Protesters Block Google Bus at 24th and Valencia

Here we go again: protesters have setup at 24th and Valencia this morning, blocking Google buses from leaving the city.  Much like May's protest that saw a Google Bus piñata smashed to bits, organizers are protesting the evictions happening in the city:

Heart of the City, the group organizing the protest (which we're told consists of several lawyers from the Eviction Defense Collaborative), writes:

Today we are the San Francisco Displacement and Neighborhood Impact Agency, and we're stopping the injustice in the city's two-tier system where the public pays and the private corporations gain.

Rents and evictions are on the rise. Tech-fueled real estate speculation is the culprit. We say: Enough is Enough! The local government, especially Mayor Lee, has given tech the keys to shape the city to their fancy without the public having any say in it. We say, lets take them back!

Tech Industry private shuttles use over 200 SF MUNI stops approximately 7,100 times in total each day (M-F) without permission or contributing funds to support this public infrastructure. No vehicles other than MUNI are allowed to use these stops. If the tech industry was fined for each illegal use for the past 2 years, they would owe an estimated $1 billion to the city. […]

With $1 billion and counting we can fund: Affordable Housing Initiatives, Eviction Defense, Public transit service improvements, Legislation initiatives to prevent speculators from using the Ellis Act & Costa Hawkins to evict residents … and so much more! […]

The city needs to declare a state of emergency, stop all no-fault evictions, and prevent tech companies from running  buses in residential neighborhoods, which is driving up rents (up to 20% along their route).

UPDATE: A view from inside one of the buses “under siege”:

UPDATE 12:00pm: Now there's video of a Google employee union organizer pretending to be a Google employee chewing out protesters, telling one to move somewhere where they can afford rent.

[Photos by Steve Rhodes]

Comments (90)

Several points:
1) The city is already working with tech companies to regulate MUNI stop use by corporate shuttles.…

2) This little protest kept 80 people - including non-Google contractors - from getting to their jobs. The people have absolutely no say in the decisions made about how the shuttles work, so this is completely unfair to them. They’re just trying to go to work.

3) The protestors told onlookers that “the bus could leave whenever it wanted to” and that “we aren’t stopping them from leaving.” However, the drive of this bus, who is a contractor and for whom English is not a native language, was intimidated from pulling away. He was really put in a bind and a high-pressure situation for now reason.

4) By preventing the Google bus from leaving the MUNI stop, the protestors kept multiple 48 and 12 MUNI busses, as well as 2 other corporate shuttles, from accessing the stop, creating traffic jams at the intersection. If you’re trying to free up MUNI stops, keeping MUNI from using them doesn’t seem like an effective tactic.

5) And I won’t even get into the fact that the busses, and their workers are several steps removed from the whole eviction debate, which has a lot more to do with market forces and outdated real estate legislation that distorts the market. The busses are just an easy-to-point-to symbol of what’s happening here, but they aren’t a cause of anything.

Thanks for this. It really is completely counterproductive. Why don’t they put this much effort into getting a job? Perhaps making more money? They are a complete joke! And how ironic is it that rely on Twitter/Google/Facebook to promote their idiotic ideals?

Is it inconceivable to you that a person’s actions could be motivated by something other than self-interest?

Yeah, why don’t they just get a job at Google and hop on the bus with the other drones? Why don’t they just take the money they’re being handed and stop being funny! Sheesh. Don’t they know that life is a MERITOCRACY? Work hard, ride comfortably, eat free food and LIVE THE DREAM!

You assume these people don’t have jobs. You are incorrect, this is not a joke, and furthermore, using the ubiquity of social media to get their point across isn’t “ironic”, what is happening to San Francisco as a result of companies like Google over stepping.

Um, you had bother to read you would have noticed it was organized by lawyers who work on eviction cases. Doh, they have jobs!! So, yes they actually contribute loads to society, unlike you and your witty comments and Google who pays nothing to the city’s infrastructure costs.

Protests are designed to get attention, not enhance traffic flow.

Attention to the fact that the protesting business is driven by a bunch of idiots.

