5 ms·

> Two San Francisco supervisors introduced an ordinance last week that would forbid employee cafeterias in new corporate construction. Yeah, we could use some

> Two San Francisco supervisors introduced an ordinance last week that would forbid employee cafeterias in new corporate construction. Yeah, we could use some more traffic and pollution from everyone driving 10 miles for lunch. As a progressive liberal, california democrats confuse me all the time.

gorkemyurt 8y ago
This is not Scranton, Pennsylvania no one drives 10 miles for lunch in San Francisco, city is only 7 miles wide
- mateo411 8y ago
  You could drive diagonally across town. What if I work in SOMA and want to have lunch in Park Merced?
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - erobbins 8y ago
    Hope you can get away with taking 3 hours for lunch
  - klez 8y ago
    You eat in SOMA, I guess. I'm not familiar with San Fransisco, but is it an area with no restaurants or cafeterias?
    - mateo411 8y ago
      Yes, there are plenty of restaurants in SOMA. Eating there is a much better plan than traveling the maximum distance while staying in San Francisco.
jjulius 8y ago
Now I'm not defending SF officials here, but c'mon. This is San Francisco we're talking about - there are restaurants aplenty within walking distance of most tech offices.
- dntrkv 8y ago
  True, but Mountain View implemented the same ban for Facebook.
  - what_ever 8y ago
    Again, the Mountain View ban is for a one particular location which has lot of restaurants in the complex. Search for The Village, Mountain View. There are a lot of things wrong with these bans but having to drive to restaurants in not one of them. (no way in favor of the ban, I like my free lunch very much)
  - pm24601 8y ago
    Yes. In the middle of a shopping area https://goo.gl/maps/5AC7tTfhNvs https://goo.gl/maps/5AC7tTfhNvs surrounded by lots of food choices with a Safeway, Trader Joe's, Milk Pail and Walmart all within a 3 minute walk!
- dasil003 8y ago
  If all cafeterias were immediately closed I imagine the lines would be insufferable.
  - jjulius 8y ago
    I've seen a few comments in this thread from people who seem to be arguing that every employee who would otherwise get a free lunch at work would suddenly be flocking to the streets. First, this doesn't eliminate existing cafeterias, it just bans new ones. Second, cafeterias exist for two reasons - pricing and convenience. If, as you hypothesize, cafeterias closed (which is not what's happening here) and everyone was forced to find other options, I would imagine that a good portion of these people would opt to bring their own lunch from home, for those same two reasons - pricing and convenience. After all, why spend 40 minutes in line for a $15 lunch when you can make a damn good one at home for ~$6 and eat it virtually whenever you'd like? Disclaimer: I do not support the city's decision here, but I also don't think it's as big of a travesty as people are making it out to be.
alaskamiller 8y ago
Then change how cities are built. Throw in more bikes, and cut out some more cars. Throw in more scooters, and get everyone to show some manners. Throw in more pop-ups, and get everyone to utilize space better. It's 2018, you're a grown adult that's tech literate with access to a computer. Go outside, get some food and a drink and do better.
kilbuz 8y ago
Not necessarily supporting this motion, but it would cause no one to drive to lunch. There are dozens of good options within a block or two of most tech companies in the city. It would probably cause an uptick in Uber Eats, Grubhub, Eat24 orders though.
- electricslpnsld 8y ago
  In mid-market? There is no where near the capacity in local restaurants to support Uber/Twitter/etc dumping all their employees out. There is the Burger King that plays classical music I suppose...
  - jjulius 8y ago
    Companies wouldn't be required to "[dump] all their employees out" at lunch. Plenty of people bring their own lunches to work every day, so it's incorrect to assume that every office-based employee would be simultaneously hitting the streets for food.

gorkemyurt 8y ago

This is not Scranton, Pennsylvania no one drives 10 miles for lunch in San Francisco, city is only 7 miles wide

mateo411 8y ago
You could drive diagonally across town. What if I work in SOMA and want to have lunch in Park Merced?
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- erobbins 8y ago
  Hope you can get away with taking 3 hours for lunch
- klez 8y ago
  You eat in SOMA, I guess. I'm not familiar with San Fransisco, but is it an area with no restaurants or cafeterias?
  - mateo411 8y ago
    Yes, there are plenty of restaurants in SOMA. Eating there is a much better plan than traveling the maximum distance while staying in San Francisco.

jjulius 8y ago

Now I'm not defending SF officials here, but c'mon. This is San Francisco we're talking about - there are restaurants aplenty within walking distance of most tech offices.

dntrkv 8y ago
True, but Mountain View implemented the same ban for Facebook.
- what_ever 8y ago
  Again, the Mountain View ban is for a one particular location which has lot of restaurants in the complex. Search for The Village, Mountain View. There are a lot of things wrong with these bans but having to drive to restaurants in not one of them. (no way in favor of the ban, I like my free lunch very much)
- pm24601 8y ago
  Yes. In the middle of a shopping area https://goo.gl/maps/5AC7tTfhNvs https://goo.gl/maps/5AC7tTfhNvs surrounded by lots of food choices with a Safeway, Trader Joe's, Milk Pail and Walmart all within a 3 minute walk!
dasil003 8y ago
If all cafeterias were immediately closed I imagine the lines would be insufferable.
- jjulius 8y ago
  I've seen a few comments in this thread from people who seem to be arguing that every employee who would otherwise get a free lunch at work would suddenly be flocking to the streets. First, this doesn't eliminate existing cafeterias, it just bans new ones. Second, cafeterias exist for two reasons - pricing and convenience. If, as you hypothesize, cafeterias closed (which is not what's happening here) and everyone was forced to find other options, I would imagine that a good portion of these people would opt to bring their own lunch from home, for those same two reasons - pricing and convenience. After all, why spend 40 minutes in line for a $15 lunch when you can make a damn good one at home for ~$6 and eat it virtually whenever you'd like? Disclaimer: I do not support the city's decision here, but I also don't think it's as big of a travesty as people are making it out to be.

alaskamiller 8y ago

Then change how cities are built. Throw in more bikes, and cut out some more cars. Throw in more scooters, and get everyone to show some manners. Throw in more pop-ups, and get everyone to utilize space better. It's 2018, you're a grown adult that's tech literate with access to a computer. Go outside, get some food and a drink and do better.

kilbuz 8y ago

Not necessarily supporting this motion, but it would cause no one to drive to lunch. There are dozens of good options within a block or two of most tech companies in the city. It would probably cause an uptick in Uber Eats, Grubhub, Eat24 orders though.

electricslpnsld 8y ago
In mid-market? There is no where near the capacity in local restaurants to support Uber/Twitter/etc dumping all their employees out. There is the Burger King that plays classical music I suppose...
- jjulius 8y ago
  Companies wouldn't be required to "[dump] all their employees out" at lunch. Plenty of people bring their own lunches to work every day, so it's incorrect to assume that every office-based employee would be simultaneously hitting the streets for food.