Everyone who gets one of those letters needs to politely respond to Kings County that they don't have a pet.
AND
In fact, they are eating the cat food/dog food themselves due to the costs of their health insurance policy under Obamacare.

to vote out the assholes doing this.

This from a Hillary! voter.

That's funny.

Yeah, I voted for her, too.

I hope I'm wrong about Trump.

I'm so tired of people not paying attention to the repercussions of their not voting or not giving real thought to the policies and people they end up rubberstamping.

Like all other Progressive Paradises, Seattle is becoming a police state. More government, means more control (and consequently, less individual liberty), which requires more government employees to investigate and regulate the subject population, which requires more revenues to pay for the greater size of the government and its activities. A Terrier Tax, along with Soda Taxes, Writer's Licenses, Parking Permits, are natural consequences of the fact that control costs lots of money. If you want to make any good or service very expensive, have the government provide it for "free." Whether Affordable Health Care or the Bureau of Pooch Police, it's just a variation on the theme that it takes a lot of effort, and money, to make sure that common folks do as told, and don't do something unacceptable, like follow their dreams.

Yeah, I voted for her, too.

I hope I'm wrong about Trump.

I'm so tired of people not paying attention to the repercussions of their not voting or not giving real thought to the policies and people they end up rubberstamping.

Amy Alkon at November 10, 2016 3:29 AM

Spoken like a true member of the self perceived elite.

You will never be wrong about Trump. He is guaranteed to do stuff you dont like, just as Hillary would have if she had been elected. Now she is off the hook, and will look better and better by comparison just as Romney does.

Three quarters of the people voting for Trump and three quarters of the people voting for Hillary voted for them for the wrong reasons or no reason at all, and every damn one of us was operating on incomplete information about both candidates with most of that information provided by journalists who were so in the tank for Hillary, that objective facts about either candidate were rarer than hens teeth.

It was all spin.

An analytical person looks at the state they are in, and who and what is on the ballot, and sometimes an ethical choice is no vote at all or a vote for a third party.

I often do this in non partisan races where I don't know any of the candidates.

I simply can't rely on the weak tea that passes for journalism to guide my decisions.

Side note. Did you know that in Minnesota Democratic candidates appear on the ballot under a party called Democratic Farmer Labor because in Minnesota those two parties merged in 1944?

Do you realize the Libertarians or any other small party are free to do the same in any state in the US?

He is guaranteed to do stuff you dont like,

I despise Hillary Clinton, think she would have been a terrible president, think she is corrupt and has no right to be president, but Donald Trump has shown himself to be both corrupt and unhinged.

I didn't want Hillary to be president -- far, far, from it. I would have voted for Mitt Romney, Obama, or even that lame-ass, personality-free Gary Johnson to keep her from the presidency. But I didn't have that choice -- and a vote for Johnson would have meant one less vote against Trump.

How do they even have the addresses? When I signed up for a loyalty card at my local grocer's, I gave them a name and a phone number, if even that.

When I worked in grocery for a major grocery chain and pulled loyalty card data to do sales analyses, the data were always incomplete - to the point that I had difficulty tying two cards in the same household together to track household purchasing habits.

When I recently signed up for Bi-Lo card, I didn't give them any information, the cashier handed me a card and I've used it ever since. Same with the Harris-Teeter card.

I know from working in the industry that most grocery chains don't provide household data to third parties when they provide the bulk sales data. Card numbers are used to tie purchasing habits together over time and determine which coupons/offers might be useful to the holder of that card number (not the person, the card number) based solely on past purchases and known synergies (i.e., milk coupons for cereal buyers).

The grocery chain for which I worked zealously guarded what card data we had, to the point that in order to get any information on the card holder, anything more than the card number, I had to be authorized each time to pull those data points. And I had to sign a form indicating why I needed the data and what I would do with the data and the analysis when finished (with whom I would share it, etc.). I couldn't even look myself up without three forms of authorization.

...and a vote for Johnson would have meant one less vote against Trump. ~ Amy Alkon at November 10, 2016 7:06 AM

You didn't vote against Trump, you voted for Hillary.

And a vote for Gary Johnson would still have been another vote not for Trump.

If you want to know what would have happened under a Hillary presidency, check out the self-righteous anti-Trump riots going on now. Did you really want a howling mob empowered to run the country?

In her concession speech, Hillary called for an open mind and giving Trump a chance. So, her supporters immediately grabbed the pitchforks and torches.

"How do they even have the addresses? When I signed up for a loyalty card at my local grocer's, I gave them a name and a phone number, if even that."

It's the government, they have access to 911 data, reverse phone lookup, etc. All data is available to them. Phone records most easily having previously worked for a phone company. Loyalty cards are a gimmick and worth more to Safeway and other retailers than your actual shopping, of course, until you stop shopping there....

Oh, and while we're at it, no, the government shouldn't be able to charge you to own a pet -- whether it's a dog, a parakeet, or an imaginary walrus.

The city in which I used to live in California had an ongoing debate in the city council about building a dog park with taxpayer funds. If you can demand the city pay for your dog park, the city can charge you to own a pet. Last I heard, the public dog park is under construction, with taxpayers funding it.

