As seen in 2017. It looks like this, you know, when in focus, but I could tell who it was from far away.
(This is the best KEEP TAHOE BLUE I’ve ever seen, and I’ve seen a lot.)
This is how we live, in 2016:
You think these ppl were just parked, checking the Facebook? Nope, they were driving at about 20 MPH inbound on JFK Drive in Golden Gate Park. That’s why the hands are on the steering wheels and the phones are held up high.
Hey, do UBER drivers go about with handicap placards hanging from the rear view? Yes, some do.
Anyway, here’s the PCO again. How much time pressure is this person under if she’s fiddling with her ticketing assistance device whilst driving?
What’s that, SFMTA – you don’t have quotas, but your employees act as if they do? Sure seems that way…
Here’s the “tradition” and here’s the 2016 version:
‘Cause nothing says CLASS like metallic gold spray paint:
Obviously, Supervisor Scott Wiener needs a driver to squire him around Frisco (and the very small slice of San Mateo County what he pretends to actually care aboot these days, eh?).
Of course, if I were Scott Wiener, I’d be all, “Man, I don’t even own an aging silver Nissan.” Or something. But no, he simply ignored this situation.
Or I would have taken these incidents as a wake-up call. And then have gotten a volunteer to drive me to my daily engagements.
Now this sitch here I don’t understand, you know fully:
Perhaps Scott Wiener should clear things up for us, you know, explain what his issues are here. (IDK, maybe somebody stole his Nissan and then parked it here – who knows. Or maybe he was so busy texting that he doesn’t really know what he’s doing IRL anymore.)
But why would such a sanctimonious “urbanist” even own a car in the first place, in Frisco of all places?
“W: What I will say is my perspective is neither the SFMTA or SFPD takes double-parking seriously. And I don’t say that lightly. I’m a fan of both agencies. I work with them. I believe SFPD and SFMTA are committed to Vision Zero. There are some really good people within SFPD who do want to see it happen. But double parking is one area where both agencies have just failed… it’s private automobiles, it’s taxis, it’s garbage trucks… it’s an unending situation. They cause traffic jams, they block Muni, they block the bike lane, it undermines our entire transportation system and makes our streets more dangerous. It is one of my significant frustrations.”
Scott Wiener – sell your car or get a driver.
Here you go, the News of the Day:
3 SF supervisors move to put tech tax on November ballot By Emily Green
And here’s the reaction:
I am appalled at the political vindictiveness of this proposed measure,” said Alex Tourk, a spokesman for San Francisco Citizens Initiative for Technology and Innovation, a coalition of tech companies.
Supervisor Mark Farrell called it “the worst idea I’ve heard in months.”
Deirdre Hussey, spokeswoman for Mayor Ed Lee, called it a “job-killing measure.” She added that the measure “upends the grand bargain” made between business and labor that ultimately led voters to eliminate the payroll tax in 2012.
And let’s note that:
[District One Supervisor Eric] Mar’s proposal would deem stock option compensation when a company goes public as taxable payroll.
All right, all I’ve done so far is simply read the news to you. But now let’s travel back to a time when former Mayor Gavin Newsom, another Right-Of-Center Willie Brown Appointee Who Somehow Ended Up Mayor, signed into law the very same 1.5% stock options tax. So put on your white shoes and dance the blues – it’s Pillsbury, bitches:
On February 19, 2004, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom approved recent changes to San Francisco’s Business Tax ordinance adopted by the Board of Supervisors on February 19, 2004. These changes become effective March 20, 2004, 30 days after signing by the Mayor.
…the amendments also contain significant changes such as … including stock options in the definition of payroll expense.“
So, was Gavin Newsom’s stock options tax a “job-killing measure” back in 2004 the way the same tax is being portrayed here in 2016?
That’s my question – I don’t know how ppl would answer.
But I’m thinking that if this 2016 proposal gets enacted and you’re a “tech* company,” whatever that is, going IPO in Frisco will cost you millions, just as Gavin Newsom wanted back in aught-four.
So that means that Gav was a job killer, right?
*What’s a tech company? IDK. What’s a pit bull?
Well, he is spending big money to get your vote. So far, so good:
Hi Josh. You kind of look like Angry Tom Cruise, or Angry Tony Robbins, or Angry Gavin Newsom, just saying. Anyway, well, yes, he’s in the big right-of-center political faction, so yes, he’s going to be backed by realtors, sure. And he’s an Airbnb booster, sure. But I think “evades” is a bit strong here. Implies illegality, IMO. Do we know that? Moving on…
…to this. Yes, he’s prolly going to be a lot more tolerant of the SFPD Police Officers Association than the typical Friscan. And oh, Ed Lee is unpopular these days. (I’ve never seen a photo like this with Our Appointed Mayor used negatively.) And yes, if you’re going to be in Frisco’s dominant political faction in 2016, you’re going to be getting a lot of money from Developers, so that’s fair enough:
So that’s it. Josh Arce is EVIL, or not, your choice…