i really will argue that our legislation encourages and incentivizes for more affordable housing. it's not easy. affordable housing is expensive. that's why in the findings with more affordable housing while this contributes to the city. if the planning commission finds that it does, they can approve that project. so, i will argue that our legislation actually incentivizes the developers that want to build more affordable housing to develop on those cites and the developers that don't want to build affordable housing won't be buying those properties on the cites. there will always be developers that want to build in san francisco. i think if speed is the issue in slowing down the i am coming impact fees is the issue, slowing down market rate housing is the issue, then we need to rethink all of the variances and conditional use. we can call it whatever we want. but those are all additional layers in the planning process. for me, i think, it's really stead fast. we have zoning in place because we want to have balance, balance of height, balance of beauty, shadow, all of these things

you are incentivizing them to stay poor. now you have got 47 million and counting. >> and it keeps growing. there are over 80 programs now giving out almost a trillion dollars every year to people and we are giving advertisements to get on to food stamps instead of off food stamps. until somebody comes in and turns the tide it's going to grow bigger and larger and hurt the economy going forward. you have got to turn the track. >> what kills me about conservatives over here -- >> don't label me. >> whatever you are, is that you sit there and you -- >> tough crowd. >> you bemoan the crumby obama economy and then you say people shouldn't go on food stamps. what is it? >> no, no. what people are saying is if you incentivize people for going on food stamps, if you reward someone for eating healthy. do you think any adult knows the difference between a snickers and banana? >> are people having a hard time getting a job? i have a hard time with attacking people who can't find a job. >> do you have a problem with taking taxpayer mon

i really will argue that our legislation encourages and incentivizes for more affordable housing. it's not easy. affordable housing is expensive. that's why in the findings with more affordable housing while this contributes to the city. if the planning commission finds that it does, they can approve that project. so, i will argue that our legislation actually incentivizes the developers that want to build more affordable housing to develop on those cites and the developers that don't want to build affordable housing won't be buying those properties on the cites. there will always

two unit yet you allocated nothing as a community benefit to restoring the basad, -- facade so incentivizing, it is really both carrot stick. whether there are financial incentivetives, whether there are regulatory standards, which set triggers if you're doing this degree of renovation you have to at least approach and look at and coming up with a plan for addressing the other as a community benefit. we think these should be included. the goal really is to see that as much restoration and rehabilitation occur and especially in that sort of gray area of the smaller projects. we think that there's room to improve the position of very strongly encouraging it for the developers as they enter these projects. thank you. >> thank you. is there anybody else who has public comment? seeing none we will close public comment. come back to the commission. any additional comments about objective six? >> just my ears may not be functioning as they did in prior times but seems to me we've had at least two or perhaps three people comment that things would be flushed out and may i suggest that flushed out is

we want them to be incentivized to sell more. whether it be the catalog folks or magazine, we want to in se incentivize them to mail more to keep six-day-a-week delivery if that's what they want. on five-day-a-week delivery we said, you can't do that, as opposed to some sort of volume trigger today. please, dr. miller. >> mr. chairman, i said in my response to questions from the committee, i think the postal service made a mistake in trying to obtain permission or first stated it would accomplish this without congressional acquiescence but then tried to obtain permission to do five -- go from six-day to five-day delivery. i think they should have asked for delivery flexibility. there are a lot of places in america where five-day delivery -- excuse me, six-day delivery makes eminently good sense. some places, seven-day delivery makes good sense. other places, five-day delivery. other places, still two or three-day delivery per week. the postal service needs to have that kind of flexibility. i think the postal service can provide w

it does incentivize people to get a job. because it will lower the price of benefits could help the problem. and you could create the illusion that it is not as bad, because in the actual numbers and when the democrats want you to stop smoking, they raise the price of cigarettes, but if you raise the price of labor, it is the same formula. so we will lose some jobs burk other benefits that mark brought up that psychologically, it is like a union that you are getting an artificial wage here. >> and do you deserve $5 to wash a dish? call a spade a spade. these are not high-paying jobs. >> no, miserable paying jobs. >> and so the issue is who should set this wage? be the company or the government? gary b? >> the market should set the wage. you open up the business and advertise for positions at $5 an hour, and if nobody shows up, you say, maybe that wage is not high enough and maybe i should raise it to $7 an hour, and this is what is going to happen when positions open up at walmart. there are lines around the store waiting fo