Amazing – while it used to take days to get whiny, knee-jerk anti-protest sentiments, now it only takes minutes. Thanks, internet!

re: #2 - the idea that this was “keeping people from getting to their jobs” seems rather laughable, especially given they can work on the bus.

What about it is laughable? The bus was held at the stop for over 20 minutes.
And I’m sure you realize that some things, like meetings, cannot get done outside the office.

That’s what Hangouts are for, silly old man!

1. The city has proven repeatedly that they will bend over for tech without so much as a courtesy reach around.

2. Boo hoo. You think those 80 people are going to get their pay docked? They’re all on “flex” hours anyway. Maybe their absence in the cube farm might send a message to the people who do make the decisions?

3. OK.

4. But that’s the whole point – the Tech busses are blocking MUNI all of the time. This exacerbates it to make a point.

5. Yes, it is an easy mark. It’s very visible and it’s the bottom of the chain. I assume that you understand the message and support it – what would you recommend they do instead?

I support this. I hope they do it everyday in random stops all over the city until the tech companies start paying for the infrastructure they are illegally using and interrupting. I don’t think it should be conflated with rising rents and evictions but the impact of these busses on the city is huge. Maybe if they started paying their way we could repeal parking meters on the weekend. That would be nice.

On point 2-4, let’s agree / agree to disagree and leave it at that.

On points 1 and 5, if the goal is to get these tech companies (including Yahoo, eBay, EA, Apple, etc) to pay for MUNI stop use, then protestors should be pressuring City Hall, not Google. Google is just one of the companies that run shuttles in SF, and they can’t control what the other companies do. It’s also not Google responsibility to pay a fine or tax to the city for using MUNI stops unless the city asks for one. Once the city asks for something (which it sounds like they’ll start doing in January), the ball will be in the tech companies’ court.

By the way, I totally agree with you that the issue of buses shouldn’t be conflated with rising rents and evictions. Google can’t fix the latter two; it shouldn’t be on the hook for them. Google is not broken; City Hall and city policy are broken.

In several ways, Google and other tech companies are indirectly responsible for the high rent prices and evictions. When Google interns make $72k per year (….), that sets a pretty high bar for the employees who actually get hired. When an intern can afford a $3000/mo apartment, the law of supply and demand really kicks in. Lots of people with lots of money demanding apartments in a small geographic area creates high cost of living in the SF area.

Talk about living in a bubble! Sheesh, my employer never paid me for my intership, much less offered me a free ride on a cushy bus with free WiFi. Sign of the times? Fad? A peek into the future? Who knows, but with Google stock at over $1000/share, the old “money talks” saying seems to fit the situation. Money is talking to The City, landlords, real estate agents, restaurants, cafes, and so on.

Are housing costs high because tech companies pay high salaries or do tech companies pay high salaries because housing costs are high?

As someone who just recently moved to the area, I can tell you that housing costs directly influenced my decision to take the job. If they’d “ignored” the “pretty high bar” and paid me what you seem to think people should be getting paid, I just would have declined the offer and gone somewhere else. If tech companies were to take your advice, they would lose all their best talent and/or have to move to a different metropolitan area, because no one is going to start accepting job offers from them if it doesn’t cover the cost of living as-is.

Nothing personal but people are saying that they do wish that people like you had declined the offer and were somewhere else.

That’s one argument, yes, but let’s work within a world of realistic expectations for a moment. How do you expect the tech companies to offer lower salaries WITHOUT jeopardizing their business or completely moving away from the area? We all know that Silicon Valley isn’t going anywhere, so if you believe that the high salaries of the tech companies is related to the housing problem, how do you propose these companies address the issue without losing out on top talent?

Well the fast response,

1) First, I don’t see it as the same disaster you imply if some companies move away. San Francisco was a great place for me before Google stock went so high. Its okay if we lose a company or two Sometimes, a club, bar, restaurant has to turn away customer to keep its quality. Its okay if we turn away a few companies and keep our soul.

2) The long predicted effect, that tech will free workers from being at the job site, just may happen little by little.

3) The top talent idea, I don’t buy. Some top talent will stay because they want to work with other talent.

