Never missing a chance to miss a chance

What is it with the current Board of Supervisors? Only one of them seems to be willing to tackle the fiscal problem the city is facing a meaningful way, and even then I get the feeling it's only halfhearted and to get some attention in the press.

What am I talking about? Apparently, not content to tax us in a variety of ways to the point of insanity, the city of San Francisco's Board of Supervisors has decided on a new 90 day trial plan with a new fee for many of us. What is that you may ask? It's parking on Sunday.

In a way, this is just like Spirit Airlines and their recent decision to tack on a fee for all luggage carry-on or loaded on their flights.

Whenever someone government says that taxes temporary, I think we need to look at their definition of temporary versus our definition of temporary. Governments never like to give up sources of revenue. There is always some pet project that can be trotted out they can justify the continuation of a tax.

In the people we elect a government, as well as the bureaucrats which they appoint, are not the only ones to blame. We enable this habit. We rubberstamp the spending by continuing to return the same people office over and over again. Voters have a memory the most major-league closers would kill for. If it didn't happen in the last few news cycles, barely remember it happened at all.

San Francisco Board of Supervisors is apparently going to authorize this new parking meter extension to Sunday's, saying that polygamy for 90 days in the know about with the program. Right... what you want to bet this is the 90 days or a Board of Supervisors is going to look at the pile of money that they've made from you dropping coins into the meters and the meter maids issuing tickets and say to themselves "this is a lot of moneyh, we could do something with this".

But is it really going to bring down the deficit that this government in San Francisco is running right now? Can act as a Band-Aid. It's going to make people think that we've solved our fiscal problems. But the only to really solve the problems is to get back to living within our means. If that means cutting some programs and we need to do that. Otherwise we're just to be raising and raising and raising more and more fees and taxes in the city.

At some point, enough has to be enough. Why don't we start now?