Good Morning Mission!

It’s 7 a.m., 48º and headed toward 65º. Details here.

Well, The Guardian has gotten into the Google bus bustle, decrying the lack of subtlety.

In a metropolitan area known for its flamboyant political theatre, its anarchist streak and a tendency for liberals to turn on each other as much as their political enemies, the point has not always been made with the greatest subtlety.

“You are not innocent victims,” one flyer directed at tech workers said. “You live your comfortable lives surrounded by poverty, homelessness and death, seemingly oblivious to everything around you, lost in the big bucks and success.”

For more on the British take,  read here. 

SFGate focused on income inequality on Sunday, offering an easy way to catch up on the possible ballot initiatives in the offing this fall. All could have legs given the Pew’s research.

A national Pew Research survey released last week found that 69 percent of those surveyed think the government should do either “a lot” or “some” to reduce the wealth gap. Read more here. 

If you’re a civilian and looking for tech advice on the best step counter/pedometer around, Tech Crunch offers its two cents here. 

But this is all so serious. Where is the humor? Ah, maybe it is not all so funny. What a shame.


9:30 a.m. Assessment Appeals Board, Room 406, City Hall. Meets to consider appeals on an assessed value. No addresses in the Mission appear, but there is an interesting one in Noe Valley where the owner of 4128 24th Street would like the assessed value to be reduced from $2.4 million to $1.3 million. It seems like it sold in August, 2013 for $2.6 million.

1:30 p..m. Land Use and Economics Committee, Room 263, City Hall. Nothing particularly Mission- centric.

1:30 p.m. The Assessment Appeals Board resumes its work in 406 and it could be more interesting to hear owners make the case for assessing property downwards.

5 p.m. San Francisco Youth Commission, Room 345 A. 


1:15 p.m. Rhyme Time and Playtime in the Children’s Area at the Mission Branch of the Public Library. 

8 p.m. Trivia night at Rosamunde’s on Mission Street near 24th Street.

Here is how to entertain yourself at the bars, from SF WEekly

And here are Monday’s AA meetings. 

Enjoy the day!

You may also like:


  1. John

    It’s worth mentioning that the UK Guardian newspaper is a notoriously left-wing paper whose views are not mainstream even in that much more socialist nation.

    While asking people if something should be done about the “wealth gap” (itself a prejudicial phrase) is leading the witness. You might as well ask people if they’d like free money.

    The wealth gap increases if a few individuals are very successful, but that tells you nothing about whether the rest of the population is paid appropriately according to the value they generate, which is the much more important question..

    • landline

      The Guardian is the third most popular newspaper in the UK; its online edition is the third most popular in the world.

      What happened to address the message, not the messenger?

      • John

        The UK Guardian is also almost bankrupt and may have to abandon it’s print version, whether it’s the “third most popular” or not:

        Anyway, the point was Kathy said it was “the British take”. That’s a bit of a stretch and I’d categorize it as the left-wing British take.

        And it’s not attacking the messenger to question someone’s sources.

    • They quote the study which revealed that over a third of tech workers would move closer to work without tech buses. I venture that number is significantly higher If you factor in the people who think they would still want to live in the city but underestimate how traffic commutes wear you down and just how inconvenient it is (and these people are naturally inclined to convenience).

      The argument about buses cutting emissions is bogus. Those emissions are generated in the first place by people moving far away from work.

      I think every major media outlet has had an article on the tech boom pains theme, and all of them highlight inequality, including the Economist.

      There is no escaping reality, no matter how many people move to Oakland and beyond, class conflict is here in full force.

      • John

        So are you saying you want to impose displacement on people forcibly? And all in the name or preventing displacement?

        What you are really saying there is that you prefer some classes of people to some other classes of people, based on your own personal value system.

        “Class conflict” is just another way of expressing envy. If I can see people different from myself without hating them and wanting to take from them, why can’t you?

        • landline

          Your comments provide a list of groups that you hate. Some examples: tenants in rent-controlled apartments, “unruly” youth, poor people, homeless people, artists, Rainbow Grocery workers. Those are just from the top of my head.

          • John

            Lies. I do not hate any of those groups. I simply think that they have not been well served by the political interests that claim to be helping them. And that envy-fueled class warfare is not a reasonable way for the city to progress and change.

          • landline

            Your words speak for themselves. Your charge of envy at people who view the world differently from you is speculative. The assumptions underlying your ignorance that class differences lead to class conflicts are fantasy-based denials.

          • John

            how is accusing a liberal of envy any different from a liberal accusing successful people of being “greedy”?

            You are projecting. I can criticize a class of people, based on their behavior, without hating them. I may oppose their behavior but do not hate them as people.

            You cannot do that. You hate and resent rich people and conservatives. And that is envy.

            My hands are clean.

          • landline

            You have no evidence that the people you criticize are envious. None. If you have it, share it. Find a quote from someone that reads, “I am opposed to the involuntary displacement of Mission District residents because I want to be richer.” Good luck. You are speculating about motivations that you cannot understand because of your obtuseness.

            At least you are consistent by raising a new issue, greed vs. envy, when you can’t back up your claims with evidence. Your discussions about investment strategies with some of your idle rich counterparts here would support the view that your strongest motivation in life is the pursuit of money and wealth. You cannot conceive that plenty of people do not share that prime motivation. To you, they are just “envious” of your hard work living off other people’s wages.

          • John

            Again, you seem happy to talk about my “greed” but you deny that your whines about successful tech employees are about envy. That’s a double standard. Either both greed and envy are factors, or neither are.

            And yes, many Americans aspire to wealth. That can hardly be a surprise to you, given that the US is often held up as the world’s leading exponent of capitalism.

            People here like money.and often come here for the American dream. We and they understand that mobility is both the cause and the effect of economic growth and success. A certain level of turnover lubricates the economic vitality that helps build our prosperity.

          • landline

            I’m done with this discussion until you provide evidence backing up your claim that envy is the motivation of the activists that you decry. Assumptions and circular reasoning are insufficient.

          • John

            I’m done with this discussion until you provide evidence backing up your claim that greed is the motivation of the successful people twhom you decry. Assumptions and circular reasoning are insufficient.

          • landline

            I never claimed “greed.” You assumed that as a diversionary tactic. I asserted that money and wealth are your prime motivations and you basically agreed with your defense of American capitalism aspirations to wealth.

            You have no evidence about envy. None.

          • John

            Criticizing someone because they seek wealth and money IS an allegation of greed. Your clear assumption is that such an attitude is undesirable.

            Your original premise remains unproven.

          • landline

            You admit to greed by your own definition of the term, so what’s the problem?

            You have provided evidence of “greed”, but none of “envy” other than people are envious because you say they are.

          • John

            No, seeking prosperity and financial security for my family is not greed by any reasonable definition of the word.

            But seeking to displace an entire class of people based solely on the fact that they are well paid easily fits most peoples’ definition of the word “envy”.

          • landline

            Who is “seeking to displace an entire class of people based solely on the fact that they are well paid?”

            You are misrepresenting b2b’s argument to make a unsupportable point about “envy.” Last I checked, the people being involuntarily displaced from the Mission District aren’t the wealthier newcomers.

          • John

            Wrong, I was criticizing the idea that the shuttles should be stopped because of the belief that tech workers would then leave the city. That is an overt attempt at the cleansing of an entire class of city residents based on prejudice against their line of work.

            Perhaps class hatred is a better description than envy but, either way, it is deplorable that so -called liberals would seek such a displacement.

Comments are closed.

Full name required to post. For full details, read our Policy