And add to that SF’s geographic barriers. Golden Gate and Bay Bridges, Peninsula freeways and Bart lines that can not efficiently deliver workers into the city during peak commute and have near zero ability to expand their throughput. Major transit bottlenecking.
At the current pace, San Francisco (aka SF) will just be known as Sales Force City.
You’re speaking in absolutes. To me, that makes your argument weak. At a least acknowledge SOME people are failures due to their own choices and lack, and SOME people achieve success due to their own choices and hard work. Or do you disagree entirely that this happens?
Weak arguments aren’t necessarily wrong. It would help your case to have more than just ‘I think that was badly argued’, you need to make arguments of your own.
When a person is seeming to say “no person who does well earned it” and “everybody who fails to get ahead fails for reasons outside of their control, specifically because they are being held back by others” then I don’t really feel much of a counter-argument needs to be made. I will grant you, completely, that these statements are often true. But not absolute.
There’s nothing specifically illegal about evicting teachers in order to make more money. What will happen is that the most entrepreneurial teachers will found private schools and will charge a high fee to educate the children of rich lawyers.
People will adapt their strategies to counter the adverse situation they find themselves in; those who can’t will become homeless and / or will starve, which is exactly how it should be.
America is founded on the principle of individuals who are not afraid or ashamed to take as much as possible at the expense of others, in order to enrich themselves. Replace teachers with Google applications, or import teachers from abroad on short-term visas. It is more economic.