JERSEY CITY LIST - Message Forum

Forum Index

Board index » All Posts (ianmac47)

Bottom

« 1 2 3 4 (5) 6 7 8 ... 81 »

ianmac47

Re: Is 'Gentrification' good for Jersey City?

#121

Home away from home

Quote:

Monroe wrote:
As for the silly comments above, suburban kids may not be able to afford to live in their hometown because of taxes. Taxes that are sky high because cities like JC and Newark, together, suck $1.6 billion EACH YEAR from the suburban taxpayers, who then have to pay sky high local muni taxes to make up.

1. Most of the suburban kids are moving back to the city, which is why suburban property values still haven't recovered from the crash while cities are unaffordable.

2. Most of the suburban districts have been created and resist regionalization because white people want to avoid integrated classrooms. When suburban districts regionalize and the state has 50 districts instead of 500, taxes will go down. Until then, you can keep paying for your segregated school system.

Posted on: 2015/1/8 2:35

Topic | Forum

ianmac47

Re: Is 'Gentrification' good for Jersey City?

#122

Home away from home

Quote:

Conformist wrote:

Rents go up because of demand, not because of how rich the people moving in are. If enough artists want to live in an area, prices go up, and only the artists who can afford it will live there--possibly with aid from family or income from bartending or by sharing apartments or rooms.

Upward price adjustments are limited by the incomes of the people who are demanding it.

It doesn't matter how many people want an apartment if each individual has a maximum buying power of $22,000. An apartment won't rent for more than that. The only reason it does is because someone comes along with more money.

That is, if there is 1 apartment and 10 Artist Abbys each with $22,000 a year, it doesn't matter that there are 10 people willing to pay $22,000, it won't rent for more than that maximum price provided that is the maximum they can pay. The apartment only rents for more than when Lawyer Laura comes along and offers $155,000 for it.

The real conflict then isn't Blue-Collar Bill and Middle-Class Mike, each earning $50,000 are in conflict with Artist Abby. Its that Lawyer Laura comes along and fucks all of them.

Posted on: 2015/1/7 21:25

Topic | Forum

ianmac47

Re: Is 'Gentrification' good for Jersey City?

#123

Home away from home

If you want to know what's driving the rapid increase in price per square foot, its going to be the bankers, lawyers, and other professional service members with six figure salaries. Its not the graduate students or writers and artists who work part time as waiters and bartenders and tattoo artists, even if they are getting a few dollars from their parents in the midwest.

Consider for a moment what you are actually talking about here.

Lets say Artist Abby works 20 hours a week at some menial service job like sales clerk, leaving plenty of time to pursue her art and music career. Very generously, her parents cut her a check for a $1,000 a month, which is a lot but its expensive to live in the big city and Artist Abby is going to be a brilliant artist one day. Art Abby is living on a solid $22,400 a year (that's $10,400 working an $12,000 from her parents).

Now lets say Lawyer Laura just landed a first year associate job at one of the big law firms. Times are tough, and base salaries haven't increased since 2007, so she only starts at a measly $160,000. She's also going to make $20,000 in student loan payments this year, so right off the top she's down to $140,000. Oh, wait, bonuses for the class of 2013 were $15,000, so Lawyer Laura earned $155,000 this year.

So who is renting the luxury high rise for $3,000 a month and who is sharing an apartment with that weird English grad student who walks her cat around the park?

Posted on: 2015/1/7 20:16

Topic | Forum

ianmac47

Re: Is 'Gentrification' good for Jersey City?

#124

Home away from home

Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:

I suggest you follow your own advice. Ianmac clearly stated that gentrification has numerous negative effects. He also demonized millions of people, saying that "most rich white people tend to be assholes."

If you can't understand the subtext behind his post that I responded to, I suggest taking lessons in reading comprehension. Especially given your spiel about why it isn't useful to get angry at gentrification.

Again, to be clear, I stated rich white people often are assholes and clarified this as independent of gentrification. This has nothing to do with whether or not they are gentrifying a place, or moving to the suburbs, or living in a van down the river. To be rich and white is hold the most powerful position in society, and with that power comes corruption -- corruption of the soul, corruption of morality, corruption of humanity.

Posted on: 2015/1/7 19:08

Topic | Forum

ianmac47

Re: Is 'Gentrification' good for Jersey City?