My HOA in California spent some of my HOA dues on baggie dispensers (and restocking them) so dog owners wouldn't be inconvenienced in picking up after their pets. God forbid they go to PetSmart and buy their own baggies.

And now I have to endure yapping "support" animals at local restaurants and public venues. A chihuahua is not a support animal; it's a yappy rat with an attitude.

I love dogs. I grew up with dogs. But dog owners presume too much.

Dog licensing is a scam.

http://mynorthwest.com/73822/why-pet-licensing-is-completely-useless/

My six-pound Chinese Crested is microchipped and is too small to wear the rabies shot tag she got. She is never off-leash unless I walk out to say hi to somebody outside my gate and she is in my arms.

It's none of the government's fucking business whether I have a dog or whether I have bangs. Which I don't. At the moment.

Oh, and I pick up her tiny tootsie-roll-sized poops in a plastic glove, turn the glove inside out around the tiny poop(s) and throw them away. Even if no one is watching, because my rule as a person -- first rule -- is don't be an asshole.

My parents HOA had a long drawn out battle over those doggie bag dispensers. But it was 2 years of removing the dispensers, then putting them back on, then removing them, then eventually putting them back up after the city decided to pay for them. People relied on those so much they were letting their dogs shit everywhere.

I live in a ghetto mexican /white trash neighborhood and I have never seen them let their dogs shit everywhere like these upper middle class people did out of spite because they weren't provided free doggie bags. These people pull 200k on average and they REFUSED to buy their own doggie bags.

I think its something in human nature where when you're given something for free you feel entitled to it and throw a tantrum if you stop getting it.

I think its something in human nature where when you're given something for free you feel entitled to it and throw a tantrum if you stop getting it.

Another reason why replacing big government with limited government is so bloody difficult.

Ah yes, Seattle. Truly becoming a Progressive Paradise. Here's a headline:

"Seattle becomes the second major U.S. city to regulate how large retailers and food-service employers schedule their workers."

This is being done by people who probably couldn't run a pet store or grocery.

I live in a ghetto mexican /white trash neighborhood and I have never seen them let their dogs shit everywhere like these upper middle class people did out of spite because they weren't provided free doggie bags. These people pull 200k on average and they REFUSED to buy their own doggie bags.
_________________________________________

Chances are, unfortunately, it has nothing to do with free vs not-free.

I know at least one arrogant blueblood (born in 1968) who flat-out told me he would rather pay a $50 fine than clean up after HIS dog.

In the same vein, Henry Kissinger (I don't know how much he actually leaves the house these days) used to walk with his dog - but he paid someone else to walk with him and clean up.

And one DOES get bags for free - bread bags, produce bags, etc, every time one shops. One can also cut a long flimsy bag in half and tie up an end to make two functional bags. That 's what I often did when dogsitting for others.

And one DOES get bags for free - bread bags, produce bags, etc, every time one shops.

Oh, they're not free. You've paid for them. Baked into the cost of the product.

You're just being frugal by repurposing them for other uses.

Another reason why replacing big government with limited government is so bloody difficult. ~ I R A Darth Aggie at November 10, 2016 8:21 AM

And so bloody necessary.

Seattle City Council member Kshama Sawant once suggested that if Boeing moved operations to another state the workers should take over Boeing's facilities and use them for production of mass transit. Which is lunacy.

She also said American labor union leadership "...in the last 30 years has completely betrayed the working class. They are hand in glove with the Democratic Party, pouring hundreds of thousands of dollars into their campaigns, and they tell rank and file workers that you have to be happy with these crumbs..." Which is true.

Seattle City Council member Kshama Sawant once suggested that if Boeing moved operations to another state the workers should take over Boeing's facilities and use them for production of mass transit.

In places where Kshama is not in charge, that would be multiple felonies.

hmmm, my local grocery stores (those that haven't gone out of business under this Obamanation that is) allow you to get their discounts without using "your" card. Simply state that you left your card at home - the cashier will then use the "store's card" and you get the discounts.

Wfjag: Like all other Progressive Paradises, Seattle is becoming a police state.

Paradise? No way. It's sheer hell living here. It's so incredibly oppressive. That's why this is happening.

"It's none of the government's fucking business..."

Wow, that's naive. No one gets to trade with a society without dealing with that society's rules. Now, go change the process.

"Seattle City Council member Kshama Sawant once suggested that if Boeing moved operations to another state the workers should take over Boeing's facilities and use them for production of mass transit. Which is lunacy."

That idiot probably doesn't know how to assemble a staff capable of the design process, much less market the product. If Boeing could make buses or trains and make a profit, they would - but profit is a filthy word to a government official. It's the crack that makes their day possible, but they have to deny it to project the total illusion of "public service".

"I would have voted for Mitt Romney, Obama, or even that lame-ass, personality-free Gary Johnson to keep her from the presidency. But I didn't have that choice -- and a vote for Johnson would have meant one less vote against Trump."

Really? I voted for Johnson because I want a third party option and I know I won't get it unless we keep voting third party.

My vote doesn't count because I live in blue California, but I do have to live with myself post-election.

If the DNC or the GOP wanted to win they should do what all parties do: run a desirable candidate and get out the vote.

Trump fought the corrupt Clintons AND the entrenched GOP establishment and won. I actually have a little hope that he'll shake things up.