so we are always looking for different ways to incentivize that. we are also shown a lot of interest in partnering with the city for contracts for something like that. what there is potential for in a partnership like that is that the city could set requirements at that point that we would be happy to comply with in order to have a contract available to make these kinds of vehicles more accessible. >> that sounds like a great idea. sure. i'm trying to add substance. moving forward to the hard of hearing. i love hearing about reaching out to that community. when talking about having access to communicating with the passengers via tablets are you referring to vrs, video relay services? >> i wish i knew the exact specific devices. i know those are used in some cases as well as ipads, where they go back and forth. >> so for deaf drivers, maybe more preferential to using asl instead of simple texting. if you have these video relay services in place, you are still going off a delay and having asl interpretation. there is a cost measure too trying to prov

again, the goal is to try to incentivize whoever can build the housing sooner, whether it's market rate or affordable. and clearly, through that process you can make changes to various requirements. some of it, some of those changes might require a charter amendment going forward, but others are strictly legislative. >> the last question i have is why is it so difficult for us as a city to maintain housing balance? why is that so problematic? >> well, we are blessed with being a very very attractive place to live. we are also blessed with having a very robust housing market. as we all saw what happens first in san francisco and in any city on a recovery is we get jobs first. jobs come first and everybody then says, oh, my god! we have all these jobs here and we rush to try to build housing and everybody tries to getten as early as possible because they think they know there is a boom and bust cycle. as mayor said he's not predicting a bust in 5 years. he's an economist and on the other hand he could be wrong. there is always this question of you know, we have a robust economy and that's

a fee or charge, so that you incentivize more buildout. that is what you want. you want more pipes, not less. i've used this numerous times in tomittee hearings as a way segue into the debate. no one has come back and said, no, doesn't work for that, but a restricteddebate supply versus a more. i'm always going to be on the side of more. have a market signal. a buildout more pipes. can everybody gets more. it is a great world and country. if you say, no, government has to be here and watch it at incentivize and make sure things, it won't work. >> the other half of what they are working on is a potential reclassification of the internet. is that going to happen, and what are your thoughts? >> it is a terrible idea. of usingng the debate a law passed in the 1930's to and with cable and internet classifying them as title ii and making it really a utility. again, no one can look at me with a straight face and say communicationnet system over the past 18 years has moved exponentially. there is more choice. there are more capabilities. why in the world would you want

therefore incentivizing banks to make these kind of risky loans.merica has a long history of governmental and private discrimination. affirmative-action and the war on poverty were designed in the 1960's to write those very real wrongs. how they are number eight. >> we use that word broadly. i don't think anybody has a problem with average. if your city or state you want to hire fire fighters are policeman. it's okay to run eds in mainstream news terrorist. applications are available. please sign up. we start running into trouble when you say we want applicants will receive we have the test you can get back with a score of 70. ec in municipalities and school districts many have thing is let tess for employment, education of proficiency tests and so on, different standards for people based upon their ethnicity. that is a racist a don't know what is. teetering erasure help him independent of their racial background. matt: the thing is made things worse? >> is difficult to say paris is kerosenes studies suggesting that when minority students who would

look at what the tax code incentivizes. it incentivizes drilling for oil. building wind turbines, it incentivizes holding stock for a longer period rather than a shorter period. it incentivizes saving for your retirement. it incentivizes buying health insurance. the tax code is full of incentives. so let's rewrite that tax code. let's create an incentive to keep jobs in america. let's create an incentive to make sure that companies that pay a fair wage and make sure their operations are good for working people get a tax break. and let's disincentivize the effort to move american jobs overseas and to move american corporate offices overseas. that to me is a tax code with the right incentives for building not only a strong american economy with good-paying jobs right here at home but building our middle class and our working americans into a strong entity, a strong force for progress and economic growth. madam president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. mr. portman: thanks very much. i was listening to my colleague from illinoi

