Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Raw Story)   Double whammy. Step one: forbid food trucks in order to protect the local restaurant industry. Step two: make the law apply to all trucks so churches cannot feed the homeless   ( rawstory.com) divider line
    More: Asinine, food truck, churches, homeless, restaurants  
•       •       •

7317 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 Mar 2014 at 7:16 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



127 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-03-30 02:39:13 PM  
Bullsh*t.
 
2014-03-30 03:21:27 PM  
Like anyone is actually gonna enforce that shiat.
 
2014-03-30 03:32:23 PM  
At this point, they're no longer worrying about it causing problems. It's just kicking people while they're down.
 
2014-03-30 03:34:42 PM  

Doktor_Zhivago: Like anyone is actually gonna enforce that shiat.


Oh I suspect they will enforce it.
 
2014-03-30 03:38:43 PM  
"I'm just so totally shocked that the city is turning their back on the homeless like this," he said.

Yes. Shocked.
 
2014-03-30 03:54:46 PM  

Weaver95: Doktor_Zhivago: Like anyone is actually gonna enforce that shiat.

Oh I suspect they will enforce it.


Against a church feeding the homeless? I'm not so sure they will enforce it, but you better believe they're going to go after a *business* that flaunts the law and cannot afford a good lawyer.

Like jaywalking in New York....
 
2014-03-30 03:56:03 PM  

ColonelCathcart: Weaver95: Doktor_Zhivago: Like anyone is actually gonna enforce that shiat.

Oh I suspect they will enforce it.

Against a church feeding the homeless? I'm not so sure they will enforce it, but you better believe they're going to go after a *business* that flaunts the law and cannot afford a good lawyer.

Like jaywalking in New York....


no, authoritarians don't give a f*ck about morality.  they spent good money passing that law and making sure there were no loopholes.  you can damn well be sure they're going to make sure everyone complies.
 
2014-03-30 04:56:53 PM  

Weaver95: ColonelCathcart: Weaver95: Doktor_Zhivago: Like anyone is actually gonna enforce that shiat.

Oh I suspect they will enforce it.

Against a church feeding the homeless? I'm not so sure they will enforce it, but you better believe they're going to go after a *business* that flaunts the law and cannot afford a good lawyer.

Like jaywalking in New York....

no, authoritarians don't give a f*ck about morality.  they spent good money passing that law and making sure there were no loopholes.  you can damn well be sure they're going to make sure everyone complies.


Alabama is scary, religious groups are annoying but this pisses me off so much I'd like to pitch in to help this guy get the required permits. Who's with me?
I want to see him driving an over the top Jesusmobile that is equipped to feed long lines of people.
 
2014-03-30 05:14:00 PM  

Doktor_Zhivago: Like anyone is actually gonna enforce that shiat.


Why would anyone pass a law they don't mean or want to enforce? (That's a rhetorical quesiton.  Yes I do realize that Christian Conservatives wouldn't want to enforce laws protecting OTHER people's religion and that's a great example, but still)
 
2014-03-30 05:32:38 PM  
You'd think there'd be an exemption since they're not charging and I doubt they're actually cooking the food in the truck. But what do I know.

Wonder if they could get around this by unloading the truck onto a wheelbarrow or something and distributing the food from there?
 
2014-03-30 05:52:15 PM  
This hasn't been as a big on the news here as I would hope. I suspect it will be enforced as a part of an effort to keep panhandlers away from the park. Birmingham is pretty small, and there are several missions and shelters in the area---even a "multifaith" one 'The Firehouse' in walking distance that takes donation of  food; I know I've brought, them food left over from catered lunches where I worked. I wonder why the Minister doesn't just bring the food to that shelter?
 
2014-03-30 06:56:55 PM  
So.... "religious freedom" exemption?

/oh yeah, this is doing something Jesus actually advocated and said in the Bible...
 
2014-03-30 06:58:43 PM  
step 3: kill everyone who voted for the bill and whoever signed the bill into law
step 4: humanity profits universally
 
2014-03-30 07:10:48 PM  
Well, it does encourage the homeless to just hang around....
 
2014-03-30 07:19:55 PM  
Amerika:  Finding New Ways to Hate since forever.
 
2014-03-30 07:21:27 PM  
If I were to kill myself (which I'm not) the only people to object would be the reasons I'm killing myself over.

I hate the world.
 
2014-03-30 07:24:23 PM  
Feeding the poor is such a liberal believer thing to do. Conservative believers only believe that shiat during the service.
 
2014-03-30 07:26:46 PM  

LordZorch: Well, it does encourage the homeless to just hang around....


Just like Jesus did!
 
2014-03-30 07:26:59 PM  

Doktor_Zhivago: Like anyone is actually gonna enforce that shiat.


Tell that to all the kids with lemonade stands that have been shutdown.  Just search Fark, there's been plenty.
 
2014-03-30 07:28:07 PM  
So the local government is trying to protect local restaurants by making it harder for food trucks to compete with them?

And yet a search for Walmarts in Birmingham, AL, turns up THREE locations?

img.fark.netView Full Size


I'm so confused by the idea that local stores, where people go to buy goods, didn't need protection from Walmart, but local restaurants, where people go to sit and eat meals, need to be protected from trucks that sell food.
 
2014-03-30 07:29:17 PM  

Doktor_Zhivago: Like anyone is actually gonna enforce that shiat.


In as much as the Police ordered Rev. Wood to stop feeding the homeless, they're enforcing it.

Or, does it only count as enforcement if he actually gets a beatdown and a prison term?
 
2014-03-30 07:29:59 PM  
Oh please. Most of these churches only care about feeding homeless to keep them away from their suburbs. Churches are some of the worst about dumping homeless on downtowns using the excuse their little town doesn't have homeless services so it's better to dump them off in the nearest big city park. There is no law that will prevent churches from renting a bus, taking the homeless back to their churches, and letting them eat there. Heck, most of the churches already own a few econoline vans or full size buses. The churches in the downtowns already know how to deal with the homeless populations and have permanent kitchens. It's the suburban and rural churches who want photo ops and act like they're visiting the zoo feeding the animals so they can pat themselves on the back for doing close to nothing. If they actually cared about the homeless they'd stop feeding them in the park like they're pigeons  and start working on the issues that caused the homelessness in the first place. But that's hard and doesn't make for quick and easy newsletter photos so it's left to the shrinking downtown churches to handle it all on their own while suburbanites cry on and on about 'those scary people' in the city.
 
2014-03-30 07:30:06 PM  
Small business owners sure seem to love the free market (see: arguments against minimum wage, ACA, etc.) until someone offers a free market challenge to their business model. Then it's time to regulate.
 
2014-03-30 07:30:27 PM  

edmo: Feeding the poor is such a liberal believer thing to do. Conservative believers only believe that shiat during the service.


