentally ill individual in San
Francisco (1) and the tech businesses and workers that have moved in within
the past few years, is a bit of a stretch.

No, make that an _enormous_ stretch.

I get that it's supposed to illustrate the disparity between the nouveau riche
and the people left behind. But this is something for individual families
and/or the state to solve. Google, Twitter, or Oracle do best when they are
left to focus on their core business. If you need them to contribute more to
"society" than they already do, raise corporate taxes and pray they don't move
to Austin.

\----

(1) a city famous for _decades_ for the extreme and outlandish behavior of its
homeless people

------
brandon272
People are jumping over the fact that he singled out tech companies but I
think he did so because he was talking about San Francisco specifically.

While Twitter doing more in the community may not have prevented this incident
from occurring, I think the overall idea is right. Corporations should give
back to their communities. Corporate influence is huge, corporations are
members of their communities and have the power to effect real change.

I also think it goes a long way for company culture when the company as a
whole is genuinely focused on giving back. A lot of people rarely feel the joy
of giving because they don't know where to start. They're intimidated. If the
company you work for provides a platform for you to be able to roll up your
sleeves and help people, that can be incredibly rewarding. Everyone benefits,
including the company who gains credibility and good will within the
community.

------
southpawgirl
I spent only one week in SF: I found the vibe horrendous. The existence of a
caste system based on ethnicity and culture is incredibly evident just by
taking a stroll in the city -- it was disturbing, and it made me feel unsafe
(please note that normally I live in a rough London area, I am no shrinking
violet).

I agree with the author of the post that successful entrepreneurs have a
social responsibility towards the territory; otherwise they are just
exacerbating the tension between 'classes'.

~~~
mdakin
I've been by the bay for going on seven years and I'm just now starting to
perceive this caste-system aspect of the place. I perceived it first as
something that I call "dynastic culture," which is, I think, how it shows up
on a individual basis. But when you collect together in the same place a bunch
of people whose consciousnesses run "dynastic culture," you end up with a
caste system emerging at the more macro scale. Anyway, I suspect I would enjoy
corresponding with you. If that's mutual, my email is mpdakin at Google's
service. Cheers!

------
presidentender
If we're going with noblesse oblige, we have to admit that we're nobility.

------
maxcan
> What did xyz do to help this man?

What did he do to help himself? Unfortunately, its damn near impossible to
help people who won't take the first couple steps themselves. I'm all for
helping people who are taking some kind of initiative but being stymied by
bureaucratic indifference, harsh economic reality, or some other circumstance.
Unfortunately, it seems like most of the advocates for the poor and homeless
in SF expect tech companies to fix everything by paying even higher taxes and
eliminating shuttles without expecting the "victims" to take any initiative
themselves.

~~~
jmcgough
Considering his strange outfit, it's entirely possible that he's mentally ill
(or, alternatively, he doesn't like people taking pictures of him). The
article doesn't give any real context.

~~~
maxcan
This applies even all but the most extreme cases of the mentally ill. Outside
of involuntarily confining someone and throwing away the key, if someone with
limited mental illness or addiction doesn't want to get better and take the
first baby steps on their own to doing so (even just stepping foot in a clinic
for example) then no amount of resources will help.

------
gress
Because instead of getting away before he was in punching range, you stood
there and took a photo?

------
bdamm
The point is that technology is supposed to be helping make the world better.
However it clearly does not work very well, or very fast, in the case of
personal conflict. Could it? Perhaps, but let me ask a few similar questions.

How quickly did mass literacy change society for the better? How quickly did
public education change society for the better? How quickly did the printing
press change society for the better? How quickly did antibiotics change
society for the better? I'm sure it wasn't fast enough for many who perished
during the transitional points.

------
owenjones
Another "What have tech companies done for SF post" huh. I still don't
understand when it became the obligation of private companies to do anything
other than run their companies to the best of their abilities?

Situations such as this is why people formed a government that is able to tax
corporations and people to fund homeless shelters and public housing and drug
rehabilitation programs.

Clearly there is a MAJOR societal problem in most of the United States, but I
don't see how people can lay it at the doorstep of Twitter.

~~~
bkmartin
Its about being a great LOCAL corporate citizen. That is what the issue is
about. There is a huge problem for lots of people in San Francisco, rent
prices. People are being displaced at an alarming rate that would be much
worse if it wasn't for some rent controls that were put in place. People are
angry, they are being forced to uproot from a place they called home for many
years. Who's taking their place? Well paid people working for the tech
startups. Who do people then blame for their problems? Tech startups.

Now, the question becomes... do the tech startups get involved in the
conversation and try to find ways to help the inevitable gentrification that
is happening hurt those pushed out less than it otherwise would? Or do they
just take the line the everyone is responsible for themselves, quit crying and
get a better paying job!

