Jump to content

San Francisco moves to ban workplace cafeterias

Sandman

By Sandman
in Daily Texan

 Share

Recommended Posts

Fudge Nuggets

Fudge Nuggets 19195

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Parliament said:
2 hours ago, Washpark said:
 I love when other people opine on local regulatory decisions then decry federalism. / Full CR as you have a history on that other site saying to respect local law  
Having lived in SF, the issue if you actually read is that SF city gave a bunch of tax breaks for companies to have offices in the city with the understanding that the employee base would stimulate local areas (market st for Twitter) to help redevelop the city.
 
These companies instead gave fully subsidize meals so workers have no reason to go to local businesses so the arrangement was broken.
 
The city is trying to fix their loop hole as the result has been a bunch of tech companies in SoMa for cheap rent but the rest of the area still looks like a war zone as employees spend 0 dollars in the area.
 
 

Read more  

They're idiots, but our freedom lets them be so.

This must be why the terrorists hate us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Doc Sam Beckett

Doc Sam Beckett 5793

Posted
Posted
On 7/26/2018 at 5:37 AM, ChickenSandwich said:

SF is on a roll. The rent is too damn high....so the rest of America needs to pony up

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2018/07/22/democrats-proposed-rent-subsidy-would-enrich-landlords-and-fleece-taxpayers/amp/

k Harris sponsors the “Rent Relief Act”

once again paying for the problems you created with other peoples money, while simultaneously not addressing the problem at all. Sounds like the left’s immigration policies. 

 

“Four Democrat Senators, led by likely 2020 Presidential candidate Kamala Harris (D-CA) have introduced a bill to subsidize rent through a refundable tax credit on federal income taxes. The basic idea of the Rent Relief Act is that low-or middle-income households that pays over 30% of their income for rent could claim a refundable tax credit for a percentage of rent paid above that 30% threshold, with the percentage depends on the household income.”

California is a net contributor in federal taxes, so wouldn't it be more like them getting their own money back instead of Kentucky or Louisiana getting it? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lhorn

Lhorn 4914

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

California is a net contributor in federal taxes, so wouldn't it be more like them getting their own money back instead of Kentucky or Louisiana getting it? 

As someone who pays a tremendous amount of taxes living in California why should I subsidize the rent of people who chose to live in one of the most expensive real estate markets in the world?  You can’t make the argument that it’s somehow to my benefit that SF pays people rent. If they can’t afford to live there and moved away it wouldn’t hurt me a bit. Its simply the state enabling people who are choosing electively to live beyond their means. 

Edited by Lhorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DanRydell

DanRydell 799

Posted
Posted
As someone who pays a tremendous amount of taxes living in California why should I subsidize the rent of people who chose to live in one of the most expensive real estate markets in the world?  You can’t make the argument that it’s somehow to my benefit that SF pays people rent. If they can’t afford to live there and moved away it wouldn’t hurt me a bit. Its simply the state enabling people who are choosing electively to live beyond their means. 


It’s not to your benefit that people have large mortgage payments either and yet we subsidize that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DanRydell

DanRydell 799

Posted
Posted
This is exactly what I was going to say.  With the filth problem and tremendous penetration of angry, aggressive bums, it's really become and uninviting place to electively visit.  I live about an hour away, could easily get there on BART yet have zero desire to go there and haven't been in the city for anything other than an appointment or to get on a cruise ship in prob 7-10 years.  It seems very uninviting to eat there.  Restaurants are covered in graffiti, dirty as hell, smell like a dumpster, restrooms are a mess.
They seem to have sold their souls and make the lives of the homeless, what 5% better?  I mean, they are still homeless, sleeping on a bench, digging through trash cans for food, shitting on the sidewalk.  Has the benefit to the homeless been worth fucking over the "regular folks" who struggle to live in one of the worlds most expensive cities?  They are ruining a great city for what?  Their ethos seems to be "there is no limit to how much we are willing to fuck over regular people in order to prove how fucking compassionate we are."
 
Living in the east bay, there are all types here and largely there are good reasonable people, but SF can fall into the ocean for all I care.