#125

Home away from home

Quote:

CapnJon wrote:
I was having a "discussion" online with a young lady who lives downtown and she was bitching and griping about "gentrification" ruining the downtown "scene" because her favorite bar was closing.

I asked her about her own background. She's lived here for just over five years. She's from the midwest. She's an "artist". She complained how downtown has changed so much in the past few years, because of white people moving from elsewhere...

She is white. From elsewhere. Gets financial help from her midwest family so she can do art.

She didn't see the irony.

Its probably not this woman or people like her driving up rents and leading to higher priced goods and services. Its the young professionals and the middle-aged professionals working full-time jobs that are pushing up the rents. She might not have to spend all her time working a day job, but she also probably isn't outbidding people on brownstones are living in luxury buildings.

Posted on: 2015/1/7 15:29

Topic | Forum

ianmac47

Re: Is 'Gentrification' good for Jersey City?

#126

Home away from home

Quote:

Monroe wrote:
To an extent, but when Midtown Direct was completed property values rose in the suburbs covered-and NJ Transit for those towns doesn't run 24/7.

Are those towns getting $800 a square foot?

Posted on: 2015/1/6 15:42

Topic | Forum

ianmac47

Re: Christie & Cuomo Support Eliminating Weekend Overnight PATH Service

#127

Home away from home

Its clearly a prelude and justification for a toll hike and fare increase.

Posted on: 2015/1/6 15:24

Topic | Forum

ianmac47

Re: Is 'Gentrification' good for Jersey City?

#128

Home away from home

Housing near the light rail would probably have a higher value and there would be a higher demand for new inventory if the light rail didn't turn off at night. Places only served by the light rail aren't really a viable competitor to neighborhoods served by the PATH or subway.

Posted on: 2015/1/6 4:14

Topic | Forum

ianmac47

Re: Is 'Gentrification' good for Jersey City?

#129

Home away from home

Quote:

Conformist wrote:
This is spurious because the phantom white menace you describe does not exist. White people move for the same reasons other people move--for cheaper rent or a smaller mortgage, a bigger or better house, better schools. There is no malice or "assholedom". You complain about white people moving out of certain neighborhoods in the white flight era, and then complain about white people moving back into the same neighborhoods in the gentrification era. Only one or the other can be morally wrong--they can't both be.

To be clear, that most of those people are assholes has nothing to do with their gentrification, but simply an observation that most rich white people tend to be assholes.

Posted on: 2015/1/5 20:22

Topic | Forum

ianmac47

Re: Is 'Gentrification' good for Jersey City?

#130

Home away from home

There is a fundamental difference between an upwardly mobile minority population ascending into a higher social class and entering into a domain that traditionally prohibits them -- that is, a black family working into the middle-class and buying into a white neighborhood -- and bourgeois whites descending upon a working class neighborhood simply because they can and the people living there lack the financial solvency or legal status to remain.

The transformation of upper and middle-class white neighborhoods into upper and middle-class black neighborhoods is not at all the same thing as rich white assholes buying up property in neighborhoods filled with poor minorities and displacing them.

Posted on: 2015/1/5 20:13

Topic | Forum

ianmac47

Re: Is 'Gentrification' good for Jersey City?

#131

Home away from home

Quote:

Monroe wrote:
At this point we can distinguish between public and private sector unions. Private sector unions are pretty much self supporting, it's the public sector unions that cost the average taxpayer so much due to their political influence.

There could be some truth to this. Just consider how the police unions have bilked NYC out of millions in overtime payments, high pensions, and outrageous healthcare all while systematically oppressing minorities and abusing their power. Where are the unions on that? They're disrespecting de Blasio -- at funerals no less while obstructing any kind of change that would address the concerns of civil rights activists. And these kinds of abuses aren't just happening in NYC, but everywhere.

Posted on: 2015/1/5 0:33

Topic | Forum

ianmac47

Re: Is 'Gentrification' good for Jersey City?

#132

Home away from home

Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Unions are way too powerful (particularly in our region) and I don't see how you draw a link between unions and gentrification and middle class. From where I stand, I see unions as nothing more than power hungry organizations, led by wolves in sheep's clothing that claim to be looking out for their members but are drawing exorbitant salaries and/or perks and are nothing short of extortionists.