There are real people being hurt by Silicon Valley, for no fault of their own.
And lots of these people are very hard working people who just want to live in
a nice place like everyone else. But because their 40 hour weeks only clear
them a couple hundred bucks after taxes they get pushed out to some other area
that is probably more crime ridden and dangerous. Other posters are correct,
you get a very clear economic class system happening.

~~~
owenjones
Well from what I know about SF rent-control-policies, (which is becoming an
annoyingly large amount due to the influx of these posts) is that San
Fransiscans have been historically hurt more from these policies than helped.

You raise valid problems, which I would again say are the traditional
responsibilities, and the reasons why, we have a government. Corporations
historically have had TERRIBLE ethical and moral compasses which is why we
need things like Child Labor Laws. I completely understand why people are mad
at SF tech companies, but I think the rational place to direct their anger is
towards the government that is not looking out for their interests.

To think that Twitter is somehow equipped to tackle the SYSTEMIC societal
issues the US face is baffling.

------
dmm
> What have you done in your neighborhoods that helps people like this poor
> man?

Fascinating attitude. I can certainly understand the desire to help the
clearly insane but being subjected to random violence is absolutely
unacceptable. Who would subject children to such an environment? I guess the
people putting up with this are young people without families or dependants?

------
freerobby
After reading this article I have a pretty good hunch about why the man
punched him.

------
DanBC
I'm having trouble reading this thread with its stigmatising views of "crazy
people", compared to other HN threads that are supportive and urge people with
me tal health problems to talk or to seek help.

Well, some of the attitudes displayed here are precisely why some people feel
unable to talk about their depression or paranoia or hallucinations. Some of
the attitudes here are why people do not disclose their MH problems to emoyers
even though US law provides protection.

~~~
aeorgnoieang
I think it's pretty rare for someone to have problems similar to the person
you depicted and also be employed. And despite legal protections, who would
want to employee or supervise someone prone to taking off their clothes,
wandering the streets, and punching people? Why is it wrong for others to
_not_ want to be around such a person?

Sympathize with everyone!

~~~
bkmartin
That's not true at all. I have a good friend who is treated for "bi-polar"
(not the real term) disorder. He had an issue a couple of years ago. Granted,
he didn't hurt anyone, but he wasn't stable. He got treatment and is a highly
functioning member of society. He holds a full time job, has a wife and a
child. Just because someone isn't completely disabled 100% of the time so that
they are institutionalized or homeless (and should be institutionalized)
doesn't mean they don't have real mental health issues. Its not an on or off
switch. In fact, you wouldn't even know this person had an issue if you
weren't told.

If you don't like sympathy, maybe you could try some empathy. I'm sure your
high horse won't mind if you get down off of him for a while.

------
mdakin
An angry man punched him because a critical mass of humanity continues to
choose dystopia over utopia.

All of the specifics and examples in that article really are just symptoms of
dystopia. The phenomenon of mentally ill people running around on the streets
punching people is merely just a symptom of dystopia.

If you want to blame something-- it's not tech companies, Google, Twitter,
etc. It's human nature in general, and it's the dystopian beliefs and
behaviors of a group of assholes+morons alive on this planet right now who
collectively pull humanity towards dystopia by their actions and behaviors in
the world relative to the other humans they interact with.

Humans on this planet at this moment in technology-time have all the
technological know-how to create a world-wide utopia-- theoretically, it could
be done in a matter of months. Unfortunately, there is a critical mass of
humans who prefer to live in dystopia. And there are many in that critical
mass who are willing to kill other people who disagree with them. So dystopia
is what we have at this moment in time.

Free will's a bitch when there is a critical mass of dystopian assholes+morons
on a planet. The behavior of that critical mass of dystopians has a sort of
spooky action at a distance for the rest of humanity, even those who are not
directly connected/interacting with the dystopians.

I can't wait for dystopian actions, behaviors, ideas, models, philosophies,
religions, corporations, and governments to die, finally.

------
philbarr
Seems to me that if he had enough time to take his phone out of his pocket and
take a picture so that he could blog about it he had enough time to turn
around and run in the opposite direction. That's worked perfectly well for me
a couple of times.

Was he waiting for someone to send him a tweet: "leg it!" ?

~~~
memracom
He did say that he was a big strong fellow and that the punch didn't bother
him. What bothered him was that incidents like this are a daily occurrence in
a city with the largest concentration in the world of people who want to do
things differently and solve problems.

Either few people bother to read the article or he really is right that the
people of HN don't really care about solving hard problems, just the easy get-
rich-quick kind of problems.

------
mrpoptart
[http://www.sfgate.com/health/article/The-crisis-of-
homelessn...](http://www.sfgate.com/health/article/The-crisis-of-homelessness-
is-rooted-in-mental-3236733.php)

------
billyjobob
Have you seen the TV show 'Arrow'? They solved the problem of their inner city
ghetto in quite an original way.