What kind of mental gymnastics are you trying to pull?

And yes some cities and towns don't want you to feed the homeless because they don't give a shiat about them and just want them to go away.
 
2014-03-30 07:30:46 PM  

Doktor_Zhivago: Like anyone is actually gonna enforce that shiat.


Look at what happens whenever Food, Not Bombs tries to feed people. Even in hippy-dippy liberal Oregon they send in the SWAT team
 
jvl [BareFark]
2014-03-30 07:31:08 PM  
Damn the Man for making people who feed the homeless conform to basic standards of sanitation and passing a health inspection! Damn him to heck!
 
2014-03-30 07:32:25 PM  

namatad: step 3: kill everyone who voted for the bill and whoever signed the bill into law
step 4: humanity profits universally


If you kill every evil, greedy sumbiatch in the Republican Party you're going to need to buy stock in the Union Metallic Cartridge Company and make sure your insurance policy covers repetitive strain injury to your trigger finger.
 
2014-03-30 07:32:25 PM  
It's like Obamacare for restaurants!

No, seriously. They defined what legal vendors there were for a product, then restricted opportunity to purchase from anything but the medium expensive (or better) product from those vendors. Any religious exemptions were denied by statute.

If you're on the side of the churches' 'meals on wheels' program, you're on the side of Hobby Lobby, et al. Or alternately, the side of liberty and goodness.
 
2014-03-30 07:32:44 PM  

lostcat: So the local government is trying to protect local restaurants by making it harder for food trucks to compete with them?

And yet a search for Walmarts in Birmingham, AL, turns up THREE locations?

[img.fark.net image 484x373]

I'm so confused by the idea that local stores, where people go to buy goods, didn't need protection from Walmart, but local restaurants, where people go to sit and eat meals, need to be protected from trucks that sell food.


Walmart has truck loads of lawyers to fight such laws.  Most cities an towns don't have the budget to fight Walmart.  The guy with the hot dog truck, sure.
 
2014-03-30 07:33:25 PM  
Alabama Legislators:

static.tvtropes.orgView Full Size
 
2014-03-30 07:34:02 PM  

EngineerAU: Oh please. Most of these churches only care about feeding homeless to keep them away from their suburbs. Churches are some of the worst about dumping homeless on downtowns using the excuse their little town doesn't have homeless services so it's better to dump them off in the nearest big city park. There is no law that will prevent churches from renting a bus, taking the homeless back to their churches, and letting them eat there. Heck, most of the churches already own a few econoline vans or full size buses. The churches in the downtowns already know how to deal with the homeless populations and have permanent kitchens. It's the suburban and rural churches who want photo ops and act like they're visiting the zoo feeding the animals so they can pat themselves on the back for doing close to nothing. If they actually cared about the homeless they'd stop feeding them in the park like they're pigeons  and start working on the issues that caused the homelessness in the first place. But that's hard and doesn't make for quick and easy newsletter photos so it's left to the shrinking downtown churches to handle it all on their own while suburbanites cry on and on about 'those scary people' in the city.


How deep into your arse did you have to reach to find that?
 
2014-03-30 07:34:04 PM  

fusillade762: You'd think there'd be an exemption since they're not charging and I doubt they're actually cooking the food in the truck. But what do I know.

Wonder if they could get around this by unloading the truck onto a wheelbarrow or something and distributing the food from there?


Bet they'll say "Every meal you feed the nasty poors is money stolen, yes stolen, from Taco Bell and Dollar General you damned commie!"
 
jvl [BareFark]
2014-03-30 07:34:13 PM  

anuran: Look at what happens whenever Food, Not Bombs tries to feed people. Even in hippy-dippy liberal Oregon they send in the SWAT team


So did San Francisco after FNB refused to get a permit even when the city offered it free and bent over backwards to try to help them comply with the requirements. Basically, FNB are attention whores who don't give a damn about the homeless except to use them as decorations in their favorite morality play.
 
2014-03-30 07:34:36 PM  
WWRJD
 
2014-03-30 07:34:41 PM  
The other side of the coin is Philly.
The suburban churches drive into the center of Philadelphia and feed the homeless.
The homeless congregate in that area where the church serves them three meals a day.  They even go from tent to tent bringing hot meals.

Unfortunately this circumvents social services that actual help people with more than just food.  The homeless dont get the medical and mental health they often need.
Philly has great services including housing, education and assistance.

Having them camp in the downtown plaza and using the fountains as toilets isn't helping the poor.  It's doing more harm than good.
 
2014-03-30 07:36:28 PM  
So obvious question, How many food truck are actually in Birmingham?  Can't be that many, can there?  I mean look at Austin or Seattle they have whole city blocks of them and no one cares.


/Austinite
//Some awesome food trucks here.
 
2014-03-30 07:37:25 PM  

jvl: Damn the Man for making people who feed the homeless conform to basic standards of sanitation and passing a health inspection! Damn him to heck!


This. They are not stopping the church from feeding the homeless. The law simply requires that they hold to the exact same health and safety standards as other people that hand food out of the back of a truck.

/The horror!
 
2014-03-30 07:38:38 PM  
It's a Birmingham Ordinance. As much as I like bashing southern conservatives when I have a good reason, the city itself if VERY blue. Blame it on general bureaucracy and general incompetence (http://www.birminghamal.gov/citycouncil/).

/Lived here for a decade.
//Red and Blue politics in Alabama are both pretty scummy. Ask Larry Langford.
///IF ATLANTA CAN HAVE A BELUGA WHALE, BIRMINGHAM CAN HAVE A BELUGA WHALE
 
2014-03-30 07:39:23 PM  
Gee if only there were a place the homeless could stay and eat for free.

Wait, what? They won't take people who are high or drunk in shelters and soup kitchens?
 
2014-03-30 07:41:39 PM  
Is this "we hate construction workers" legislation really about the restaurants, which are never actually ON THE JOB SITE, or is it to make more mexicans self deport? The second fits stated goals of legislators.

The real purpose of food trucks is to be a temporary eatery where the workers are. If this was anti-hipster legislation, I can understand. A food truck setting up across the street from a local establishment to serve local business is a practical business concern.

As far as the church stuff? This is what you farking morons elected into office. Suck it.
 
2014-03-30 07:43:26 PM  
Who buys trood?
 
2014-03-30 07:45:53 PM  

Porous Horace: Who buys trood?


I'm generally the only person in line at the store who DOES actually buy food.  Everyone else gets food as a benefit for being useless.
 
2014-03-30 07:47:48 PM  
I'm not surprised. This is a country where you can be too poor to get the nationally mandated health insurance.
 
2014-03-30 07:50:15 PM  
The church could start a "Take a Homeless Person to Dinner" trend, and eat with them inside the fancy restaurant. Then everybody would be happy.
 
