Government Spending

I Know That Frisco's Expensive, But Jesus Christ!


From the San Francisco Chronicle:

It's catching on….

More than 1 in 3 of San Francisco's nearly 27,000 city workers earned $100,000 or more last year—a number that has been growing steadily for the past decade.

The number of city workers paid at least $100,000 in base salary totaled 6,449 last year. When such extras as overtime are included, the number jumped to 9,487 workers, nearly eight times the number from a decade ago. And that calculation doesn't include the cost of often-generous city benefits such as health care and pensions.

Whole investigative bit here. Link via Jack Shafer's Twitter feed. Reason on the public/private sector Class War here.

NEXT: The Future of Health Care: "Huge taxes and fees are coming."

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Have you seen the price of a decent bottle of wine? And the furniture is so last year?

    I mean, come on! It’s expensive just to get by.

    (And let’s not talk about the price of a meal in a decent restaurant.)


    1. I’ve heard being gay is expensive no matter where you live. 🙂

      1. But you have all that extra expendable cash with no spouse or kids to raise.

      2. For what it’s worth SF isnt nearly as gay as it used to be. The gay “community” in large cities is a lot more intergrated into the general population. With SF in particular a lot of younger gays have moved because they can’t afford to live there. And lots of older ones died of AIDS in the 80s and 90s.

  2. I have a friend who wishes to move back to CA. Mein gott, who the hell would do that on purpose?

  3. Hmm…so San Francisco pays its city employees well, and it also is one of (if not the) most desirable cities to live in the America.

    Sounds like the market is working well there.

    1. Greece is desireable due to its beautiful topography, natural climate, and wealth of historical sites.

      It doesn’t mean its model is even the slightest bit sustainable or solvent.

    2. Only if you call one-party government plus public employee unions “the market.”

      1. So it’s NOT market forces when the wolves decide which sheep to eat? Oh Snap!

    3. San Francisco has also been steadily pushing poor people out of the city.

    4. I would think that a base standard of “desirable” is that more people are moving to the city than leaving it.

      1. No, people might be leaving because they can’t afford to live there.

        The reason they can’t afford to live there is because it is expensive.

        The reason it is expensive is because it is a desirable place to live.

        1. Who are you? What have you done with Dan T.?

        2. The reason why it’s expensive is zoning and other land use restrictions which stunts supply of residential land use. San Fran’s economy is perpetuated by their tech-and-communication markets, and credit is still easy to get (especially when there are tax credit to buyers) – so when new jobs influx and the land use is restricted but credit is still easy to come by, well, you can guess what happens next. Add that into the additional property tax revenues cities get (which are routinely reassessed), living in San Fran can cost a pretty penny.

    5. You might have a point if it weren’t for all the state and federal funding that San Francisco receives. Their leftist paradise couldn’t pay the bills on its own.

      If they were municipal government were actually self-sufficient, then yes, you would have a good argument for devolution, if not necessarily “the market”.

  4. But… but…quality workers!

    1. We’re talking about pube-sec workers, Paul. Your comment does not compute.

  5. Quality worker such as a Network Engineering that sat in jail for 2 years for refused to release password that locked out the City from its own database. This is quality that other city can only aspired to.

  6. Leading 2009’s $100,000 Club was the Police Department’s Charles Keohane, a deputy chief who retired midyear.

    His total payout was $516,118, city records show, the bulk of which came from cashing out stored-up vacation, sick days and comp time. Several other police employees who changed rank or retired also saw their annual earnings swell.

    When asked how he felt about landing in the No. 1 spot, Keohane joked, “Not so good, if it’s going to get my name in the paper.”

    The 36-year SFPD veteran, whose last assignment was head of administration, said much of that pay was taken out in taxes. “I helped reduce the deficit,” he said.

    Fucking moron.

  7. No, people might be leaving because they can’t afford to live there can make a better living and have a better lifestyle elsewhere.

    The reason they can’t afford to live there can live better elsewhere is because it is expensive the quality of life there doesn’t justify the expense.

    The reason it is expensive the quality of life there doesn’t justify the expense is because it is a desirable place to live of high taxes, the entitlement mentality that drives taxes, and the social rot that comes from an entitlement mentality.

  8. So, if I made $98,788 in 2000 and $100,050 in 2010, do I count in the 8x increase?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.