Posted on 09/14/2010 4:43:58 PM PDT by SmithL
San Francisco lawmakers have approved a fee on alcohol distribution to help the city recover the cost of dealing with problem drinkers, but the measure faces a likely mayoral veto.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
Yet another reason to avoid the Gay Bay.
Collectivism in action.
Punish the many for the sins of the few.
Gavin Nuisance has promised to veto this legislation.
Gavin Newsom is not the ideal mayor by any mainstream measurement, but, he is probably the best we could hope for from SF.
Notice the article mentions a likely veto from Newsom.
Strange as it may seem, he is probably the sanest politician in SF.
He’s also a restaurant owner, so he has some understanding of business, and an alcohol fee hits close to home for him.
But the sad thing is, when it comes to any Democrat, they only grow a conscience or sense when they are personally affected. If it was a tax or fee that harmed someone else’s business and not his own, Newsom would have no problem with it.
Most of the “few” are actually the bums and winos that SF has been supporting and rewarding for their dysfunction for years and years and years. Believe me, these folks aren’t drinking at the latest trendy bar or even at the Chinese restaurant down the street. So SF is punishing the functional for the problems of the dysfunctional, whom it has carefully cultivated for some 50 years now.
What they need to do is figure out a way to teach the public how to get their heads out of their asses, get involved in their own community, and report problems when they see them; or smell them in the case of the recent gas leak that nobody bothered to report to the gas company.
California is such a lost cause we would be far better off as a nation if we made the Mexicans take at least the Southern half back.
Didn’t 72% of san fransicko vote for pelousy? They deserve to be punished.
“So SF is punishing the functional for the problems of the dysfunctional, whom it has carefully cultivated for some 50 years now.”
The place just hasn’t been the same since Dirty Harry left;)
Astute observation, and well said.
Fat is next.
A fee on rubbers is counterproductive don’t you think, if they’re trying to curb the spread of AIDS.
But I question whether or not they really want to.
The more of an ‘epidemic’ it is, the more it helps their political cause.
It’s just like poverty. Democrats want more poor people, because that means more support for redistribution, and more Democrat voters.
If the whine & cheese crowd get ouched, I don’t care.
“So SF is punishing the functional for the problems of the dysfunctional, whom it has carefully cultivated for some 50 years now.”
Your analysis seems to go beyond San Francisco, and beyond Alcohol problems.
It seems to describe the underlying logic for collectivism/socialism/communism.
i have to return some video tapes...
That’s Pelosiville, who cares.
Make the “problem drinkers” pay the “fee”. Why punish everybody? This is some dumb ****! Mass punishment is so communistic.
You have to drink heavily to live in that city. It’s the only way you could stand it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.