2014-03-30 07:50:20 PM  

Callous: EngineerAU: Oh please. Most of these churches only care about feeding homeless to keep them away from their suburbs. Churches are some of the worst about dumping homeless on downtowns using the excuse their little town doesn't have homeless services so it's better to dump them off in the nearest big city park. There is no law that will prevent churches from renting a bus, taking the homeless back to their churches, and letting them eat there. Heck, most of the churches already own a few econoline vans or full size buses. The churches in the downtowns already know how to deal with the homeless populations and have permanent kitchens. It's the suburban and rural churches who want photo ops and act like they're visiting the zoo feeding the animals so they can pat themselves on the back for doing close to nothing. If they actually cared about the homeless they'd stop feeding them in the park like they're pigeons  and start working on the issues that caused the homelessness in the first place. But that's hard and doesn't make for quick and easy newsletter photos so it's left to the shrinking downtown churches to handle it all on their own while suburbanites cry on and on about 'those scary people' in the city.

How deep into your arse did you have to reach to find that?


I was trying to come up with a good, trolling, anti-religion comment as a bit of satire, but he did a way better job than I ever could.
 
2014-03-30 07:54:25 PM  

Doktor_Zhivago: Like anyone is actually gonna enforce that shiat.


They used to do it here. There was a priest who had an old school bus who would drive around and help the homeless - mostly youths - by giving them hot soup and an ear to listen to their problem.

Of course, some busybody from city hall thought it would be a good idea to follow him around and give him a fine every day, which the priest dutifully paid every time.
 
2014-03-30 07:55:30 PM  

Cobblestone Flag: It's a Birmingham Ordinance. As much as I like bashing southern conservatives when I have a good reason, the city itself if VERY blue. Blame it on general bureaucracy and general incompetence (http://www.birminghamal.gov/citycouncil/)


Both sides are bad, so vote for hating on the homeless?

/cause, yknow, both sides like to support anti-homeless measures on the local front, so a vote for anyone is usually a vote to stick it to the poorest members of society. NIMBY is about as bipartisan an idea as it gets.
 
2014-03-30 07:57:09 PM  

optikeye: This hasn't been as a big on the news here as I would hope. I suspect it will be enforced as a part of an effort to keep panhandlers away from the park. Birmingham is pretty small, and there are several missions and shelters in the area---even a "multifaith" one 'The Firehouse' in walking distance that takes donation of  food; I know I've brought, them food left over from catered lunches where I worked. I wonder why the Minister doesn't just bring the food to that shelter?


Not everybody can or will go to a shelter to eat.  Some won't know about them, some of them will be banned from the shelter for behavior, some can't stand to be around people due to mental illness.  A few are sometimes too drunk to bother trying to eat.  Some shelters have limits on how many they can feed daily.

Most homeless will be clustered around the areas where services are available, but not all.

Our church goes to the camps & spots where the people are staying.  In our city, the churches and agencies are given an inordinate amount of leeway in helping the homeless.  The agencies meet monthly with the mayor and we can bring up individual cases to the mayor for help.
 
2014-03-30 07:58:16 PM  
Sounds like a win-win.

Actually, fark that local eatery. If they can't compete with Jose's Tacos Sold from the Back of a Repainted U-HAUL, then tough shiat.
 
2014-03-30 07:59:01 PM  
It could happen to you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCFjnhALP44&feature=kp">https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=aCFjnhALP44&feature=kp
 
2014-03-30 07:59:45 PM  
 
2014-03-30 07:59:48 PM  

OtherLittleGuy: So.... "religious freedom" exemption?

/oh yeah, this is doing something Jesus actually advocated and said in the Bible...


Contrary to modern rhetoric, the free exercise clause doesn't give Blanket protection.

Religious practices are still subject to laws passed for the common good.
 
2014-03-30 08:01:27 PM  

lostcat: So the local government is trying to protect local restaurants by making it harder for food trucks to compete with them?

And yet a search for Walmarts in Birmingham, AL, turns up THREE locations?

I'm so confused by the idea that local stores, where people go to buy goods, didn't need protection from Walmart, but local restaurants, where people go to sit and eat meals, need to be protected from trucks that sell food.


Walmart had more money then mom and pop.

Restaurants have more money then food trucks.
 
2014-03-30 08:03:43 PM  
So what about catering trucks delivering food?
 
2014-03-30 08:04:26 PM  
FTA " even ones which sport Matthew 25, 35-40 on their sides.
"I was hungry, I was thirsty, I was naked, I was sick and in prison," the verses read. "When you do to them, you do to me."


They forgot Matthew 25, 40-45 says "psych!  suck it poor people.  Get a job!"
 
2014-03-30 08:05:32 PM  

chaosweaver: jvl: Damn the Man for making people who feed the homeless conform to basic standards of sanitation and passing a health inspection! Damn him to heck!

This. They are not stopping the church from feeding the homeless. The law simply requires that they hold to the exact same health and safety standards as other people that hand food out of the back of a truck.

/The horror!


There's a difference between a truck that cooks food and one that just hands it out.
 
2014-03-30 08:05:51 PM  
Why is the local restaurant industry any more important than the local food truck industry? And why are politicians protecting industries instead of their constituents?
 
2014-03-30 08:06:59 PM  

eas81: So obvious question, How many food truck are actually in Birmingham?  Can't be that many, can there?  I mean look at Austin or Seattle they have whole city blocks of them and no one cares.


/Austinite
//Some awesome food trucks here.


Not a ton of them, but it's a growing trade. Downtown Birmingham has been going through a pretty significant redevelopment over the last five-ten years. All of the food trucks operate in the downtown area (the closest Wal-Mart to downtown is about 3 miles away. Piggly Wiggly/Western Supermarkets serve downtown for the most part).

I think the Food Truck ordinance is honestly just supposed to be a method of protecting old businesses from new businesses, but it's really hamhandedly implemented. Like, the point is to keep them from operating too close to brick-and-mortar restaurants, but it's simply a poorly designed ordinance, and a lot of business owners are complaining about it and very unhappy with it, well beyond this case.
 
2014-03-30 08:09:00 PM  

shtychkn: OtherLittleGuy: So.... "religious freedom" exemption?

/oh yeah, this is doing something Jesus actually advocated and said in the Bible...

Contrary to modern rhetoric, the free exercise clause doesn't give Blanket protection.

Religious practices are still subject to laws passed for the common good.


Note: only applies to commerce - business or industry engaged in or affecting a public interest. If you don't want to make any money, and you don't want to be open to the public, you're still welcome to serve or deny anyone you want. Of course, if you can't serve the public or deal in money, it's going to be tough to find a business plan.
 
2014-03-30 08:09:03 PM  

untaken_name: Why is the local restaurant industry any more important than the local food truck industry? And why are politicians protecting industries instead of their constituents?


