Tuesday, December 25, 2007

Schadenfreude San Fran Style

San Francisco, like many libtard outposts, has made it extremely difficult for large chain stores to operate in the city. Libtards think that they must put up barriers to successful businesses, in order to protect "Mom and Pop" businesses from actually having to compete in the marketplace. Well, this Christmas, the chickens came home to roost. Seems that San Franciscoans are having a hard time finding the popular toys this season, because none of the Mom and Pop stores carry them.

Schadenfreude tastes sweet doesn't it?

Update 12-26-07: Seems the Chronicle has "eaten" the story I linked to, so I have found a version of the story that ran in the NYT and fixed the link. But in reading the NYT version, some bits apparently were left out of the Chronicle version, bits that hint at deeper problems for San Fran. For instance this quote from the story that was completely left out of the Chronicle version:

“There are more medical cannabis dispensaries than there are toy stores,” joked John Dallas, a local real estate agent and the father of two young children. He buys his toys online or at a local hardware store that sells Legos and Transformers alongside screwdrivers and gas stoves.

“When you go to a birthday party, the parents are all asking: What the heck? Where are all the toy stores?”

From the toy industry’s perspective, the city is definitely an anomaly. Among the nation’s 15 most populous cities, only San Francisco and Detroit do not have a Toys “R” Us, a Wal-Mart or a Target, which together account for more than 60 percent of retail toy sales, industry analysts said.

In San Francisco, the reasons for the stores’ absence seem plainer than the nose on Barbie’s face. Commercial real estate prices are high, while the proportion of children in the population — 15 percent — is the lowest by far of any big American city.

Hmm, lowest proportion of children of any major city eh? Hmm, could it maybe have something to do with all the gays (who demographically speaking tend to not have as many kids)? Or perhaps all the libtards that are having themselves sterilized so that they won't burden the planet with any of their spawn? And you also notice that it is only heavily democrat cities that do not have the trifecta of big box stores? One has to wonder.....


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Schadenfreude : What a great word! I always learn something new here. :-) I couldn't access the story, but I know where you're coming from. I think Christmas is way too commercialized, but it's reflective of our society. As a consumer, I certainly want to get more bang for my dollar. I won't drive 10-miles out of my way to save 50 cents, but I will drive out of my way to save a few hundred dollars on big ticket items. Hope your holiday was pleasant!

December 26, 2007 9:20 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Houston, we have a problem here. We constantly are sawing off the limb we are sitting on, and soon we won't have a place for our arses.

We have exported the jobs that give us stability, while blindly allowing the borders to go unchecked for decades in that thirst of cheap labor that is now taking the roots of our society and draining it in every school, hospital and government benefit it can consume.

The 14th amendment be dammed.... we are growing to be a third world country, just travel to some parts of the city, if you can, and you will see that you are no longer in the US, but a subset of another country....

December 26, 2007 4:35 PM  
Blogger Rorschach said...

Anon, Hear! Hear! But there is something that people fail to grasp. the 14th amendment was never intended to give the offspring of illegal aliens automatic citizenship, in fact at the time of it's drafting, one of the co-authors said that the phrase "and subject to the laws thereof" was intended to ensure that alien's and foreigner's children would NOT be granted automatic citizenship. How this got screwed up so badly I haven't a clue.

December 26, 2007 4:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Part of the reason that one doesn't find many young families in SF is hinted at in the story: sky high housing costs. Only the very wealthy (who tend not to have many children), the old (who bought homes when costs weren't astronomical), and the very poor (who enjoy subsidised housing).

Many who work in SF are forced to commute long distances from their affordable neighborhoods.

Pigilito (an ex-SFer)

December 27, 2007 2:44 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home