that's very corruptive of our prison system. >> how does one incentivize crime? >> well, we have suffered from the politics here and anger and in the 1972 we had 300,000 people in jails and prisons. today we have 2.4. they didn't happen because crime increased. it happened because politicians use year about crime and anger about crime to political benefits. democrats and republicans. so we criminalize a bunch of things that were not really crimes. we decided to make drug addiction and drug dependency a crime issue rather than a health care issue. hundreds of thousands of people jailed. we passed laws that put people that commit minor crimes, write bad checks, shoplifting in jail a long time. we realize that's not good for the country. but we are stuck. we remain stuck because it is a -- 245 lobbyists funded by private prisons working in 32 states who are spending money to fight against reforms. fight for criminalizing more stuff. that kind of incentives to keep prisons high, i think that is undermining our justice system. more than anything, it is actually block

we have not incentivized people to break the rules.entivized people to ask kids and families to pony up tens or more thousands of dollars to end up with a degree, a piece of paper that is effectively worthless in the job market. >> it is partially. the reason is the incentives made it appear free on the front end. students made lots of bad decisions. it is that by following incentives, which we are not breaking any rules. they were following the rules or often than we'd like to admit in retrospect. >> why would anyone think a private universities education is free? >> i totally agree. you have a very big loan from the federal government. the return is seen far off in the future. colleges were very good at telling students you will get the job on the other side and be able to pay this back. i am the potential student. own't i responsible for my finances and plans and i cannot say if i go to the school i will be guaranteed a job and make the money in the future? that is not a responsible way. talking about people who are 18 and older. al

the number one way of securing our border is stop incentivizing people to come to our country illegallyhat we're doing right now. and so we have to stop that and again, the best thing that we could send would be to send the kids back in a very humane and safe fashion, take them back to their countries of origin so they'll stop being sent here by their parents. >> many democrats say there's a reason for having a deportation hearing, that in certain cases, there is a claim for asylum that should be heard, and that this is something that, for some folks who come to the u.s., and they have a claim like that that you don't just send them back, you have a deportation hearing. what do you say that? >> the anti-trafficking law was a well-intentioned law but it has very negative unintended consequences, so now what we're seeing is we're actually almost incentivizing human traffics, aren't we? these kids are being smuggled through, they are paying these druglords to smuggle their children. isn't that human trafficking? so again, you have to actually, if you want asylum, go to your consulate or th

why would you incentivize that? >> then let's make it $100?nt to say $0. >> only 5% are paid minimum wage. 95% don't need the rule and if adults want to work at $2 then why can't we be free to do that? >> why can't we be free to let children work or that? because we the government to help us along as to what is equitable. john: what about clean-air? if the kids are not slaves and they want to work, people have free choice. >> zaph 5% is the important 5% we look out for those there is no reason why we cannot look at the 5% better earning the minimum wage. >> the defeatist mentality is there is a culpability on of the 5% and basically you are incentivizing people rather than work up the ladder you shave off the bottom rungs by hiking the standard for everyone's been a this is america, it will adjust and all the chickens falling argument never bear out each time we raise it. >> it is government creep. it is clear. [laughter] john: talk about inequality between the four in the rich. what is rich? >> to be rich i should be >> to be rich i should be

they incentivized research and development, incentivized deployment. they made estonia feel like they had fairer taxes and what happened. you fly into town in estonia today and it is like flying into dallas or atlanta. there are cranes everywhere, economic improvement everywhere. they have what people perceive to be a fair code and incentivize people to do business and make money. you raise revenue in america by raising prosperity, not by raising rates of taxation. we prove that every time we lower the capital gains tax. every year following the lowering of the capital gains tax, revenues from capital gains went up and not down. why? because people who had a mature investment were incentivized to pay the lower tax rate, sell the investment and reinvest in a maturing developing investment rather than that hold on because they didn't want to pay a confiscatory tax. there is not one of us in this room that doesn't make decisions every single day on our personal financing where we don't consider in some part, in whole or in part the tax consequence of it.