Because industry is part of their constituency.
 
2014-03-30 08:09:40 PM  

wildcardjack: Is this "we hate construction workers" legislation really about the restaurants, which are never actually ON THE JOB SITE, or is it to make more mexicans self deport? The second fits stated goals of legislators.

The real purpose of food trucks is to be a temporary eatery where the workers are. If this was anti-hipster legislation, I can understand. A food truck setting up across the street from a local establishment to serve local business is a practical business concern.


Ah I get it. If a restaurant's business model fails in the Blessed Free Market we need to bring the power of the Law down on those damned hipsters who out-compete them.
 
2014-03-30 08:10:43 PM  
The outrage is misplaced and misdirected. The intent of the law was not to prohibiatcharities from providing food to the homeless. That charities are are now prohibited from providing food to the homeless through food trucks is a completely unintended side-benefit to the law. A serendipitous effect, if you will.
 
2014-03-30 08:11:34 PM  

shtychkn: untaken_name: Why is the local restaurant industry any more important than the local food truck industry? And why are politicians protecting industries instead of their constituents?

Because industry is part of their constituency.


Is it a smaller or larger part of their constituency than "everything but the local restaurant industry"?
If they're supposed to protect only a tiny piece of their constituency, why local restaurants and not local food trucks?
 
2014-03-30 08:12:51 PM  

anuran: wildcardjack: Is this "we hate construction workers" legislation really about the restaurants, which are never actually ON THE JOB SITE, or is it to make more mexicans self deport? The second fits stated goals of legislators.

The real purpose of food trucks is to be a temporary eatery where the workers are. If this was anti-hipster legislation, I can understand. A food truck setting up across the street from a local establishment to serve local business is a practical business concern.

Ah I get it. If a restaurant's business model fails in the Blessed Free Market we need to bring the power of the Law down on those damned hipsters who out-compete them.


It is a free market till competition ruins my profits. Then we legislate to Protect by Business because you know... Freedom!
 
2014-03-30 08:13:57 PM  

EngineerAU: Oh please. Most of these churches only care about feeding homeless to keep them away from their suburbs. Churches are some of the worst about dumping homeless on downtowns using the excuse their little town doesn't have homeless services so it's better to dump them off in the nearest big city park. There is no law that will prevent churches from renting a bus, taking the homeless back to their churches, and letting them eat there. Heck, most of the churches already own a few econoline vans or full size buses. The churches in the downtowns already know how to deal with the homeless populations and have permanent kitchens. It's the suburban and rural churches who want photo ops and act like they're visiting the zoo feeding the animals so they can pat themselves on the back for doing close to nothing. If they actually cared about the homeless they'd stop feeding them in the park like they're pigeons  and start working on the issues that caused the homelessness in the first place. But that's hard and doesn't make for quick and easy newsletter photos so it's left to the shrinking downtown churches to handle it all on their own while suburbanites cry on and on about 'those scary people' in the city.


THIS.

/War Eagle
 
2014-03-30 08:14:50 PM  

untaken_name: shtychkn: untaken_name: Why is the local restaurant industry any more important than the local food truck industry? And why are politicians protecting industries instead of their constituents?

Because industry is part of their constituency.

Is it a smaller or larger part of their constituency than "everything but the local restaurant industry"?
If they're supposed to protect only a tiny piece of their constituency, why local restaurants and not local food trucks?


Probably guessing the Legislature owns restaurants or gets significant donations from them.
 
2014-03-30 08:14:55 PM  

Weaver95: ColonelCathcart: Weaver95: Doktor_Zhivago: Like anyone is actually gonna enforce that shiat.

Oh I suspect they will enforce it.

Against a church feeding the homeless? I'm not so sure they will enforce it, but you better believe they're going to go after a *business* that flaunts the law and cannot afford a good lawyer.

Like jaywalking in New York....

no, authoritarians don't give a f*ck about morality.  they spent good money passing that law and making sure there were no loopholes.  you can damn well be sure they're going to make sure everyone complies.


I'd skirt that law just out of spite. It'd be up to them to figure out how I did it after I already made off with the money and contracts.
 
2014-03-30 08:16:58 PM  

untaken_name: shtychkn: untaken_name: Why is the local restaurant industry any more important than the local food truck industry? And why are politicians protecting industries instead of their constituents?

Because industry is part of their constituency.

Is it a smaller or larger part of their constituency than "everything but the local restaurant industry"?
If they're supposed to protect only a tiny piece of their constituency, why local restaurants and not local food trucks?


It is not led then everyone.

But the people made angry that will vote or donate about it are less then those who were made happy.

Politicians put those who are involved in politics first.
 
2014-03-30 08:17:04 PM  

ColonelCathcart: Weaver95: Doktor_Zhivago: Like anyone is actually gonna enforce that shiat.

Oh I suspect they will enforce it.

Against a church feeding the homeless? I'm not so sure they will enforce it, but you better believe they're going to go after a *business* that flaunts the law and cannot afford a good lawyer.

Like jaywalking in New York....


Step 1.  Call the local news station and pitch the story.
Step 2.  Let the camera truck show up.
Step 3.  Let the food truck show up.
Step 4.  Let the police show up.
Step 5.  Do what you want and see who blinks first.
 
2014-03-30 08:20:13 PM  

ZzeusS: ColonelCathcart: Weaver95: Doktor_Zhivago: Like anyone is actually gonna enforce that shiat.

Oh I suspect they will enforce it.

Against a church feeding the homeless? I'm not so sure they will enforce it, but you better believe they're going to go after a *business* that flaunts the law and cannot afford a good lawyer.

Like jaywalking in New York....

Step 1.  Call the local news station and pitch the story.
Step 2.  Let the camera truck show up.
Step 3.  Let the food truck show up.
Step 4.  Let the police show up.
Step 5.  Do what you want and see who blinks first.


There is a reason that police can choose which laws to enforce and which to ignore.
 
2014-03-30 08:20:20 PM  

EdgeRunner: Cobblestone Flag: It's a Birmingham Ordinance. As much as I like bashing southern conservatives when I have a good reason, the city itself if VERY blue. Blame it on general bureaucracy and general incompetence (http://www.birminghamal.gov/citycouncil/)

Both sides are bad, so vote for hating on the homeless?

/cause, yknow, both sides like to support anti-homeless measures on the local front, so a vote for anyone is usually a vote to stick it to the poorest members of society. NIMBY is about as bipartisan an idea as it gets.


The poor get a lot of lip service from the local government, but it's mostly just talk/pandering for votes. They play the right tune to get the votes come election time, but they are all interested in catering to the same deep pockets.

This is the big scandal right now:  http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2014/03/new_citizens_coalition_protest.ht m l

A sweetheart deal to pay off a prolific donor.
 