I was there three weeks ago and found it quite inviting. The homeless population seemed no more prevalent or problematic than in Austin.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lhorn

Lhorn 4914

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, DanRydell said:

 


It’s not to your benefit that people have large mortgage payments either and yet we subsidize that.

 

That is a terrible argument.  There's obviously a great argument to be made that mortgage subsidies are a bad thing. So double down on it?

Edited by Lhorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SDG

SDG 3319

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, DanRydell said:

 


I was there three weeks ago and found it quite inviting. The homeless population seemed no more prevalent or problematic than in Austin.

 

Apparently, not everyone feels the way you do. 

“Medical Convention Cancels on San Francisco Because Its Streets Are So Distressing”

http://fortune.com/2018/07/02/san-francisco-streets-streets-medical-convention/

Edited by SDG
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Doc Sam Beckett

Doc Sam Beckett 5793

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, Lhorn said:

As someone who pays a tremendous amount of taxes living in California why should I subsidize the rent of people who chose to live in one of the most expensive real estate markets in the world?  You can’t make the argument that it’s somehow to my benefit that SF pays people rent. If they can’t afford to live there and moved away it wouldn’t hurt me a bit. Its simply the state enabling people who are choosing electively to live beyond their means. 

Well your point is much different than "creating problems and asking the rest of America to fix it". And technically SF would be getting their federal tax dollars back and your federal tax dollars would continue to subsidize Jim Bob in Mississippi. 

Californians send a lot of money to the fed that gets redistributed to horribly managed states who hate California. I bet 90% of Californians would rather their tax dollars go back to Cali. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
phdhorn

phdhorn 6224

Posted
Posted
48 minutes ago, SDG said:

Apparently, not everyone feels the way you do. 

“Medical Convention Cancels on San Francisco Because Its Streets Are So Distressing”

http://fortune.com/2018/07/02/san-francisco-streets-streets-medical-convention/

Jeez, with all the disease and shit (literally) ramping around there, you'd think they'd love it if for nothing else the extensive opportunities for field work!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted

Honest question---what do supporters of "the State" think is going to happen when the State becomes all-powerful.  How is this not the inevitable conclusion of what support?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lhorn

Lhorn 4914

Posted
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Lobo said:

Honest question---what do supporters of "the State" think is going to happen when the State becomes all-powerful.  How is this not the inevitable conclusion of what support?  

I would also add that some people are fine with the state over stepping it's bounds because they vaguely support the agenda of the state in that particular action..  But what happens when political winds change and the new runners of the state overstep their bounds in ways that you don't support.  Would you then have a problem with the state overstepping? It's probably best that state not assume it has the right to tell people where they can and can't buy their lunch (as long as we're not talking about health codes etc). 

Edited by Lhorn
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChickenSandwich

ChickenSandwich 9840

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Lhorn said:

I would also add that some people are fine with the state over stepping it's bounds because they vaguely support the agenda of the state in that particular action..  But what happens when political winds change and the new runners of the state overstep their bounds in ways that you don't support.  Would you then have a problem with the state overstepping? It's probably best that state not assume it has the right to tell people where they can and can't buy their lunch (as long as we're not talking about health codes etc). 

Why not make business relocate from SF and redistribute those companies, jobs and workers equally across the major population centers in CA. This would would help reduce the demand for housing in the most desirable cities like SF and lower property values.  Can repurpose the vacated spacing with public housing, and then relocate the homeless evenly across the state. 

SF need only look to Socialism for the answer. Redistribute the locations of the corporations. Not only does SF not have the housing to accommodate all those who want to live there, they don’t really have the land to expand either. 

They have already eliminated the middle class on their present trajectory. 

 

*would also need to disallow second and vacation home owners, require residency

Edited by ChickenSandwich
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Incredulity

Incredulity 11675

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Lhorn said:

I would also add that some people are fine with the state over stepping it's bounds because they vaguely support the agenda of the state in that particular action..  But what happens when political winds change and the new runners of the state overstep their bounds in ways that you don't support.  Would you then have a problem with the state overstepping? It's probably best that state not assume it has the right to tell people where they can and can't buy their lunch (as long as we're not talking about health codes etc). 

