"F.O.A.D." wrote:
On 7/24/13 12:42 PM, Califbill wrote:
"F.O.A.D." wrote:
On 7/24/13 11:36 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jul 2013 06:53:39 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 7/24/13 6:14 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 7/24/13 2:09 AM, Califbill wrote:
"F.O.A.D." wrote:
On 7/23/13 1:02 PM, Califbill wrote:
why do you have to pay a janitor
$60k a year?

So he or she can find a decent place to live and feed and clothe the
family in one of the highest cost of living cities in the USA?

Bull**** on the highest cost living cities. Lots different when you live
here as opposed to visiting. He wants more money, get an education
not rip
off the public treasury!



Here's a chart that shows that S.F. is one of the highest cost of living
cities in the USA.

http://tinyurl.com/77gnjm4

Have a nice day.

Oh, here's another, one that shows S.F. in the top five most expensive
cities in the U.S. in which to live:

http://www.coli.org/ReleaseHighlights.asp

You notice the cheap places to live are usually "right to work"
states.


The right to work for less, the right to have less safe jobs, the right
to have less opportunities for health insurance, the right to have less
clean air, clean water...

The SF Bay Area is a lot bigger than San Francisco! SF is only about 46
sq miles in size. Plus SF has the highest cost of government in the
country I think. It is run by unions. SF is about the same size and
population as Indianapolis and spends 2X on government. And no snow
removal.


Indianapolis is one of the crappiest cities in the United States. San
Francisco is one of the nicest.

Bull. Better climate, better views, but government and the well subsidized
street people, detract immensely.