2014-03-30 08:22:03 PM  

Ambivalence: Doktor_Zhivago: Like anyone is actually gonna enforce that shiat.

Why would anyone pass a law they don't mean or want to enforce? (That's a rhetorical quesiton.  Yes I do realize that Christian Conservatives wouldn't want to enforce laws protecting OTHER people's religion and that's a great example, but still)


Oh, there's room for lots more hypocrites than are dreamt of in your imagination, Horatio
 
2014-03-30 08:23:37 PM  

Dimensio: The outrage is misplaced and misdirected. The intent of the law was not to prohibiatcharities from providing food to the homeless. That charities are are now prohibited from providing food to the homeless through food trucks is a completely unintended side-benefit to the law. A serendipitous effect, if you will.


Bingo.

/nice filter pwnage, btw
 
2014-03-30 08:26:37 PM  

shtychkn: gets significant donations from them.


shtychkn: It is not led then everyone.

But the people made angry that will vote or donate about it are less then those who were made happy.

Politicians put those who are involved in politics first.


It's obviously due to blatant bribery. I just wondered if you would admit it.
 
2014-03-30 08:27:41 PM  
Restaurants need protection from food trucks.  Social workers and welfare administrators need protection from churches and other groups that help the poor for free.
 
2014-03-30 08:28:32 PM  

untaken_name: shtychkn: gets significant donations from them.

shtychkn: It is not led then everyone.

But the people made angry that will vote or donate about it are less then those who were made happy.

Politicians put those who are involved in politics first.

It's obviously due to blatant bribery. I just wondered if you would admit it.


Why would I not?

Politicians helping those that help them Hey elected is how a democracy works.
 
2014-03-30 08:30:42 PM  
mobile-cuisine.comView Full Size

/feels it's about time
 
2014-03-30 08:39:28 PM  
optimalhumanmodulation.files.wordpress.comView Full Size
 
m00
2014-03-30 08:41:23 PM  
There is no real problem -- they don't mean Christian churches. Because Jesus was an Aryan badass who would give a poor person a gun and teach him to hunt for hisself. Only heathen churches hand out food, that's socialism and downright Anti-American. So if you give food to poor people, you can take your commie religion and GIT OUT.
 
2014-03-30 08:43:00 PM  
It's a strange feeling.
The libertarian part of me wants to know why any business needed special protection from the government in order to stay in business.  Those food trucks were obviously providing a valuable service that their customers desired.  But the government can't have that...

The non-sociopath in me wonders why the government needed to pass a law that directly hurts its most vulnerable citizens.

The sociopath in my wants to violate the people who allowed the bill to become law, while feeding their entrails to chickens, and videotape it as a deterrent to any future such stupidity.

...

And they're all on the same side.
 
2014-03-30 08:46:15 PM  
Are these churches making sure that donated food has adequate nutritional value, no harmful substances like trans fats, or contain known allergens like peanuts , lactose or gluten? No? Tough luck.
 
2014-03-30 08:48:24 PM  
Schwans and a miss.
 
2014-03-30 08:49:55 PM  

GoldSpider: Are these churches making sure that donated food has adequate nutritional value, no harmful substances like trans fats, or contain known allergens like peanuts , lactose or gluten? No? Tough luck.


Are you seriously proposing that a person should not feed a starving person, because of the chance that the starving person might have a peanut allergy?
Just how much of Michael Bloomberg's kool-aid have you been drinking?
 
2014-03-30 08:51:50 PM  

RoyBatty: [i.imgur.com image 850x592]
http://www.thenation.com/article/178845/town-turned-poverty-prison-s en tence

[i.imgur.com image 639x842]


Holy shiat.  Thanks for the link.
I moved to Birmingham two years ago.  This state is a third world country.
 
2014-03-30 09:08:39 PM  
Just give them muffin stumps
 
2014-03-30 09:09:35 PM  

hasty ambush: [optimalhumanmodulation.files.wordpress.com image 850x812]


A government of the people, by the people and for the people is governed by, you guessed it, the people.
 
2014-03-30 09:13:28 PM  

namatad: step 3: kill everyone who voted for the bill and whoever signed the bill into law
step 4: humanity profits universally


More people need to be killed.  There are too many, and the weight of idiocy becomes too much for society to bear.
 
2014-03-30 09:14:16 PM  

EngineerAU: Oh please. Most of these churches only care about feeding homeless to keep them away from their suburbs. Churches are some of the worst about dumping homeless on downtowns using the excuse their little town doesn't have homeless services so it's better to dump them off in the nearest big city park. There is no law that will prevent churches from renting a bus, taking the homeless back to their churches, and letting them eat there. Heck, most of the churches already own a few econoline vans or full size buses. The churches in the downtowns already know how to deal with the homeless populations and have permanent kitchens. It's the suburban and rural churches who want photo ops and act like they're visiting the zoo feeding the animals so they can pat themselves on the back for doing close to nothing. If they actually cared about the homeless they'd stop feeding them in the park like they're pigeons  and start working on the issues that caused the homelessness in the first place. But that's hard and doesn't make for quick and easy newsletter photos so it's left to the shrinking downtown churches to handle it all on their own while suburbanites cry on and on about 'those scary people' in the city.


You are a clueless fark.

The churches that feed the homeless in Milwaukee are the churches in the inner city.

You sir, are a dumbass.

/of the highest order
//congratulations
 
2014-03-30 09:14:25 PM  
Great.  Shut down that meals on wheels thing too, thats food from a truck.
 
2014-03-30 09:15:44 PM  
Can't those uppity homeless just go to the restaurants?
 
2014-03-30 09:16:34 PM  

Doktor_Zhivago: Like anyone is actually gonna enforce that shiat.


Yes the leftist politicos who hate faith based movements of any kind, how dare we usurp the governments job of providing for the needy.
 
2014-03-30 09:20:07 PM  

JoieD'Zen: Weaver95: ColonelCathcart: Weaver95: Doktor_Zhivago: Like anyone is actually gonna enforce that shiat.

Oh I suspect they will enforce it.

Against a church feeding the homeless? I'm not so sure they will enforce it, but you better believe they're going to go after a *business* that flaunts the law and cannot afford a good lawyer.

Like jaywalking in New York....

no, authoritarians don't give a f*ck about morality.  they spent good money passing that law and making sure there were no loopholes.  you can damn well be sure they're going to make sure everyone complies.

Alabama is scary, religious groups are annoying but this pisses me off so much I'd like to pitch in to help this guy get the required permits. Who's with me?
I want to see him driving an over the top Jesusmobile that is equipped to feed long lines of people.


http://www.rescuemission.org/services/

What a true mission looks like.
 
2014-03-30 09:21:02 PM  

remus: Can't those uppity homeless just go to the restaurants?