We are witnessing  this first hand with Obama’s pen and phone changing to Trump’s Twitter insanity.  Reid blowing up the 60 vote threshold and the confirmation of Gorsuch and soon Kavanaugh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Michael Knight

Michael Knight 12981

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Lhorn said:

I would also add that some people are fine with the state over stepping it's bounds because they vaguely support the agenda of the state in that particular action..  But what happens when political winds change and the new runners of the state overstep their bounds in ways that you don't support.  Would you then have a problem with the state overstepping? It's probably best that state not assume it has the right to tell people where they can and can't buy their lunch (as long as we're not talking about health codes etc). 

aKzCCpG.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lhorn

Lhorn 4914

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Beau Vine said:

 

Compromise. Free cafeteria on site offering coffee and bran muffins. 1.00 pay toilets spread throughout the community where your shit can enrich the local community, provided you can find one where a homeless person hasn't set up semipermanent camp.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChickenSandwich

ChickenSandwich 9840

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Lhorn said:

Compromise. Free cafeteria on site offering coffee and bran muffins. 1.00 pay toilets spread throughout the community where your shit can enrich the local community, provided you can find one where a homeless person hasn't set up semipermanent camp.  

Then pay the homeless to compost the shit and mulch the city’s parks. 

Its a circle of life. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aqua Buddha

Aqua Buddha 14598

Posted
Posted
On 7/27/2018 at 7:57 PM, Lhorn said:

This is exactly what I was going to say.  With the filth problem and tremendous penetration of angry, aggressive bums, it's really become and uninviting place to electively visit.  I live about an hour away, could easily get there on BART yet have zero desire to go there and haven't been in the city for anything other than an appointment or to get on a cruise ship in prob 7-10 years.  It seems very uninviting to eat there.  Restaurants are covered in graffiti, dirty as hell, smell like a dumpster, restrooms are a mess.

They seem to have sold their souls and make the lives of the homeless, what 5% better?  I mean, they are still homeless, sleeping on a bench, digging through trash cans for food, shitting on the sidewalk.  Has the benefit to the homeless been worth fucking over the "regular folks" who struggle to live in one of the worlds most expensive cities?  They are ruining a great city for what?  Their ethos seems to be "there is no limit to how much we are willing to fuck over regular people in order to prove how fucking compassionate we are."

 

Living in the east bay, there are all types here and largely there are good reasonable people, but SF can fall into the ocean for all I care.

If San Francisco and Seattle spent as much time and money on affordable housing for the middle class as they did while shoveling money at the homeless, they wouldn't have the housing problems they do not.

Instead, San Francisco is the most beautiful big city in the world and it's been turned into an open toilet.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jim Tom Pinch

Jim Tom Pinch 120

Posted
Posted
On 7/27/2018 at 9:11 PM, Washpark said:

 I love when other people opine on local regulatory decisions then decry federalism. / Full CR as you have a history on that other site saying to respect local law

 

Having lived in SF, the issue if you actually read is that SF city gave a bunch of tax breaks for companies to have offices in the city with the understanding that the employee base would stimulate local areas (market st for Twitter) to help redevelop the city.

 

These companies instead gave fully subsidize meals so workers have no reason to go to local businesses so the arrangement was broken.

 

The city is trying to fix their loop hole as the result has been a bunch of tech companies in SoMa for cheap rent but the rest of the area still looks like a war zone as employees spend 0 dollars in the area.

 

 

Bums will still be shitting on the sidewalk if this passes so I’m not sure what it fixes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...
tx 3 putt

tx 3 putt 76980

Posted
Posted
On 7/25/2018 at 7:04 PM, Deej said:

I'd love to see Austin attempt this, since the cafeterias in state buildings are run by blind or otherwise challenged individuals. 

I worked at the tnrcc campus one summer, damn that cafeteria had the best fucking salsa ever. Damn good breakfast tacos too. 
 

also, don’t be stuck at the register with a $50. You have  to wait until Someone can verify 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
conVINCEd

conVINCEd 21469

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, tx 3 putt said:

I worked at the tnrcc campus one summer, damn that cafeteria had the best fucking salsa ever. Damn good breakfast tacos too. 
 

also, don’t be stuck at the register with a $50. You have  to wait until Someone can verify 

They don’t check 20’s?  Asking for a friend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...