near incentivizing parents to put their kids at great risk coming across mexico because they know if they reach the promised land they are home free. we're creating incentives. when president obama two years ago issued a memorandum to defer action on childhood arrivals which codified fact we won't send people home we're creating that incentive. we're trying to stop human trafficking. are we actually increasing it because we have smugglers earning $3,000 per child? so i guess i would like to first of all, if we're going to solve the problem let's understand the numbers. mr. kerlikowske you're the best person to ask this. how many unaccompanied children have come in to this nation since doca was issued two years ago. how many kids? >> i have the number of children that have been apprehended in this fiscal year of 57,000. i can give you the information on going back to doca. >> i would like that. of 57,000 how many have been returned? >> we only -- the united states customs and border patrol is in the apprehension. >> so who would know the number of how many of those have been returned?

we are not going to incentivize somebody packing up -- and, by the way, oftentimes those workers end up having to train their replacement. we have many stories in michigan where the replacement worker's in another country, flown in our country, trained by our people to take their jobs. and then to add insult to injury, they pay for the move through the tax code. so we're -- it's very, very simple, and i'm going to turn things over to senator walsh to close out this debate. but we have a very simple message. you want to bring your jobs ho home, madam president? we're all in. you can write off the costs of that move and we'll give you an extra 20% tax cut. but if you want to ship your jobs overseas, you're on your own. i would yield the floor and turn to senator walsh. mr. walsh: madam president, i rise today -- the presiding officer: the senator from montana. mr. walsh: madam president, i rise today to thank my senate colleagues for joining with american workers in voting overwhelmingly to consider the bring jobs home act. i want to particularly thank my colleague from michigan, senat

should our tax code incentivize bringing jobs back from overseas or should it incentivize and encourageshipping jobs overseas overseas? it is a simple vote and i hope it is overwhelmingly bipartisan anwhen it comes before us. we know our country can grow with the right encouragement because we're lucky. for those of us who were born here, we were born into one of the strongest democracies in history. we're born into a system that et creates -- that creates opportunity. and we also know that we have a responsibility here in the senate, the house, and in the white house to create a tax climate and an economic climate for that kind of growth. that's what we're trying to do with this bill: a fair shot for american companies so that they can bring jobs home and be incentivized and rewarded to do it and discouraging those companies that do just the opposite. i think this is a front and center issue. good-paying jobs are the key to restoring the middle class in america, something that i think is long overdue, to create an incentive for people who are struggling to see at the end of that rainbo

if you don't do that, you're going to incentivize more children coming here illegally. >> secretary jeh johnson, who has been selected to review, he did not however confidently confirm that the mass amounts of people, specifically children, would be deported. he reiterated the administration will take action. >> there are a number of things that the president and i, within the confines of existing law, can do to fix the broken immigration system, and we will. if congress doesn't act, we will. >> the president will travel to texas this coming wednesday. the administration says he has no intentions of visiting the border to look at what he calls a humanitarian crisis. julie, back to you. >> and as elizabeth just mentioned texas governor rick perry asking president obama to visit the border later this week. the white house responding to the request, saying the president is already very attuned to what is happening at the border, therefore refusing to go and visit there. what do you think? would his going to the border actually change anything? tweet me. we'll read some of your responses la

are colleges trying to incentivize sexual abuse?est of us call 30 days off to write a book vacation. jordan klepper and jessica williams have come up with some campus safety do's and don'ts. guys, take it away. [cheering and applause] >> okay, bros. party commandment number one: beer before liquor, never been sicker. >> and lady, never lose sight of your drink ever. don't be a doofie. watch out for a roofie. >> this is a big one, guys: don't pass out on the couple of someone might draw like a dick on your face. >> yes, do not pass out on the couch, ladies. someone will put their dick on your face at a minimum. >> i meant... you know what, never mind. now, if you and your bros do get hammered, which you will -- nice -- friends don't let friends drive drunk. take a cab. you can pass out in the back. >> and also friends don't let friends stay at party drunk. girl, get her out of. there call a cab from an actual cab company with a web site, not some creepy guy with a yellow car. >> breath mintses -- >> i'm not done. don't get in a car w

