The rusting bay bridge needs $2 billion in additional costs to repair the damage caused by indifferent Chinese workers. That is expensive. Is that the only way to solve the problem?
If the Rusting Bay Bridge comes down, how much would a fleet of ferryboats cost running back and forth from Oakland/Alameda to SF? Is that less than the bridge repairs?
Do we really need the bridge? Jobs are leaving the country anyway. Who crosses that bridge? Can they take Hayward instead? Do their companies really need to be in San Francisco?
Only the rich really need to enter the city that way. Everyone else should get out of SF. It is for rich people only. Pack your crap, move out. Let the rich sweep their own streets. Think outside the box. There's still another bridge to the South, where the jobs are on the Peninsula. And the BART tunnel. How many train cars will that $2 billion buy? Seriously. Give up on this bridge. It was doomed from the start. Petty vindictive little bastards. "I want a pretty and expensive bridge. Let's argue about the design for 6 years!" And they did, too. Idiots.
The city is expensive to supply with water and power. It all comes from somewhere else. Fair Housing Practice laws mean they imported violent crime, and the entire Tenderloin district and most of Mission and all of Hunters Point should be bulldozed. They are nothing but crime. If you rip down the worthless parts of the city, and jack up the price of water, eventually only the really rich will still be there. Sort of like Malibu and Beverly Hills. San Francisco doesn't need poor people. And if you don't need them, why build them a bridge? Why spend $8.5 billion to build a bridge that should have cost $1.2 billion that poor people use to commit crime in a city for the rich they should be living in?
So I'm looking at that and I see that the BART subway can carry the few servants needed.
All production is South of the city, and the Hayward bridge can handle that traffic. And eventually costs will drive that away. San Francisco should be for the Rich, only the Rich. An expensive and pretty play place for the very rich. Not for the poor. Get them out of there. Raise rents, demolish buildings, leave vacant lots until they are all gone and they can replace those lots with more parks. San Francisco is dumb. And the fewer poor people, the less need for crappy shops and it will really cut down on the traffic. Think that one scene in On The Beach, where the submarine stares at the silent city, nothing moving. This was before good special effects, so the movie makers convinced the city to stay indoors for the shot. A whole city. Try that today and the poor would have a riot demanding a payoff.
I figure a combination of Ferry Boats, to carry the few rich commuters who will eventually just move into the city, and exporting the poor so there's a drastic cut in crime, and you don't really need a bridge after that. The ferry boats can be luxurious and expensive. The Hayward bridge can carry traffic, and checkpoints and soldiers can patrol the city borders to keep out the junkies, burglars, and riffraff. That's fair, right?
Why so down on San Francisco? Well, it is a rock. Until an enterprising real estate loon started collecting bones from butchers, in 1860, and ground them up and planted eucalyptus trees on top of the bone meal, which supplies nutrients for wood growth, nothing grew where San Francisco stands today. It was bare sandstone. It has no water supply. The salt from the ocean and bay would mean any well would produce salt water. Duh. So the water is pumped from far away. How far? Yosemite. Really. That cost money to build, and costs money to pump today. Its also a long supply line which can be attacked and destroyed by terrorists or people who want to get even with rich jerks in San Francisco. The water is pumped into Crystal Springs Reservoir before being treated and pumped into the City water system. If fewer people lived there, the water would require less energy because less would be used and if huge blocks of the city were shut off, repairs wouldn't be needed for all those pipes that fracture under the streets and leak. Same with outgoing sewage water, that almost certainly ends up in the bay or ocean. It is a stupid place to build homes, and a stupid place to do any business that isn't directly involved in shipping, since the whole point of the Bay is a safe anchorage for ships. It is a Port. Do Port-things with it. When I lived and worked in the Bay Area, I learned that the city was all about labor exploitation and murder, and I got really tired of that viciousness. I won't go back, thanks much. Only Tourists think it's pretty, and that's because they don't see the news or look too closely. Having been back and forth to the city for day trips to museums, I've seen and smelled its seedy underbelly. It is a nasty dirty place.
So really, ripping down the housing for the poor and replacing those with parks for the rich and the tourists? That makes more sense than the current mess. We don't need to throw more money at Chinese workers to fix a problem they caused. We don't need the bridge. Tear it down. Build ferry boats at a fraction of the cost, and rehab the BART trains for crossing the bay tunnel so they're actually clean and safe. Keep the poor out of the city. They don't belong there and they aren't welcome. The poor deserve to be sweaty. Move to Sacramento where its 100'F every day all summer long. Pfft!
No comments:
Post a Comment