It’s Frisco LibTurds vs SF Property Owners

Posted April 4th, 2019 by Iron Mike

There was a meeting in San Francisco to discuss their new and very expensive homeless shelter….

New Mayor London Breed got an EARFULL!   video:

When he was alive,  Mayor Ed Lee didn’t seem bothered by the growing army of homeless shitting on his streets every day.

He hired people to clean up after them,…more government jobs mean more Democrat votes.

Made to feel tolerated, – even welcome, San Francisco’s homeless population grew during the Obama years….

San Francisco depends in large measure on the tourism industry.

8,000 homeless people – shitting on the streets, are not an ‘attraction’.

London Breed grew up in relative poverty,  so she feels a connection with the poor.  Her sister died of an overdose, – her brother is serving 44 years in prison.

But despite having a Masters in Public Policy,  – she may not understand the business side of government,  – and what that property could be adding to the SF tax base if developed as a hotel or office building.

And she clearly has no concept about what a huge homeless shelter in the middle of the Embarcadero will do to property values in the entire area.  So her constituents are rightly pissed.

She knows better than to involve her local Congresswoman…

Breed was elected Mayor – on her own – in a Special Election last June to fill out Ed Lee’s term.  If she likes this job, she’ll have to run again and win this November….

5 Responses to “It’s Frisco LibTurds vs SF Property Owners”

  1. Walter Knight

    San Francisco used to a museum freak show. Now, it’s a zoo no one wants to visit. Navigate that.

    Building a mega homeless shelter won’t just affect tourism and property values. It will draw bums and drug addicts, affect schools, and create a no-go zone. Worse, if completed the mega shelter will be a model, copied by other liberal mayors to destroy their cities, too.

    Highways are already lined with tents and hobo camps. Concentrating those people into mini-cities will not make the homeless camps go away. It will only concentrate dangerous unmanageable areas.

  2. FLICK

    I crossed SF off my bucket list. Visited there a couple years ago, the only thing that impressed me were the cable cars and Alcatraz. Everywhere, and through 10 days of tourism the guides preached about how SF is so expensive, having to drive an hour to get to work for their meager pay and tips. A tiny home the width of a single garage for $1,000,000. And, YET; I have to watch those ‘carefree California lifestyle’ commercials on my TV between all the LA/Hollywood self-serving awards shows. I suggested that maybe LA could send some $$$ up to SF and all would benefit. SECEDE ALREADY CA and stop living off of my dime!

  3. jim ettwein

    I’ve been to SF many times on business. I never thought it a particularly clean city. It was always kinda scruffy. That said, I never noticed feces on my shoes… or a stunningly large homeless population. As far as I’m concerned, they are getting everything they deserve for their decades of neglect of their own taxpayers. Drifting off to sea it too good for them.

  4. panther 6

    Last time I visited SF was 1965 and it was a hot bed of anti war peace mongers at that time – but still beautiful. Over the years as it became more and more progressive I became convinced I have no interest in revisiting the place. I honestly doubt they can sort it out at this point. Goodbye SF.

  5. Kojack

    I think London has the right idea putting these types of centers where the libTURDs like to live and play. Now if only we could get a couple of huge residences/centers for illegal aliens built in Brookline and Edgartown on Martha’s Vineyard.