“Our city is a bastion of tolerance, and we want to kick you out of it for not being just like us. Nothing personal.”

Yeah, well, fuck you too.

Finally a sensible comment! Thank you!

Woah, and you are indirectly responsible for the deaths of millions at the hands of the U.S. military, right?? See how much sense your argument makes?

Excellent points! While we are at it we should ban all forms of high density transportation. That way the traffic will be so terrible everyone with a job will be forced to leave the city.

Bingo. Everything you said is spot on.

Thank you. It was fun and overwhelmingly supported by the lookee-loos (not on the bus) in the neighborhood. You should join if it happens again.

Its not known yet, but Ed Lee is selling a City owned building on Howard Street that long provide resources to the people of San Francisco for a cheap price.

It will come out in the news in about a month, I think

1. Don’t steal Full Metal Jacket quotes. Google has done more good for the city than likely all those protesting combined.

2. They are employees. You debate in favor of those stopping the city from splitting into two groups. You ironically are okay with those suffering, because of your beliefs, when you claim to stop those suffering because of Google’s.

4. Perhaps Google should provide all employees with V-8 cars. So you can complain about the environmental damage instead. Google is providing a benefit. Sure, it could pay for using the stops and should seek permission first. But this protest is a real turn off for people who see it. I work in Boston, and all universities have buses that usually share MBTA stops for free. But it actually saves damage on the roads and environment, and we aren’t haughty Yuppies, so we don’t complain.

you forgot # 3. Could you add it. Pleazzzze

(1) You can’t spell.
(2) The busses to the valley are indeed actually an enabling cause of the displacement.

Thanks for these comments. If I may, could I kindly and politely reply to a few of them:

1) re the city already working with tech companies on the MUNI stop use: This is a case of too little, too late. First, the initial hubris of a company (especially one with “Don’t be evil” as its slogan) blithely using public stops for its private buses without even inquiring as to cost; this smacks of the very cavalier entitlement we should all rally against/ Secondly, the deal they are being given is a sweetheart deal that does not truly address the traffic concerns nor the true dollar value they should be proposing. This is Ed Lee at his best- pretending to be sympathetic to all sides, with the financial juggernaut always emerging the winner. Fine them for the current use, and THEN we can talk.

2) It is unfortunate these people were prevented from going to work. This said, we are not as removed from injustices as we might think; we are ALL responsible for addressing these concerns and protests nearly always inconvenience people. The question is; are we better off with protest or without it? Maybe a bit heavy handed to invoke Elie Wiesel, but he said, “there may be times when we are powerless to prevent injustice, but there must never be a time when we fail to protest.” Ultimately part of living in a democratic society is that portions of its infrastructure will be affronted and inconvenienced in pursuit of improvement. And we must all realize that we are part of machines that do not always do the right thing, and sooner or later we will be held accountable for it.

Re 5) I agree. This is about symbolism. But there is no doubt that those who ride the buses are part of the problem. The tech industry IS turning SF is into an expensive, less dimensional universe.

Anyway, this reply is in the spirit of open thought and in no way meant to disrespect the prior commenter. I just wanted to inject some more points into this discussion, thanks all!

re: 3): gee, you’d think Google could afford to hire bus drivers who can speak English. seeing as how clear communication is an essential part of their job.

re 2): I’m sure Google took care of it.

re 1), 4), and 5): the purpose of a protest is to be visible, get media attention, spark discussion. looks like it worked.

Nice. To be fair, I bet a lot of the people on that bus were fairly tickled by the whole thing. Facebook posts like ‘just another day living in san francisco’ are going to be pretty well liked after this event

gee, do you think if we blocked enough of their busses, they’d get tired of San Francisco and *go away*?

Hahahahahahahahaha! What a bunch of idiots!

Idiots huh?

I suppose you would just let tech companies to whatever the hell they want in San Francisco and not pay forward a dime? Fuck you.

More than happy to drive to work if this is something that I have to deal with consistently. We’re taking over- and there is nothing you can do about it. Hahahahaha!

Obvious troll post is obvious.