if you bring up a civil charge you'rif you're incentivizeing this behavior. maybe the way to address it is at the corporate level as a whole. it's not obvious that bringing a criminal charge would make things actually better. in the snl surprises we put plenty of bank necessary jail, and that did not solve the problem 15, 20 years later when we saw the same behavior. >> when we come back we'll talk did deterrents. how do you do you deter bad business practice in banking? when you run a business, you can't settle for slow. that's why i always choose the fastest intern. the fastest printer. the fastest lunch. turkey club. the fastest pencil sharpener. the fastest elevator. the fastest speed dial. the fastest office plant. so why wouldn't i choose the fastest wifi? i would. switch to comcast business internet and get the fastest wifi included. comcast business. built for business. >> welcome back to "inside story." i'm libby casey. it's five and a half years since the financial crisis that started the great recession and the government is still investigating the

but at what point do you sit there and say is there too much incentivizing? >> on that, chuck, we did reduce traffic fatalities. we also found out -- knew where they were going to be, some of these individuals. we integrated them into our economic society. look, i think what we need to do is find a way to see the immigration issue as an economic issue, as a way to create jobs, to improve the american economy and to bring more highly skilled workers, immigrant workers. that's the way i think you emphasize a solution that is positive. >> i guess the problem with the immigration debate is it gets so -- it seems it's become a cultural debate, that it's not an economic debate. how do you get through the cultural gap? i grew up in florida but i say it's very much like a border state where we went through the integration process in the '70s. all the horrible things being said in the midwest and some of these places in the south, i saw then, and then florida got over it. is this just going to be a case where we have to age out of this? >> i think you emphasize the ec

i don't have time to be doing this all night. 25% is really the number that i need that incentivizesthings that i think need to be done. investing in businesses is always a risk. but i always gear my offers towards minimizing my risk. there's over $400,000 of inventory here, so my $100,000 offer is safe. if this deal goes bad, i know for certain i'll get my money back. and you understand, for the next week, i'm 100% in charge. last year, maarse lost $20,000. but i know with a few tweaks, we can go from losing $20,000 to making $1/2 million very quickly. i'm so confident that i can make a difference, i'm writing a check. >> is this a now or never deal? >> you're gonna make a decision right now. >> all right. i'm okay with that, for one week. >> but all i ask is that you don't screw me. you don't take my money. >> we're not the type. >> yeah, you won't find anybody that-- >> well, why did it take you a while to say that to me? your mom said it right away. why did you have to think about it? >> i'm just surprised you would even say something like that. >> well, sure, you have to say thi

building inspection and our continuing role will be to advocate for possible legislative changes to incentivize repairing and upgrading elevators in single-room occupancy hotels. so i will be keeping you posted on that progress. then with your patience, councilmembers, my next item is to talk about a supervisors' hearing. supervisor mar on june 5th sponsored a hearing to talk about the city of san francisco's efforts to hire and to retain employees with disabilities. and this hearing was structured around a part of the city chart called "rule 115." and this rule allows the city to hire a person with a disability without going through the standard civil service process for testing and placement on an active list. this rule has been in place since the mid-1980s and it was necessary then just like it's necessary now, because depending on statistics that you listen to, people with disabilitis are only as one-third as likely to be employed as people who don't have disabilities. and our economic circumstances reflect that. so as is common with labor statistics, those numbers are just counting the peo

the salaries that some of the drivers are able to pull in, the incentivizing. what's the current pay rates for drivers in the city? >> i'm not sure in the san francisco. but drivers who do this full time are able to do very well for themselves. they are able to provide and use this on a full time basis. >> so if there is capital available, putting in the minimum bare minimum requirements on your own accessibility training and then just having a simple on-site visit. i just don't see how that's actually going to have any real world effect. so i strongly urge you to go back and say, if we have the money and putting our money where our mouth is so to speak and say we do believe in accessibility, that's something we should do is providing mandatory wheelchair accessible vans. it would be great to your city to be able to show this off as opposed to having over the computer training. that's one of mine. okay. i think that's all i have for now. we are going to councilmember harriet wong. >> hi, going back to what chip was saying about how some don't use credit cards.