Yes, but non-homeless seeing the homeless buying their own food means they will no longer believe those "help, I'm hungry" signs the homeless have been holding up all this time.  If you want to play the beggar role, you got to live the role.
 
2014-03-30 09:25:01 PM  

lack of warmth: remus: Can't those uppity homeless just go to the restaurants?

Yes, but non-homeless seeing the homeless buying their own food means they will no longer believe those "help, I'm hungry" signs the homeless have been holding up all this time.  If you want to play the beggar role, you got to live the role.


Always a catch...  always...
 
2014-03-30 09:26:09 PM  

rolladuck: It's a strange feeling.
The libertarian part of me wants to know why any business needed special protection from the government in order to stay in business.  Those food trucks were obviously providing a valuable service that their customers desired.  But the government can't have that...

The non-sociopath in me wonders why the government needed to pass a law that directly hurts its most vulnerable citizens.

The sociopath in my wants to violate the people who allowed the bill to become law, while feeding their entrails to chickens, and videotape it as a deterrent to any future such stupidity.

...

And they're all on the same side.


This right here
 
2014-03-30 09:31:15 PM  
Simple. Just banninate asll trucks carrying food commercially, including the Walwart trucks, and see how fast there's a carefully "though not literate" exemption for them. Remember it's all about $$$afety!
 
2014-03-30 09:43:55 PM  

Weaver95: ColonelCathcart: Weaver95: Doktor_Zhivago: Like anyone is actually gonna enforce that shiat.

Oh I suspect they will enforce it.

Against a church feeding the homeless? I'm not so sure they will enforce it, but you better believe they're going to go after a *business* that flaunts the law and cannot afford a good lawyer.

Like jaywalking in New York....

no, authoritarians don't give a f*ck about morality.  they spent good money passing that law and making sure there were no loopholes.  you can damn well be sure they're going to make sure everyone complies.


Probably, but the article was less clear than what we have here in Houston.

Where I live the law keeps food trucks (except certain "Grandfathered" food trucks) from entering downtown because, and I'm not making this shiat up, "the gas tanks for the cookers could turn it into a rolling bomb."  It's total bullshiat and obvious corruption but this is Texas, of the best law money can buy.

TFA on the other hand appears to be enforcing health code regulations, and while it is ENTIRELY possible that these regulations are bad it's also entirely possible they're just keeping the number of plagues upon the earth down to a reasonable level.

Another question which I don't have an answer for is whether the standard restaurant health codes apply to soup kitchens.  A charity that gives people typhoid (by accident) isn't a very good charity, I would think, and the same rules would apply to rolling charities.

Likelihood this is the case?  Unknown, it is Alabama.
 
2014-03-30 09:45:38 PM  

untaken_name: Why is the local restaurant industry any more important than the local food truck industry? And why are politicians protecting industries instead of their constituents?


Taxes
 
2014-03-30 09:47:38 PM  
Then I suggest that the homeless go and sit down during business lunch in those fine restaurants and order some coffee.
 
2014-03-30 09:50:32 PM  

EngineerAU: Churches are some of the worst about dumping homeless on downtowns using the excuse their little town doesn't have homeless services so it's better to dump them off in the nearest big city park. There is no law that will prevent churches from renting a bus, taking the homeless back to their churches, and letting them eat there. Heck, most of the churches already own a few econoline vans or full size buses.


Dude, would you really want to spend all that time cleaning homeless scat out of the same vans you need to use to pick up your immobile thithers.  All it takes is for somebody to find a used condom or dirty needle and they will suddenly find a different church that cares for their needs to go and put money in the collection plate of.  There just ain't enough febreeze out there.
 
2014-03-30 09:59:21 PM  
 
2014-03-30 10:13:44 PM  
What about delivery trucks like Schwans or Omaha steaks? And the Girl Scout cookie mafia? And that guy from Nogales that sells shrimp out of his trunk or the nice door to door lady selling tamales from 5 gallon paint buckets? Oh wait, that'd be AZ and CA, not Alabama. Get rid of that tamale lady and it'll be war.
 
2014-03-30 11:07:10 PM  

EngineerAU: Oh please. Most of these churches only care about feeding homeless to keep them away from their suburbs. Churches are some of the worst about dumping homeless on downtowns using the excuse their little town doesn't have homeless services so it's better to dump them off in the nearest big city park. There is no law that will prevent churches from renting a bus, taking the homeless back to their churches, and letting them eat there. Heck, most of the churches already own a few econoline vans or full size buses. The churches in the downtowns already know how to deal with the homeless populations and have permanent kitchens. It's the suburban and rural churches who want photo ops and act like they're visiting the zoo feeding the animals so they can pat themselves on the back for doing close to nothing. If they actually cared about the homeless they'd stop feeding them in the park like they're pigeons  and start working on the issues that caused the homelessness in the first place. But that's hard and doesn't make for quick and easy newsletter photos so it's left to the shrinking downtown churches to handle it all on their own while suburbanites cry on and on about 'those scary people' in the city.


What is your idea here, that churches feed the homeless to keep them out of white suburbs??

That's the dumbest idea I ever heard. Why would you spend time and money feeding them when it's much cheaper to pay cops to harass them?
 
2014-03-30 11:15:38 PM  
I see a lot of folks getting mad at the GOP and conservatives in regards to this story.  Well in the interest of keeping folks well-informed....just look at the demographics of the region.  These folks ain't Republican, much as they'd love people to think they are and get mad about it.  Not that I give a damn about defending Republicans but in this case they are just not a part of this equation.

This scheme is run by old school conservative Dixiecrats Southern Democrats, in collusion with big corporate carpetbaggers restaurant chains.  It's also a good bet that the Mob has got their meat hooks in on this as well, but that's just speculation on my part.

It works like this:  Big, corporate carpetbaggers restaurant chains want to stick their fingers in a local economy and shill a cheap, crappy product so they put money into getting Dixiecrats politicians who are friendly to their interests elected.  Those local Dixiecrats politicians then pass laws which make it difficult and cost prohibitive to start a local business due to burdensome licensing requirements and high overhead.

Local businesses get around this by operating out of a truck or a trailer, which lowers their overhead.  This allows them to not only pay their workers a living wage and decrease their employee turnover rate (leading to less homeless people), but also offer a better product for a comparable, if not better price than the carpetbaggers brick-and-mortar businesses.

The consumer public is naturally going to be drawn to the kitschy little food truck with far better food, which also has the advantage of being new and novel, over the big corporate chain that makes OK food which only makes them a little sick to their stomachs.  The carpetbaggers corporate chains that run the brick-and-mortar stores don't like the competition, nor do they like a level playing field.  And they don't particularly like local money being funneled back into the local economy instead of their out-of-state pockets.

