San Francisco Government Broke? Take a pay cut city officials!

As many San Franciscans know, our city government is not doing so great after learning there is a budget shortfall, and it looks like a lot of our city paid services is going to get a nasty cut in funding that will always attack something important, the lower paid employees of those services.

But when you think about this, if for example, the Department of Parking and Traffic (DPT) takes a 10% cut in city funding to operate, who would you think they would let go? It won't be the administrative or high ranking manager positions, it seems easy for the people in power to cut out the easy people, the hard working wage donkeys that makes about $10 to $15 an hour (not including benefits).

Instead of letting go of the people that make lower salaries, why not chip off the high paid officials, such as elected officials of the Board of Supervisors or the high paid administrative level folks like Police Chief Heather Fong? Why does our tax money fund such HUGE salaries in this city? $100,000 a year salary is plenty to support at least a couple of families who are middle class.

Here's another thing that will piss you off. Why does the Board of Supervisors have the ability to vote for a raise in salary? Most of us have to meet with our supervisor to ask for a raise, all you have to do is just get a damn majority of your own peers. And in the name of greed, I don't think anyone would say "nay." I think it's best to do it the other way: Let the VOTERS vote to elect if the Board of Supervisors deserve a pay raise. If the Supervisor's performance sucks, then NO RAISE.

My solution: Every San Francisco government employee and elected official that makes more than $80,000 a year must take a MINIMUM 10% PAY CUT.

Maybe all the money they collect from kicking that out of their salaries can be infused in a helpful program like FIXING MUNI. Take a pay cut, go scrap your $50,000 luxury cars and use that pay cut money to fix Muni and take the fucking bus like us wage donkeys do on a daily basis.

Or do it the other way, become like ex-supervisor Ed Jew and extort tapioca drink shops.

My Opinion on the San Francisco Zoo Tragedy

The San Francisco Zoo has had some bad incidents in the past years, from an elephant dying, to a lady being mauled by a tiger. Even more tragic is that one man was killed, and two were mauled (and survived) by the same tiger that attacked a keeper. AND THIS WAS ON CHRISTMAS DAY!

Now, this story has hit the national headlines big time, and this story is not going away that easy... OK, maybe in a month, just like the Cosco Busan oil spill incident. Our local news outlets don't even talk about the oil spill anymore.

There's this huge blame game going around, and it always seems that when things get really f-ed up, you always call the best "spin" public speakers and lawyers in the nation to screw around with the story. Lets see what they have to say:

The Zoo: They claim that the tiger was taunted by the three (now possibly four) people that were allegedly involved. They also claim that they had a quick enough response.

The lawyer for the mauled men: They did not taunt the tiger and zoo employees at the nearby cafe refused to let the men hide in the facility.

My analysis: The zoo is responsible for this incident. Regardless if an animal is taunted or not, it is the responsibility of the San Francisco Zoo to build safe exhibits that prevent animal escapes in the first place. For the tiger grotto, the wall was NOT HIGH ENOUGH to repel the animal.

Also, there's word that the tiger had some cement in her claws, which is a sign that somehow the animal was able to climb the wall. I wonder what the condition of the wall is? Was it in good condition, where it is smooth and not possible to break apart so that the animal could not climb the wall? Or was the wall in poor condition, where the wall was not smooth (rocky) or in bad condition, that even a human could do some rock climbing on that thing?

So what's going to happen now?
-- I think that the zoo better be ready to take on a million dollar settlement. The zoo is held responsible for holding a DANGEROUS animal that is their responsibility. They built a grotto that is not high enough, and did not provide quick enough response to evacuate the area and respond to the incident. And now... they are to install a PA system... yeah, could have been installed decades ago; idiots.

I'd fire the entire zoo management for this fuck-up. Especially the guy who's getting paid over $100,000+ a year to "manage" this bullshit facility. Even better, close down the damn place if they cannot pay to maintain the facility. Why waste my tax dollars on a place that is inadequate in the name of safety?

What's wrong with this city?

1. Muni sucks.
2. The cops can't control the lower east side of town.
3. A zoo that is basically unsafe.
4. A Mayor who went to rehab.
5. A Mayor involved in a sex scandal.
   
6. Overpaid city "managers."
7. The 311 operators are operated by a bunch of retards.
8. Things change only when someone gets killed, such as the zoo incident.