101–110 of 322 posts
America is going in the opposite direction with instant food delivery. Your $11 meal is delivered to your house within 30 minutes. But, there's a service fee of $5, a delivery fee of $6, and a 20% gratuity.
Ok… if this is the case, then why are food trucks charging $18 for a burger and fries now? It isn’t all zoning laws.
1. food trucks are subject to lots of regulation and fees too 2. burrito trucks sell their burritos at the market clearing price for a burrito, which is $18 because most of that burrito truck's competition is brick-and-mortar restaurants with expensive rent because of zoning laws.
I serve as a planning commissioner for my city, and my city just recently tried to overhaul our zoning code to allow for more affordability and better economic outcomes for our citizens and future as a city. Here is what I have learned: In the US, few people participate or care about local laws, zoning, and elections, or even understand why participation may be important. In a citizen ballot to determine if we should…
Not convinced, plenty of countries (e.g. UK) don’t have such stringent don’t have strict zoning laws and also don’t have $4 food
reducing everything to zoning laws is lazy analysis. nobody will ever sell $4 lunch bowls in SF because the rent is too high. so these market incentives will influence/force the proprietor to sell them for more!
failing to understand that the rent is too high because of zoning laws is lazy analysis.
Ok… if this is the case, then why are food trucks charging $18 for a burger and fries now? It isn’t all zoning laws.
from the article: > But the restaurant industry fights to limit food trucks. On average, food trucks must handle 45 separate regulatory procedures and spend $28,276 on associated fees. Lets napkin-math this. If we assume a food truck has margins at the upper end of the fast-casual industry of 9%, then each $18 burger-and-fries nets 1.62 in profit. $28,276 / 1.62 = 17,454 burgers-and-fries. If you were open every day…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I get the sentiment about "why would I let people who aren't going to stay long term decide how the city is run?" but in the end it creates a city that is indifferent or even hostile to people in that situation. It ends up disenfranchising a population that will always be there, even if the people who make up that population is constantly changing.
The ones who will “always be there” can get their papers for permanent residence done and vote. If they don’t want to (or can’t since they don’t have the legal grounds to even stay there for longer), then they shouldn’t have a say on decisions that can permanently change things about the place.
With your thinking you are creating a class of subhumans where you enjoy the benefits of their labour but you are not allowing them to vote. Like African Americans in the US not that long ago.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is not true. The UK has a £3.85 meal deal that is a sandwich + a snack + a drink. It's hugely popular. Germany has the Döner Kebab, it's now about 5-9€, but the have cheaper options available too. Again, hugely popular. I'm sure most European cities have these.
A sandwich, snack or Döner Kebab is not a full nutritional lunch.
I have heard that there are no zoning laws in Houston, Texas. Are there $4 lunch bowls there?
$7-9 for bun, and 3.25-5.50 for banh mi