Good day all. It’s no secret that the Democrat run, (Into the ground), cities are seeing a lot of businesses give up and close their doors. They’ve been dealing with over-regulation, taxes and the outright refusal to arrest and prosecute shoplifters.
San Francisco is one of the worst hit with business closures, especially supermarkets. The markets are being robbed blind and the owners can’t get any help from the city. Now many of these markets are giving up and closing their doors. This is causing problems as residents have to travel further away to get food. So what is San Francisco’s answer to this problem? Sue markets for closing their doors. Here are the details from Reason:
The San Francisco Board of Supervisors is considering a remarkable policy that would allow people to sue grocery stores that close too quickly.
Earlier this week, Supervisors Dean Preston and Aaron Peskin introduced an ordinance that, if passed, would require grocery stores to provide six months’ written notice to the city before closing down.
And how are these stores going to know that they’re going to close their doors 6 months in advance? Most of them don’t want to shut down, but due to the economy and crime levels, (All a result of the Democrats stupidity and incompetence), they might have less then a month to shut down before they run out of money.
Supermarket operators would also have to make “good faith” efforts to ensure the continued availability of groceries at their shuttered location, either through finding a successor store, helping residents form a grocery co-op, or any other plan they might work out by meeting with city and neighborhood residents.
How about No, they don’t. These Marxist morons may want to think they can force grocery stores to stay open, but they can’t. If the money is gone, the store owners will close down and tell San Francisco to go suck eggs.
Lest one thinks this is some heavy-handed City Hall intervention, the ordinance makes clear that owners still retain the ultimate power to close their store. It also creates a number of exemptions to the six-month notice requirement. If a store is closing because of a natural disaster or business. circumstances that aren’t “reasonably foreseeable,” it doesn’t have to provide the full six months’ notice.
I look forward to the wave of closures brought on by minor earthquakes. A simple, bearly noticeable tremor and a store might say “We suffered to much damage! Insurance won’t cover this. Sorry, we’re out of business! Bye now!”
Still, should stores close without providing the proper notice, persons affected by the closure would be entitled to sue the closed store for damages.
Preston has been floating this ordinance since January when a Safeway in the city’s Fillmore neighborhood announced it was closing before city officials intervened to keep it open a little longer. The policy itself is decades old.
Are they going to supply money to the store to keep it open? How about arresting and prosecuting thieves who are one of the main causes of these stores closing their doors?
In 1984, the board of supervisors passed an identical policy to what Preston and Peskin are proposing now, but it was vetoed by then-Mayor Dianne Feinstein. At the time, Feinstein described the policy as “an unnecessary intrusion of governmental regulatory authority.”
That was probably one of the few good things that cow did in her generally useless public life. Other then finally dying that is.
Preston is more comfortable with the intrusion.
“It was a good idea then, and it’s an even better idea now,” he told the San Francisco Chronicle in January. “We need notice, we need transparency, community input, and a transition plan when major neighborhood grocery stores plan to shut their doors.”
No Comrade Moonbat, what you need is an education in economic reality. I just looked up this loser and, Oh Boy! He has never done anything useful in his life. He’s an original Manhattan Marxist who moved to San Francisco. Apparently, his one foray into the “Dreaded Private Sector” was part owner of a bar and night club. (I don’t know if he’s still involved with that. It does appear to still be open somehow)
Grocery store executives argued back in the 1980s that layering a bunch of process on stores shutting down would make it less likely that they’d open in the first place.
The exemptions in the ordinance would seem to give supermarkets enough wiggle room to stay within the letter of the law, even if they didn’t provide six months’ advance notice that they were closing down. One wonders how much of a payout someone could expect from suing a store that’s closed down.
I know! How does nothing strike you? If a store closes down, they cancel their lease and the owners may very well leave the state for more business friendly locations. If you get some sort of summary judgment, good luck collecting it, assuming you can find the owners.
Whatever the impact of this proposed policy, it does provide a telling insight into just how much micromanagement San Francisco politicians think their city needs.
Have you ever met a Progressive Liberal Socialist Democrat Communist who didn’t think he or she knew how to run other people’s lives and businesses better than the person or business owner? These idiots don’t.
Preston and Peskin aren’t as confident in San Franciscans’ capacity for self-organization. Their ordinance is premised on the idea that change of any significance needs to be paired with an elongated public process and enforced with the threat of third-party lawsuits, lest people make their own decisions and do something too rash.
This is effectively how San Francisco already treats anyone’s effort to start anything, be it a new business, a new technology, or a new home. That isn’t a coincidence. All that process and red tape on the front end makes it more difficult for businesses to start and more jarring when they close.
And this is why businesses are fleeing San Francisco and Kalifornistan. It’s hard enough to start a business in San Francisco and these idiots think that they can force a business to remain open? Forcing markets to remain open will see scenes right out of Moscow at the end of the Soviet Union, Long lines of people waiting to pick over the empty shelves. Just because you order the stores to remain open doesn’t mean they will have anything to sell you morons.
I don’t doubt that San Francisco might just pass this, but it won’t work. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if all the markets close their doors before it goes into effect out of simple preservation. San Francisco is rapidly going from the “City by the Bay” to just another Communist Turd world Hellhole. The entire state is not far behind. Eventually, even the entitled losers running things from their gated communities will start feeling the effects of their policies. By then, it will be to late. It will serve them right as they starve in the dark.
Thatisall
(4 votes, average: 4.75 out of 5)
Loading...
~The Angry Webmaster~
Leads one to wonder (well, not really) that if this looks like it’ll pass (it’s San Fran, OF COURSE it’s going to pass) and not get shot down by the mayor, if there will be a sudden wave of closures before it passes.