I assume you must be joking. Unions are growing weaker every year. Membership has been reduced from 30% of the workforce in the 1960s to 12% today. Limitations on soft money contributions to political parties have substantially weakened labor unions' political influence while simultaneously strengthening donations from the very wealthy. Today almost half -- 24 states -- have right to work laws that circumvent national protections for organized labor. All of this is primarily relevant because correlating with the declining role of labor unions has been the declining percentage of the percent of GDP held by the middle-class, parallels the decline in real wages, and the growing wealth disparity, and a strong middle-class would have more power to withstand the assault of rising costs that comes with gentrification.

Finally, if you aren't joking about the power of labor unions, if you truly, honestly believe they are dangerous and power cabal of working people meant to steal your money, that is yet another symptom of the decline of labor unions' power: an unsophisticated electorate so critically simplistic that it accepts conservative propaganda from spokespeople paid to feed them talking points.

Posted on: 2015/1/4 2:21

Topic | Forum

ianmac47

Re: Is 'Gentrification' good for Jersey City?

#133

Home away from home

The reason certain types of people -- artists, writers, LGBT, students, academics, young people -- have traditionally been signifiers of gentrification is that these are groups that are marginalized by mainstream culture and seek out compromised spaces because they tend to be cheaper. These groups tend to invest in a community because the initial costs are low either for living expenses or costs for launching businesses. What has happened over the last two decades is that these spaces have become more interesting to mainstreamers who then want to live among the artists, writers, gays, ect, because the culture created by these people is far more interesting and different than the corporate brands that mainstreamers are usually surrounded by.

When the yuppies capitalize these once compromised spaces big corporations see the opportunity to monetize the neighborhood whitewashing those neighborhoods with the same kind of brands that every other neighborhood has. Of course, by that point, the people who have actually made a neighborhood interesting and desirable in the first place have moved out.

This is why places like Bedford Avenue, once the center of counter-culture twenty years ago now has a Duane Reade, Urban Outfitters, J Crew, and coming soon, Whole Foods and an Apple Store. But its also why all of the venues that embodied culture -- music venues, art galleries, independent cafes have closed within the last year and either are moving east or disappearing altogether. This has happened in the West Village, in Soho, Chelsea, Tribeca, Powerhouse Arts District, Grove Street and soon enough Journal Square.

That narrative of course fails to address the class issue -- that there tends to be poor people already living in places when the artists or the gays or whatever other marginalized population shows up looking for low cost housing. Its particularly problematic too that these poorer populations tend to be people of color, and the transplants tend to be white, and that the language of colonization is used -- urban pioneer, frontier, ect. There are of course examples where there wasn't an existing population. DTJC is actually one example, since most of the waterfront was empty abandoned industrial, and the same with the Williamsburg waterfront. However in places like the village, the lower east side, Bushwick, Crown Heights, Lefferts -- there are existing populations of people who are being displaced.

But to blame the artists, academics, students and whoever else is the first wave of gentrification is to fail to address the overall class problem that exists in the metropolitan area and the country as a whole. The wealthy are growing wealthier and the poor at best remain the same. Thats not just gentrification at work, but systemic failure with our economic system where corporate lobbyists are allowed to write legislation, unions are undermined in their political power, and overall conservative politics that favors the concentration of wealth among the already wealthy and predominantly white elite.

The best way to fight the negative effects of gentrification is through building a strong middle-class that has the economic power to resist gentrification and the political power to defend themselves. That means stronger unions, higher corporate taxes, and better public services.

Posted on: 2015/1/3 17:49

Topic | Forum

ianmac47

Re: Is 'Gentrification' good for Jersey City?

#134

Home away from home

The word "gentrification" is fairly overused and generic, often misused and employed in situations that stretch its meaning. Even its roots are misleading as working professionals are hardly part of the gentry class from which the name is derived.

Gentrification today tends to mean a process of class stratification that further polarizes distinctions between rich and poor (and often between white and people of color). Where twenty years ago, it often meant integrating young, white, wealthy individuals alongside poorer people of color, its now come to mean wholly displacing existing neighborhoods. In some instances, gentrification means wealthy white people displacing slightly less wealthy white people, creating super zones of very expensive housing and services.