So the carpetbaggers corporations put the local Dixiecrat quislings politicians to work passing more draconian laws against food trucks.  As a bonus, they get to label the homeless shelter trucks as "food trucks" and run off all those unsightly homeless people ...into the next town which has a debtor's prison, from what I've been reading on this thread.  Prison's are of course a growth industry in the 21st Century so the folks that operate them get a piece of the pie as well.

How could they possibly get away with it?  The answer is simple...YOU!  All of you well-meaning dupes that are blaming the Republican conservatives for this sort of thing in the most knee jerk hysterical fashion possible.  You think, small town in Alabama and immediately you have this image of gun-totin', pickup truck drivin', Duck Dynasty watching, George W. votin' rednecks with their racist, misogynist good old boy network.

Well the Dixiecrats conservative Democrats want you to have that image in your head.  And they want you to tie that good old boy image to Republicans.  And they want you to confuse the terms "Republican" and "conservative" so that they are one in the same in your mind.  And while they're at it they want you to tie that image to the church (y'know, the ones that are actually feeding the homeless). And they want you to stay mad about it so that you act impulsively and never stop to think it through.  And if you are the sort to think it through then they want to appeal to your ego...they want you to be convinced of your own intellectual superiority and to think that there's no way you can generalize or give in to a mob mentality...you're too intellectual for that.  You're too smart for that!

"The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist."

See while you're busy being mad at Republicans, you're letting your situational awareness go to shiat.  You are also voting out the Dixiecrats' conservative Democrats' main competition.  You're doing their dirty work for them.  Your well-intentioned anger becomes their greatest asset.  Meanwhile both local economies like this, as well as the national economy, goes down the crapper.  Ordinary people are put out of business. they are put out on the street, and they are incarcerated all because the Dixiecrats the Devil that doesn't want you to know it exists is able to manipulate you all like children.

But what do I know, I'm just a troll on the internet.
 
2014-03-30 11:22:19 PM  

lostcat: So the local government is trying to protect local restaurants by making it harder for food trucks to compete with them?

And yet a search for Walmarts in Birmingham, AL, turns up THREE locations?

I'm so confused by the idea that local stores, where people go to buy goods, didn't need protection from Walmart, but local restaurants, where people go to sit and eat meals, need to be protected from trucks that sell food.


Walmart $ to procure favorable regulation > Foodtruck $ to procure favorable regulation
 
2014-03-30 11:32:02 PM  

Plant Rights Activist: WWRJD


He'd go down to the crossroads, kneel himself right down.
He'd go down to the crossroads, kneel himself right down.

/not Robert Johnson?
 
2014-03-30 11:41:45 PM  

rolladuck: GoldSpider: Are these churches making sure that donated food has adequate nutritional value, no harmful substances like trans fats, or contain known allergens like peanuts , lactose or gluten? No? Tough luck.

Are you seriously proposing that a person should not feed a starving person, because of the chance that the starving person might have a peanut allergy?
Just how much of Michael Bloomberg's kool-aid have you been drinking?


No more than 16 oz., supposedly.
 
2014-03-30 11:45:09 PM  

Kumana Wanalaia: hasty ambush: [optimalhumanmodulation.files.wordpress.com image 850x812]

A government of the people, by the people and for the people is governed by, you guessed it, the people.


I don't think quoting Lincoln gets you far in Alabama.
 
2014-03-31 12:25:11 AM  

misterpriapus: But what do I know,


Little
 
2014-03-31 12:55:15 AM  

jnapier: The other side of the coin is Philly.
The suburban churches drive into the center of Philadelphia and feed the homeless.
The homeless congregate in that area where the church serves them three meals a day.  They even go from tent to tent bringing hot meals.

Unfortunately this circumvents social services that actual help people with more than just food.  The homeless dont get the medical and mental health they often need.
Philly has great services including housing, education and assistance.

Having them camp in the downtown plaza and using the fountains as toilets isn't helping the poor.  It's doing more harm than good.


If only there were some kind of truck, like a food truck, but for healthcare, maybe it could even have lights and sirens on it to make it stand out... Then the physical- and mental-healthcare providers for the homeless, if they exist, could get off their asses and do the same thing the churches are doing.
 
2014-03-31 01:12:56 AM  

GoldSpider: Are these churches making sure that donated food has adequate nutritional value, no harmful substances like trans fats, or contain known allergens like peanuts , lactose or gluten? No? Tough luck.


I think you need to get your first-world problems meter checked.
 
2014-03-31 01:23:24 AM  

rmcooper4: Small business owners sure seem to love the free market (see: arguments against minimum wage, ACA, etc.) until someone offers a free market challenge to their business model. Then it's time to regulate.


It looks like you mistakenly added an SM to the front of your point. I think it should read...

all business owners sure seem to love the free market (see: arguments against minimum wage, ACA, etc.) until someone offers a free market challenge to their business model. Then it's time to regulate.
 
2014-03-31 01:26:22 AM  
Well, I thought everyone hated the church anyway.
 
2014-03-31 06:52:26 AM  

squirrelflavoredyogurt: rmcooper4: Small business owners sure seem to love the free market (see: arguments against minimum wage, ACA, etc.) until someone offers a free market challenge to their business model. Then it's time to regulate.

It looks like you mistakenly added an SM to the front of your point. I think it should read...

all business owners sure seem to love the free market (see: arguments against minimum wage, ACA, etc.) until someone offers a free market challenge to their business model. Then it's time to regulate.


I suppose that's true. My frustration comes from the exaltation of the small business owner to the point where they're above criticism, but your point is well taken.
 
2014-03-31 06:59:48 AM  

trappedspirit: misterpriapus: But what do I know,

Little


Yea, that is the definition of "Off the Mark."

Dixiecrats don't have a thing to do with this. Dixiecrats aren't even really an influence in this state since Republicans finally flipped the rural areas of the state around the time Siegelman got put in jail. I do agree that biatching about conservatives gives these mediocre politicians an out to be incompetent/play favorites, but that's about the only element of that that made any sense in context.
 
2014-03-31 07:31:13 AM  

lostcat: So the local government is trying to protect local restaurants by making it harder for food trucks to compete with them?

And yet a search for Walmarts in Birmingham, AL, turns up THREE locations?

I'm so confused by the idea that local stores, where people go to buy goods, didn't need protection from Walmart, but local restaurants, where people go to sit and eat meals, need to be protected from trucks that sell food.


Agree 100%.

Me thinks the politicians may own some restaurants, ... ... and Walmart stock.
 
2014-03-31 08:37:02 AM  
imagine if they had a "Food Trailer Park" like they do here in Austin. Oh the horror of small businesses working together to help the economy!  And if, (god forbid, and full pun intended on that one, btw) one of them HAPPEN to be one that helps the homeless...omg, they would have several heart attacks there in good ol' birmingham!