they incentivized research and development, incentivized deployment. they made estonia feel like they had fairer taxes and what happened. you fly into town in estonia today and it is like flying into dallas or atlanta. there are cranes everywhere, economic improvement everywhere. they have what people perceive to be a fair code and incentivize people to do business and make money. you raise revenue in america by raising prosperity, not by raising rates of taxation. we prove that every time we lower the capital gains tax. every year following the lowering of the capital gains tax, revenues from capital gains went up and not down. why? because people h

so we are always looking for different ways to incentivize that. we are also shown a lot of interest in partnering with the city for contracts for something like that. what there is potential for in a partnership like that is that the city could set requirements at that point that we would be happy to ly

we are looking at a way to incentivize our partners and structure block buys so industry knows they have a minimum that will be bought over a certain number of years. if we can work that out, we can pass the savings onto our partners and fms customers. that is good for them. it is good for us because the cost of ththe airplane claontins to come down. it is good for industry because industry will have a solid base from which to further invest because they know the buy is going to be there. >> coming up, we are continuing our programw with the jfs officer. each service is struggling to pay for the joint strike fighter as well as other acquisition prrities high production quantities are key to keeping costs low. i asked what would hapn if the military forces are forced to cut back their orders. >> i can't speak for the services in teterms of resourcen decisions they have to make. what ian tell you is none of as services has ever wered far as i know on the total number theintend on buying. what is more important for me in the near-term is keeping the ramp rate steady and moving upward. if yo

that's incentivizing small business owners to change their owner. food gardens, we have an amazing food garden, they give out 400 pounds of food a month for free, residents of tenderloin all fresh and healthy vegetables. it's been great. i get that diabetes has a higher impact on low income residents and i think i have a lot of feelings and thoughts about that. i think labeling is important. i think what then mayor bloomberg i think those are all things that we can look at. we certainly did this with cell phone antennas or attempted to several years ago. we attempted to label and education consumers about the potential usage of cell phones. i don't want this vote to be viewed as not thinking this this is an important issue on an epidemic. again, i just want to reemphasize that i just question whether this is the medium. if this is a question of whether this will go to the vote and, you know, we were the sixth vote or another thing, i think that we'd want the conversation to move forward to the voters. i think this conversation has been super interes

. >> you can incentivize your children. >> you can. >> there's that. >> how do you incentivize? >> you don't agree with that? don't incentivize? >> no bribery? >> no. i mean, of course, we do the choars are something they'r supposed to do so they can help out. >> again, that sounds so good! >> before you guys play with them, say, hey, let's clean up. let's put the dishes away, but don't put that before special moments with your kids. >> that's something i have to remember more. we both are such neaties. is that a word? neaties. great story. thank you so much, ericka. >>> coming up, our audience is all fired up for the new "guardians of the galaxy" movie. there they are outside. chris pratt is all fired up, as well. you're going to have so much fun with him. that's not all. we also have will.i.am. coming up. can hear his new hit single, "it's my birthday." >>> how is this for a deal? tell them, tory. everything. everything for a buck. only for you, our "gma" viewers. tomorrow get your "deals and steals" on thursday's "good morning america." >>> good morning. i'm eric thomas. oakl

>> to my recollection performance benefits have always been in place to incentivize and reward good behavior and good results. i think for the past few years we really have done a better job federal government wide at focusing on results. >> mr. bertoni? as far as the use of federal performance? >> i can't speak to the history. i would say it's consistent across the executive agencies that performance bonuses are there and they should be performance-based and they should be results based but certainly when you combine the allure of performance bonuses with metrics that drive in a certain way and drive certain behaviors that is when it gets perverse and that is where executive agencies and otherwise have to be careful about the metrics they put in place and a performance bonus associated with that. >> ms. halliday in the scenario of looking at the vba aside from the scheduling issues we have had in phoenix is there any indication to you that they performance bonus and the metrics have combined in a similar way for motivation to game the system for financial gain? >> i can't speak to that. >>