Some studies from earlier in the 2000s suggested that gentrification helped everyone in a community. Even poorer people ended up benefitting through higher wages for low skilled jobs, better access to government services as wealthy people lobbied for improvements, and better access to private services like grocery stores. However, as the process has accelerated, neighborhoods are less integrated and more exclusive. The edge of gentrified neighborhoods is farther and farther away, meaning living in the fringe offers less access to the benefits of an upscale neighborhood. Also, the process has begun to shift poor -- and the problems that come with it -- into suburbans areas.

Posted on: 2015/1/2 16:52

Topic | Forum

ianmac47

Re: JC has competition for "6th Boro" status

#135

Home away from home

Don't worry, without overnight PATH service, nobody will be comparing Jersey City to a borough of NYC.

Posted on: 2014/12/31 0:19

Topic | Forum

ianmac47

Re: Christie & Cuomo Support Eliminating Weekend Overnight PATH Service

#136

Home away from home

Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

PEC0905 wrote:
Quote:

ianmac47 wrote:
This is all politics. Its not a real proposal.

1. Its a response to Fulop's lawsuit for $400 million in back taxes.
2. Its a response to the state legislatures voting to restructure the agency while diminishing the power of both governors.
3. Its a shake down for campaign contributions from real estate interests in NJ, many of whom also have a presence in NY.

If this was a real proposal, the real estate developers would be shutting down development on half finished towers rather than continuing to throw good money after bad.

Perfectly stated.

This is all bullsh*t and even the title of this thread is misleading. The Port Authority released a 99 page report proposing several changes across the board and the PATH overnight service change is just one idea of many that was FLOATED. Neither governor singled out PATh and no service change is approved or even pending, so everyone needs to relax.

This has no basis is reality and is politics at its best. All parties involved are scheming and are pushing back at each other to promote hidden agendas.

At the end of the day public transportation is vital and therefore is heavily subsidized. The MTA loses money as does the PATH and just about every other public transportation entity. This is nothing new so the the fact they mention potential savings of 10 million is a joke and a drop in the bucket when you look at the big picture.

Fulop and Zimmer are already pushing back and the banks and developers will do so behind the scenes. The 24/7 PATH service is critical and as Hudson County continues to grow, service needs to increase, not decrease. A new station is coming to Harrison and Christie's buddies have development contracts for the surrounding neighborhood that will depend on PATH so just keep that in mind. Nevermind the WTC Hub that cost 4 billion and is almost complete. 10 million, really??

What we really need is for PATH to be classified as an Urban Transit System just like the NYC Subway so that it will be eligible for additional federal funding. This could be a ploy to get just that......

There is literally nothing misleading about the thread's title. Your opinion may be that this is not a serious proposal, but it is a specific proposal supported by Christie and Cuomo nonetheless.

http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/ ... TH-Service-286991111.html

Its very serious. But its not intended to be implemented. Its serious because once again Christie is putting politics above policy. Its serious because once again Christie is willing to jeopardize NJ jobs for his own political gain. Its serious that Christie thinks its alright to place in jeopardy millions of dollars of investment in NJ as retribution against political opponents. Its serious that Cuomo is such a scumbag to go along with it. But its not realistic as a proposal given the amount of money that would be lost by developers in Essex and Hudson county.

Posted on: 2014/12/29 16:45

Topic | Forum

ianmac47

Re: Christie & Cuomo Support Eliminating Weekend Overnight PATH Service

#137

Home away from home

Quote:

We all know that Christie is a piece of sh*t but Cuomo has really been a disappointment.

Cuomo is a bigger shit than Christie. This is the least of it.

Posted on: 2014/12/29 4:49

Topic | Forum

ianmac47

Re: Christie & Cuomo Support Eliminating Weekend Overnight PATH Service

#138

Home away from home

This is all politics. Its not a real proposal.

1. Its a response to Fulop's lawsuit for $400 million in back taxes.
2. Its a response to the state legislatures voting to restructure the agency while diminishing the power of both governors.
3. Its a shake down for campaign contributions from real estate interests in NJ, many of whom also have a presence in NY.

If this was a real proposal, the real estate developers would be shutting down development on half finished towers rather than continuing to throw good money after bad.

