Don't believe the hype: Not a clique? ["Faerie Freedom Village," Peter Lawrence Kane, News Feature, 6/25/15.] As a friend of mine (and erstwhile radical faerie) eloquently put it, "a bunch of 50-year-old men in chiffon chasing after the one cute boy." So-Cialist
Another win for political theater: What's not mentioned in the article ["Bad Touch: Trafficking Law Hurts Legit Massage Parlors," Chris Roberts, Sucka Free City, 6/25/15] is the bureaucratic and logistical nightmare of the dozen-plus inspections by myraid divisions of the Department of Public Health, and the thousands of dollars in city fees being foisted upon established, legitimate businesses already in good standing — not to mention on new, launching businesses. This is an obvious attempt by a young, ambitious politician to jump-start her career by picking an "easy" issue no one can oppose. (Who can argue with stemming human trafficking? No one.) Yet this politician does not understand (nor care) about the impacts of her legislation on skilled tradespeople (particularly women) and this legislation will do almost nothing to stem the tide of human trafficking.
Does Supervisor [Katy] Tang have a solid argument, supported by data, for this legislation? Are there metrics being proposed to measure its success and conduct a cost-benefit analysis? Is there any evidence whatsoever to support the theory that a series of health and building code inspections, rather than law enforcement, is the answer to the abysmal issue of prostitution and human trafficking in San Francisco? Why is a more legitimate solution, such as the reversal of Brown's ludicrous transfer of power, not on the table, rather than this sorry piece of legislation that, in bizarre fashion, seeks to lump legitimate massage therapists and pimps/prostitutes into one pool, and to place the onus for stemming trafficking on small business owners (particularly women) and skilled tradespeople?
Another win for political theater for the Board of Supervisors and another loss for SF's middle class. V. Kulla
Food for thought: "Salsipuedes" is the name of several localities in Latin America, an old Mexican land-grant rancho in old California, and a very famous cumbia song from Colombia. ["Oakland's Forthcoming Salsipuedes Crowdfunds Its Way to Completion," Peter Lawrence Kane, Food, 6/24/15.] Quite an esoteric name. What's the real story here? reebeedeebs
That's Mr. Ranger, to you: This is about health and safety. The Bureau of Land Management doesn't get to "party" out there ["Burning Man and Bureau of Land Management in Standoff Over Choco Tacos," Jeremy Lybarger, The Snitch, 6/29/15] — attending the event is their job; they're professionals.
You can't expect them to adopt BMorg's obtuse definition of "radical self reliance" when they are there to protect people. They shouldn't need to drive 30 minutes just to use a clean toilet in Gerlach. BMorg says this will cost [Burning Man] $1 million — that's ridiculous! BLM should not back down from its requests. Even if this camp did cost $1 million (impossible), it's still only about a $10 increase on each ticket. Ranger Dave
Comments are closed.
