I think the richer street life argument is true in general, but false for much of SF. SoMa's street life is one reason I prefer cafeterias.
I’m torn. On the one hand, I think this would improve the city for almost all its residents (per Jane Jacobs / richer street life). On the other hand, freedom of assembly!https://twitter.com/adamnash/status/1021833412804370432 …
Wow. Unbelievable. San Francisco proposes to ban workplace cafeterias. 
http://www.sfexaminer.com/supervisors-move-ban-workplace-cafeterias/ …
http://www.sfexaminer.com/supervisors-move-ban-workplace-cafeterias/ …-
-
-
Why is it false for SF? Isn't this exactly the negative spiral we'd like to avoid: shitty street life —> people retreat further from the street —> even shittier?
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
It’s interesting to think about the multiple levels of solution space here. For instance, this wouldn’t be a problem without huge inequality between a few tech companies and the rest of the population.
-
How does inequality exacerbate the problem?
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Banning home laundry would also get people out to mix, this time in laundrymats. Seems also a bad idea.
-
To be clear, I could never advocate such a heavy-handed intervention as prohibiting on-site meals. But the city planning argument is compelling to me. More street life is a virtuous cycle of safety and vitality. Erode that and you risk creating ghost neighborhoods.
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
The loss of productivity alone is a very big deal. This city never ceases to amaze me.
-
Productivity is bad because it means increased inequality.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
What hasn't been said is that this again demonstrates how unwilling SF is to address urgent matters. Workplace cafeterias should not be high up on their list of priorities to fix with respect to the homelessness/mental health issues in the city.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This proposed reg is wackadoodle, on the level of trying to ban families eating together because the families could be out enriching the community. What right does SF have to penetrate into private businesses in this fashion? Also, does this impair union rights?
-
(Re impairing union rights, it is plausible that shared cafeterias are places where union or OSHA notices, etc. are placed, and also common places where union activities occur. I'd think then this statute could run afoul of both fed. and state union laws, but not my area!)
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.