I find the comments from Jandosaurus’ link telling. I’m pretty sure those folks do know why they are protesting. Seems these folks sitting on the bus might be due some self-reflection instead of self-centered reaction.

With all due respect to Old Mission Neighbor, this is a pretty effective way to force a change. Block a Google bus everyday and, at some point, the folks on the bus will want to be on time to work and the company will want to find a solution. Does it solve the housing crisis? Not a whit. Will it force what appears to be an all-powerful entity into changing it’s behavior? If you keep it up long enough and consistently enough, yes. Strategically, it makes great sense and, tactically, it’s low cost, high impact and unpredictable. It’s text book guerrilla style.

I don’t know that it’s right or wrong in this case but people turn to direct action when they feel other means have failed and it can be super effective. If the protestors focus on making workforce transportation a daily question wherein only they get to decide who gets to work on time, they will effectively control the situation and change will come sooner than one might think. This has been done in form or another throughout history.

And if it forces a change it will be viewed as a success and will be repeated and escalated. What happens if this group shows up at a different Google stop or time every day and delays a different bus for one hour each day? Workers will never know which Google bus will get delayed for an hour or more. Got an important meeting? Better drive. Don’t have a car? Uh oh. Where’s Caltrain? The inconvenience is minor but the uncertainty is constant. And uncertainty is a killer in business. Don’t fool yourselves, if the protestors decide to make this “a thing”, it could have legs because its so simple and easy to grow.

Mayor Lee better wake up quick, drop the platitudes and start making moves to actually manage the firms he so carefully spoon fed into focusing on SF. Jon Golinger may be a joke (see today’s paper for exhibit A) but he’s showing folks that it’s possible to challenge the administration and win with broad support from every corner of the City.

Technically speaking, you and your little gang, should be considered a fucking terrorist.

What gives you and the rest of these clowns the “right” to be here? Would you prefer they all had a car? Should we take down bicycle parking to make room for those?

Why don’t you jackasses propose something USEFUL. Pissing people off may get useless talking heads like Campos to say a few positive about you but let’s be honest, it’s not going to change the fact that people want to live here.

Grow up. Assholes.

Terrorists????? looooooooooooooooooooool

Because an attack on the $$ machine is unAmerican?

sure buddy, i love that you consider standing outside a bus and delaying its departure TERRORISM.

technically speaking, your obscenely entitled point of view is truly frightening.

I agree with Andrew, above, and anyone else who is totally aghast by the entitled bullshit that “You” projects. For months I’ve been like, yeah, tech is fucking up this city, but you know, dem’s da ropes. But the tone of this “You” character has really just set a fire in my belly. What a fucking asshole. Please, “You”, private message me. My email is

Seriously. Private message me. Let’s meet up.

Is “You” is actually a “union organizer from Oakland.”

@You = Scary out of touch.

Or perhaps You’s asshole was surgically closed, because You are totally full of sh#i

First of all, technically speaking, this isn’t terrorism. Before you start correcting folks, learn your definitions.

Second of all, this isn’t my group and I wasn’t involved. I was simply commenting that if applied properly, this could end up being very effective.

Third of all, at this point, I’m no longer sure that the benefits of the Google bus outweigh the negatives. In beginning, yes. But now it feels like there are more buses from more companies and the associated wave of gentrification is have unanticipated impacts that we haven’t seen in a long time. That can no longer be ignored. What’s shocking to me is that after six months of backlash and civic soul-searching, the technology community is still putting up its dukes instead of trying to find ways to really become part of our community. People like Ron Conway have it backwards - you don’t shape our City, you join our City.

Why don’t I do something useful? I do and I still find the time to participate in civic discussions, vote, attend the occasional community meeting, raise kids, work 45+ hours a week, enjoy our city parks and nightlife, etc… It’s called urban living and it involves more than parachuting in and out of one’s neighborhood every night.

Whoa. “You” needs to get his/her fucking ass kicked. Seriously, like curb-stomped.

Yep. You can tell s/he did not grow up in a city.

Eat shit


“Block a Google bus everyday and, at some point, the folks on the bus will want to be on time to work” … and they will drive, increasing manifold the emissions poured into the air. Terrific! I, too, hate the environment, and want to hasten climate change, so get rid of these extremely large, efficient carpools, post haste!