/sheesh, Birmingham, grow the fark up and progress a little..it won't hurt ya!
 
2014-03-31 12:47:26 PM  

Doktor_Zhivago: Like anyone is actually gonna enforce that shiat.


What do you even mean? Having a law that isn't enforced on the books is incredibly dangerous, because one day someone may have an axe to grind and conveniently start enforcing it.

Every law should be enforced to its letter IMHO. If that's a problem, then the law needs to be changed.
 
2014-03-31 01:13:51 PM  
I've noticed that, over the past couple of years, that various cities have begun to block handouts of food for the homeless in various ways. If they're in a public park, the food distribution gets stopped through various ways and moved several blocks or miles away.

I've read where organizations handing out sandwiches to the homeless while on foot along streets have been stopped due to 'health laws'.

It's like folks have grown tired of the homeless problem, frustrated that the government, which helped start it all, hasn't been able to clean it up and just want it swept under the rug and off their streets.

Donations to food banks have slipped since the price of food has gone up -- which seems to go up these days for any excuse. Like, the price of milk will go up because Congress did not 'have time' to renew the subsidy bill last session, which means everything with milk byproducts in it will go up also, especially cheese -- the latter being, at one time, the 'poor man's food'.
Now it's the very well off's food. (Real cheese, that is.)

Homeless camps are being raided more frequently and shut down. We had a big one here, near the rail road tracks, on land no one really wanted and the city threw them out, bulldozed down their shelters and tents, cleared out most of the wild brush and made it into a public park -- where not even the public is allowed. No trespassing signs went up as soon as they were done.

The fact that the camp had caused no real problem and had been there for years didn't seem to matter.
 
2014-03-31 01:43:32 PM  

Truther: EngineerAU: Oh please. Most of these churches only care about feeding homeless to keep them away from their suburbs. Churches are some of the worst about dumping homeless on downtowns using the excuse their little town doesn't have homeless services so it's better to dump them off in the nearest big city park. There is no law that will prevent churches from renting a bus, taking the homeless back to their churches, and letting them eat there. Heck, most of the churches already own a few econoline vans or full size buses. The churches in the downtowns already know how to deal with the homeless populations and have permanent kitchens. It's the suburban and rural churches who want photo ops and act like they're visiting the zoo feeding the animals so they can pat themselves on the back for doing close to nothing. If they actually cared about the homeless they'd stop feeding them in the park like they're pigeons and start working on the issues that caused the homelessness in the first place. But that's hard and doesn't make for quick and easy newsletter photos so it's left to the shrinking downtown churches to handle it all on their own while suburbanites cry on and on about 'those scary people' in the city.

You are a clueless fark.

The churches that feed the homeless in Milwaukee are the churches in the inner city.

You sir, are a dumbass.


Go easy on him. If EngineerAU means he has studied engineering at Auburn University, he may be at least mildly retarded.
 
2014-03-31 02:25:31 PM  
I came close to commenting that we have a similar law in Alabama where the restaurants in downtown Birmingham whined and griped. Then I clicked on the link and saw it WAS the one from Alabama. Yep. Competition is REALLY REALLY BAD here in the heart of "free market capitalism" land.

On a side note, Birmingham has some very nice food, and most people not from down here are unaware. One of our local chefs (Chris Hastings) even beat Bobby Flay on ICA. These are some damn good food trucks with five star cuisine for some of them. One of the truck owners opened a brick and mortar last week, and I'm already a regular.
 
2014-03-31 02:29:59 PM  

Weaver95: Doktor_Zhivago: Like anyone is actually gonna enforce that shiat.

Oh I suspect they will enforce it.


Yeah, Birmingham police officers have a certain reputation for being dicks-- even among police officers from elsewhere within the state.
 
2014-03-31 02:41:40 PM  

namatad: step 3: kill everyone who voted for the bill and whoever signed the bill into law
step 4: humanity profits universally


You'd basically end up needing to exterminate the population of Birmingham to truly fix the problem. They have a tendency to vote for a level of gross incompetence and corruption that would make U.S. Congressmen blush. (Google "Larry Langford," sometime. Better yet, expand that search to include "returned shirts" and "dental work." Even better, include "JP Morgan" and "Jefferson County" in that search. The dude was up to his eyeballs in scandal and DIDN'T EVEN FARKING LIVE IN BIRMINGHAM when they made him their mayor. But dammit if he wasn't properly flashy!) The Birmingham neighborhood associations are also nationally infamous for sending huge and unnecessary delegations to NUSA every year on the taxpayer dime. We send more people than almost anyone else, and that's not even the sum total of the neighborhood association budget that the taxpayers give them. If anyone is ever interested in watching this clown show, they do stream the meetings from the city website, now.
 
2014-03-31 02:47:10 PM  

Plant Rights Activist: WWRJD


As much as I would love to agree with you, seeing as how I'm one of the twelve remaining liberals* in the state of Alabama, Birmingham is Democrat land and very much so. And this brand of Democrat is far more Jebus-loving and corrupt than the worst Republican in D.C.

Nope. Not kidding. It's BAD.

*By "liberal" I mean that I'm a moderate, but in Alabama it counts.
 
2014-03-31 02:48:40 PM  

Cobblestone Flag: It's a Birmingham Ordinance. As much as I like bashing southern conservatives when I have a good reason, the city itself if VERY blue. Blame it on general bureaucracy and general incompetence (http://www.birminghamal.gov/citycouncil/).

/Lived here for a decade.
//Red and Blue politics in Alabama are both pretty scummy. Ask Larry Langford.
///IF ATLANTA CAN HAVE A BELUGA WHALE, BIRMINGHAM CAN HAVE A BELUGA WHALE


////And cruise ships. We'll park them at the BJCC.
 
2014-03-31 08:31:35 PM  

Duke_leto_Atredes: Doktor_Zhivago: Like anyone is actually gonna enforce that shiat.

Yes the leftist politicos who hate faith based movements of any kind, how dare we usurp the governments job of providing for the needy.


You know that those Catholic soup kitchens and probably these food trucks are funded by that evil liberal government.
 
2014-03-31 08:34:23 PM  

rmcooper4: squirrelflavoredyogurt: rmcooper4: Small business owners sure seem to love the free market (see: arguments against minimum wage, ACA, etc.) until someone offers a free market challenge to their business model. Then it's time to regulate.

It looks like you mistakenly added an SM to the front of your point. I think it should read...

all business owners sure seem to love the free market (see: arguments against minimum wage, ACA, etc.) until someone offers a free market challenge to their business model. Then it's time to regulate.

I suppose that's true. My frustration comes from the exaltation of the small business owner to the point where they're above criticism, but your point is well taken.


They are job creators and the back bone of the American economy!
 
Displayed 127 of 127 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report