

Confiscating your ice cream cones  - ajdecon
http://www.jwz.org/blog/2012/02/confiscating-your-ice-cream-cones/

======
latch
Reminds me of this article (<http://www.economist.com/node/18678963>) which
talks about overregulation in the USA.

The other thing this reminds me of is The Aviator. It's always fascinating
because you essentially see a guy build an empire, and help build an important
industry, largely through lack of regulations.

~~~
Cushman
I'm a bit confused about why you and others* put this as the product of United
States regulation-- what we're seeing here is the tyranny of local government,
exactly the thing that those who oppose national regulation would like to see
in charge.

It seems very dangerous to mix up the broader inter-state health and commerce
regulation for which the Federal government is responsible with this kind of
admittedly oppressive state and local regulation.

*Realizing you don't necessarily speak for the article you linked, of course.

~~~
Zak
I can't speak for everyone, but I believe in both decentralization (as much as
possible, but not more) and limited regulation because of the same core
belief: power corrupts. I'm not sure what a systemic solution to local tyranny
would look like though.

------
guard-of-terra
And yet USA ranks as #2 (XXX old report, wikipedia cites
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ease_of_Doing_Business_Index> #4) the most
friendly country to small business.

You might wonder how, say, #22 feels like, but then you might also reconsider
taking such lists into account.

~~~
HaloZero
I think this is a particular article related to San Francisco, and not the US
in general.

~~~
_delirium
And even more specifically retail food service, one of the more regulation-
heavy areas. Starting a small tech business is a lot easier.

------
jluxenberg
Press release by the SF Planning Department containing the video
<http://www.sf-planning.org/index.aspx?page=2925>

------
chrismealy
There are worse things:

[http://www.jwz.org/blog/2012/02/confiscating-your-ice-
cream-...](http://www.jwz.org/blog/2012/02/confiscating-your-ice-cream-
cones/#comment-101537)

~~~
Luyt
To which jwz replied: "Safety regulations are great. The bureaucracy we have
here goes far beyond that into attempted cultural engineering."

~~~
_delirium
In the case of many local governments (like SF's) I think it has less to do
with cultural engineering, and more with protecting a clique of well-connected
businessmen. Same reason Louisiana monks can't sell caskets without a casket-
making license...

~~~
yock
This kind of corruption gets lost in the political shuffle. Both sides of the
argument want so desperately to over-simplify the issue into regulation is
good/bad as a boolean decision rather than attack specific classes of
regulation at their core. It's a lot harder to uncover the corruption behind
bad regulation than to vilify regulation at large, which is why I suppose
those who have much to gain from the argument choose to simplify it.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
Hey! Everybody benefits from simplified regulation. Of course those arguing
For it benefit.

And 'benefit' here means entering into fair competition with existing
establishments, so it isn't really a benefit. Those establishments with
'protected status' also only 'lose' by having to be competitive too. That's
not right or wrong - that's supposed to be the normal free-market ecosystem.

Reducing regulation and returning to a fair ecosystem for small businesses is
all that is really being proposed. There will be winners and losers. But the
consumer will normally win, and there are a lot more of us.

------
jeffreymcmanus
I'm on the side of the small business owner here, but for some perspective on
why restaurant businesses have to go though hell to get set up in SF, search
Yelp for "9th avenue burger king". The short version is that people in the
neighborhoods go insane if businesses (particularly restaurants, and
especially chains) set up in their area.

People still line up to start restaurants in SF.

~~~
npc
I'm not much of a free-marketeer, but if enough people "in the neighborhoods"
want to eat at a burger king such that it would be economically viable, why
should other people be allowed to prevent them from doing that?

~~~
jeffreymcmanus
Because in this case the burger king was located in the lower floor of a two-
story residential building and caused air pollution and litter in the
neighborhood.

------
notatoad
maybe it's just because i've seen too much TV, but i suspect that a lot of
these fees and red tape could have been avoided if you knew the right people.

~~~
dugmartin
If "knew" means "bribed" you would be correct.

~~~
learc83
I helped a buddy of mine open a retail shop a few years ago. The inspections
were ridiculous.

The building inspector would show up, find one thing wrong, leave without
looking at anything else and tell us to reschedule.

Then another building inspector would show up, find a different problem that
the previous inspector thought was fine, leave and tell us to reschedule.

The violations seemed completely arbitrary. Each inspector had a different pet
problem. We had one inspector who failed us because the restroom sign was too
small. Wouldn't even wait 5 minutes for us to run across the street to grab
another one from Staples.

After a few weeks we finally got the original inspector back. We fixed the
single original problem he had, and he passed us. For a while I wondered if
they expected us to slip them a few hundred dollars.

------
ryanwaggoner
With regard to the hole between the restaurant and the club, what if you just
went ahead and did it? It seems likely that a city with this level of
disorganization and incompetence would never find out, let alone do anything
about it if they did, right?

~~~
aaronbrethorst
Ooh, but there are undoubtedly fines to be had if he goes ahead and does
construction work without a permit. I'm sure they'd be all over that in a
heartbeat.

~~~
ryanwaggoner
I'm sure there are fines, but how would they even know with this level of
disorganization? Do you know how much un-permitted construction happens in SF?

~~~
mturmon
As the above commenter said: going without permits may work in a residence,
but not in a club. Especially one that already has some unfriendly neighbors
(read his blog). They will complain, and you'll be liable to get your liquor
license pulled. End of story.

~~~
mindcrime
_They will complain, and you'll be liable to get your liquor license pulled._

Serve the liquor anyway. Get some crazy bootlegger to distill it and have it
delivered "Smokey and the Bandit" style if you have to.

OK, maybe not really, but damn is the idea awfully appealing. Government in
this country is ridiculously out-of-control, and so totally corrupt, evil and
heavy-handed that it would be funny if it weren't real. :-(

~~~
mturmon
It's out of control until you live across the alley from the evil twin of the
DNA Lounge (jwz's club), which serves to minors, who puke outside your back
door, and which winks at the coke dealers who operate out of the alley behind
the place. Then, it turns out, you do want someone to complain to.

------
pax
After you watch the video, check the uploader.

~~~
StavrosK
Or the article:

> Even the planning department itself is calling for reform. "Hello City
> Planner," an animated cartoon produced by the department and posted on its
> Web site, depicts a litany of farcical city hassles faced by a woman
> applying to sell ice cream.