If you want to stop gentrification, make tweaks to capitalism. We’ve done a pretty good job of that in SF, actually - we are one of only a handful of cities nationwide with rent control. If that’s not enough, come up with some further capitalism-inhibitors. I’m not necessarily against that, but I am against interfering with a *good* thing about the tech companies - the buses they provide are good for the environment and for traffic.

The bus protests are all about *something else*, not about the buses. Since the buses do good, on their own, the protests would be better focused on *actual bad things*, rather than symbols of bad things,



I’d better buy a car.

Don’t have a car → buy a car. Caltrain doesn’t go to Google.

Or find a equally well paying tech job in San Francisco.

When will they protest sf2g?

Tongue in cheek doesn’t work so well when someone screenshots your IG account before any meaningful discussion can take place. Not that my usual photostream of bikes and my cat should be hosting serious political and economic conversation, anyway.

Anywho, I’m all for 2014’s proposals on charging private firms to use MUNI stops:…

It really is incredible how the city lets these phenomenally rich companies do anything they want in SF. The buses are hardly that removed from the eviction debate. It allows thousands of people who make very very good wages work in Silicon valley to live in SF and commute down there for free. Many of them would otherwise live in the south bay.

Why are we protesting the tech workers, instead of the landlords choosing to evict tenants in order to capitalize on them?

Or the policies which have led to the housing shortage.

San Francisco doesn’t have any meaningful control over the housing policies outside its borders.

Or how about why SF doesn’t have a large enough supply of housing because of the strict controls and 4 years of paperwork to build anything. That is something the city could control.

Or how about the City is a place that people want to live in t because it has strict controls and 4 years of paperwork to build anything. Strict controls is a core feature, not a bug.

There are place that allow quick building, and that brings different problems than what we have.

U rnt vry good @ econ lol

Constraining supply in a period of skyrocketing demand and influx of money will result in sharp pricing increases. That’s how markets work. You can’t have it both ways. Don’t call it a feature then complain about its predictable and well understood effects.

Speaking of economics…

I had believed that if we kept building in that manner and increasing our housing supply … that prices would go down,” [Amanda Burden, director of New York City’s Department of City Planning] said. “We had every year almost 30,000 permits for housing, and we built a tremendous amount of housing, including affordable housing, either through incentives or through government funds. And the price of housing didn’t go down at all. That’s a practitioner’s point of view.”

Trickle Down Economics. Reagan is smiling from his grave.

Did you actually read the article you posted? Because it actually makes the opposite of the point you’re trying to make - that increasing the supply of housing probably _did_ keep prices under control some, it just wasn’t done aggressively enough to make a significant dent.

And directly under the quote you posted comes this quote.

“By increasing supply, Bloomberg-era housing policies helped to keep prices from rising as much as they would have in the absence of any new construction—but because the policies were too modest to keep up with demand, prices did not fall.”

Come on KevMo, you’re better than that.

This article is more a discussion of policy and thus not a one-to-one example, but I feel it highlights the simple truth that with land being such a scarce resource in SF, we’d have to do Fillmore-style redevelopment of neighborhoods to hit building rates that would would actually make a meaningful impact on rental prices (and I doubt anyone wants that).

As the headline states, “Modest Increases in the Supply of Housing Won’t Reduce Rents in NYC.”

Sure, every new unit ‘makes a difference’, but between all the speculative buying and influx of new residents, development just isn’t scaling to a rate that will make a difference.

@Scott you might first want to brush up on the economic concept of externalites, and taxation principles.

The influx of money is because San Francisco is a quality place, with planning laws to preserve its quality, quality people and quality company will not be attracted. If we make San Francisco into a quick build, ugly city destroying its communities and culture it is doubtful that it would be a premium location.

And yes, I want the tech companies to be here. Google is truly my friend. But that doesn’t mean that the tech companies should not pay their share. If they use the bus space and other resources, the should contribute accordingly.

Because an indirect approach is much more effective. It allows the protestors to leverage their resources in a way that unbalances and can dislodge a larger or more widely dispersed opponent.

@BeckyBayside - Good response. Thanks.

You can’t tackle everything at once. The buses have become an extremely visible part of the entire debate so these folks are just capitalizing on that. The city is absolutely frightened of raising these companies’ ire on any level, which is equally as sickening as the eviction problem. Take the “Google Barge” for instance. If that was anyone else, the city would have stopped it long ago, but it took the Coast Guard and a state agency to investigate it and stop its construction.

One reason for the protests against tech workers is because too many of them act like the are better, and work harder than other folks, When the reality is they got their money by the luck of right place, right time.

Just an FYI for the commenter complaining about the poor tech workers being late to their jobs. I’ve been late several times, because the J-line is blocked by the Google bus, which subsequently causes me to miss my Caltrain connection. It’s not like light rail can go around the bus. Fuck them.

This type of protest gets people talking and brings a lot of attention to a frustrating problem that doesn’t have a simple solution… To simply focus on the reasons it isn’t effective and ignore the problem only makes things worse. People need to see there is a problem and then ideas and solutions are key… Do you agree there is a problem? What can be done? Charging the companies for the use of bus stops is a good very small step. Having a city like SF recognize it’s long time citizens and families as very important parts of it’s culture and community is what’s vital. If we say nothing, SF and cities in general will always sell their souls to the highest bidder for a short term gain. Does SF care about it’s families and natives? That’s up to us!!! Actions speak WAY louder then words!!!

The bus hate is absurd. You could make a reasonable argument that they should contribute to Muni funding for use of the bus zone for pickups, but the existence of the busses is A GOOD THING. Would you rather all of those employees be taking private cars down to Mountain View every day? If you think your roads are clogged with traffic now, think about how much worse it could be.

What, are the only choices binary?

If (Bus=== good,) {
some argument}

Else if ( Bus=== bad) {
more argument}

Ummm…. what?

You’re the one who seems to be arguing in favor of protesting private bussing in the city. I’m stating that it largely reduces congestion from commuters who would probably otherwise be driving themselves. I also said that I’m not against the idea of the city asking for compensation for use of the bus zones.

That doesn’t seem binary to me.

Either way, touting google busses as the crux of the problem of rising cost of living in the city is stupid and counterproductive. Focus your efforts elsewhere.

@Scott, I don’t know if you are purposefully over-simplifying, but you are…

The buses are a symbol, not the crux of the issue. I’m not part of the protests, but I don’t think the sentiment is that this is a SFMTA issue. Its not about asking for a contribution about bus spaces its about making a contribution about the overall impact of the changes., and that much of City Hall has a bend over backward attitude when it should not.

Scott’s just a simpleton.

Hey Scott: These very important TPS reports aren’t going to generate themselves. Might want to get back on that, skipper.

To the anti-protest protesters: It’s called civic responsibility and Tech companies aren’t exempt from it. Buses cost Google and other such companies an incredible amount of money to run. As a temporary solution, it’s justifiable; as a permanent, ever expanding solution, it’s more of a libertarian fuck you to the City than anything else. Why haven’t these companies taken affirmative actions to facilitate a better inter-county public transportation system. And if Caltrain is too large for one company to take on, why not help fund PUBLIC bus routes? Google could have poured money into Muni, SamTrans, or VTA, and any of those three agencies could have happily accommodated stops at Google in exchange for real funding help. Google isn’t doing anything out of necessity. These are choices and Google’s choices are undemocratic. Ford could have setup a private health system to serve its employees; instead it bankrolled the Henry Ford Health System, a health system for the PEOPLE of Detroit.

As one of the earliest white hipsters to have moved to the Mission – that is, as one of the earliest gentrifiers, someone who remembers the Latin American Club when that was a descriptive, not an ironic, name– I feel comfortable saying that the fundamental appeal of San Francisco aside, it is hipsters ourselves, and not Google employees or anyone else who are primarily responsible for the soaring cultural capital of that neighborhood and, in turn, for the skyrocketing increase in the cost of living both there and around San Francisco.
It’s a point I’m sure everyone is entirely familiar with, and I add it here not to make some some fatuous declaration of blame, but just to suggest that the framing of this as a moral or ethical issue is a waste of time. There are ethical issues inside of the problem, of course, and the busses might be one of them, but how different are they from those that existed when our $895 - for a 4 bedroom at 23rd and Bryant - was more than any working class Mexican family was willing to pay?
What’s happening in SF makes me sad, for loved ones and strangers and for the city generally. But it’s still true that just because the city is built out and gentrification complete - leaving nowhere for artists, students and the like to turn - does not make the current state of affairs any more about principle than was the one in Chelsea in the 1960s, or wherever and whenever else we’d care to look.

“Stop Displacement Now.”


That’s a compelling argument. It’s also less compelling today than it has been at any time in the last 30 years.

Oh, hipsters. All about yourselves. Yes, it was you. Not the sunnier microhood weather. Not the proximity to hop on the 101. You may have added to it, but yeah, it ain’t you.

By the way, the video of the “Google employee chewing out protesters” turned out to be fake – it was a protestor pretending to be a Google employee.

You just choked on my nuts.

I can’t wait until the process is complete. It will be a great day when the hoople heads are pushed right the fuck out. God damn San Francisco cocksuckers. It will be great when the demographics have changed and the progressive political machine is kicked to the curb. I can’t wait.

You must live a pretty pathetic live if this is what you long for. Go get laid.

I too am concerned about the state of housing in San Francisco, but I don’t see how it is the fault of the companies who are making money, actually hiring people (and not closing or downsizing or going LEAN) around the bay for the eviction or the housing prices (to buy or to rent) being hiked up the way they are.
There doesn’t seem to be any structure to protect the people who work here and who don’t make millions and this included a lot of the tech companies employees. If you think they are not effected by the housing boom in the Bay Area, that is a very misguided view.
The rampant acquisition of housing from investment companies just to flip it a few months later for a couple of hundred of thousand dollars extra that has been going on for years, the whole Cityapartments bubble 3 years ago that morphed into tenths of other mini “cityapartments” companies (how much of the renters market were they allowed to buy in mortgages without any real safety nets? ⅓ of the city or some such?), the very few protective laws for renters (sure there is rent control but the amount of difficulty the landlords are allowed to impose by renting out all the parking spaces in a city where parking is like seeing a unicorn, not allowing for any storage in the storage areas, not cleaning the buildings often enough) are hardly sufficient.

Yet no one seems to be knocking at the Mayor’s and the Governor’s door about these things and put pressure on them.

It is easy and sensationalistic to go at a Google bus and pitch your sign in front of it.

I also encourage everyone to seek out and listen to an expose/interview that KALW public radio did on corporate buses in the bay area (aired about a month ago) where SFMTA official rep admitted that yes, they do turn the blind eye due to the very obvious benefits and there are plans and discussions being made with the companies to minimise the burden to the stops.
Oh, and local families in the Mission were interviewed and said that they prefer the neighborhood now because it is safer and has a better community feel to it.

There is obviously some jealousy and distaste of the fact that many tech employees and start-up richies, who are making a lot of money, are changing the culture of the city in many of SF’s most prized neighborhoods. This includes the mutation of culture within neighborhoods where rent prices are sky-rocketing, as high paid millennials flock in as they listen to Phoenix on their headphones. (no offense, Phoenix)

But here’s the point - NO ONE IS OVERPAID, it is not economically possible… We are the ones demanding that companies, like Google and Facebook, offer social platforms and web services that we all use each and every day. This causes the Googles and Facebooks to staff accordingly, and hire enough cubical farmers to get the job done.

If you’d rather our neighborhoods be filled with the [and more uniquely San Franciscan] artistic types, then stop Facebooking, Googling, and start attending more art galleries, musical performances, ballets, etc. I’m an artist, but to be honest, I use FB and Google everyday, so I’m fine with dealing with the extra headaches that come from the larger company cultures.. Fuck it, ya know? Just do your part to keep SF the way you want it to be… Or else stop complaining

Surfer, you may be excited about your religious dogma, but don’t scream it.