Posted on: 2014/12/28 23:31

Topic | Forum

ianmac47

Re: Bike Share System

#139

Home away from home

Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:

Your arguments do not AT ALL change the FACT that CitiBike has been an engineering failure. You are providing explanations as to why the failures happened, but you can't deny or argue the failure itself. Simply put, CitiBike has been an engineering failure: bikes that are too heavy, docking stations that are prone to glitches or breakdowns, etc. All of your explanations may be true, but they still do not change the facts.

A Honda Civic or a Toyota Camry are both highly reliable cars, but if cheap out on maintenance and don't bother getting the oil repaired, the engine is still going to freeze up. Is that an engineering problem? No, that's a maintenance problem, which is no different than not maintaining CitiBikes because there isn't enough money to pay for them.

Quote:

Completely and utterly untrue. BikeShare in Philadelphia is expected to launch in Philly next year, without expecting a subsidy.

So what you are saying is that the Philadelphia Bike Share system is not yet operating. Meaning, Philadelphia's Bike share might operate without subsidy, but it is not at present operating without a subsidy.

Posted on: 2014/12/18 18:43

Topic | Forum

ianmac47

Re: Bike Share System

#140

Home away from home

Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
At any given moment, close to a quarter of all bikes (reports vary from 15 to 25 percent) are unusable because they are broken down, or something basic is not in working order.

The first "engineering failure" was the software used to operate the system -- because the Citibike operators wanted to use cheaper software rather than license software that was already operational in other cities.

The second "engineering failure" -- the equipment being stored in an area that was flooded by Sandy -- was a direct result of delays from waiting for the cheaper software to be finished.

The ongoing "engineering failure" -- the 15 to 25 percent of bikes that aren't working -- are due to the fact that Alta Bicycle Share, the operator of the system, laid off workers because of financial reasons.

Citi Bike is the only bike share system in the country -- and probably the world -- that is expected to operate without public subsidy. And before you say this is because its not popular -- thats actually part of the problem -- its proven so popular that too many people are subscribing to the service rather than paying day rates to use the bikes.

Also to say there is little support for public bike share simply a lie. 3/4 of New Yorkers support bike share programs -- rising from 72% to 74% support between 2011 and 2012.
http://www.streetsblog.org/2013/08/16 ... es-bike-share-and-plazas/
And even after totally fucking up the system -- again, because it didn't have enough money to operate correctly -- half of New Yorkers still supported bike share.
http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/ ... ike-share-composting-plan

So regardless of the personal poll you took of yourself, Bike share systems are extremely popular, and to say they don't deserve public funding because they are meant to appease "deep pocketed liberal donors" only betrays your ignorance.

Posted on: 2014/12/18 6:36

Topic | Forum

ianmac47

Re: Bike Share System

#141

Home away from home

Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:

You are clearly in the minority. Citibike is, and has been, a financial and engineering failure.

CitiBike is a financial failure in the same way the interstate highway system is a failure. Or NJTransit. Or the PATH. Or The MTA. Or NYWaterway. Its not profitable to move people. But highways, buses and trains all receive subsidies, something CitiBike hasn't been allowed to receive, which is the main failure of the financial system that was set up.

As for the engineering failures, this is linked to the funding issue. The main engineering problems are: flooded equipment before it was installed; failure to maintain equipment; failure to inspect equipment. These failures are all linked to the main problem: not getting public subsidies in the same way that highways, roadways, ferries, buses, and trains.

You can't be upset that a system is breaking when you aren't paying to maintain it.

Posted on: 2014/12/15 4:05

Topic | Forum

ianmac47

Re: Fugly parking podiums

#142

Home away from home

Quote:

jc_dweller wrote:
EVERY. SINGLE. TIME.
Every time there is a new building downtown with limited parking the neighbors go bananas. RIGHT HERE ON JC LIST.

Those people mean FREE parking.

Posted on: 2014/12/8 19:55

Topic | Forum

ianmac47

Re: Fugly parking podiums

#143

Home away from home

This all has to do with zoning. First, zoning needs to require fewer parking spaces. Jersey City has admittedly been slightly more progressive with this in recent years reducing the number of parking spaces per unit, but even so, that could be reduced further. Second, local zoning doesn't require that these spaces are masked. In cities with very strict zoning, parking garages are not allowed to be exposed on the facade of the building and must be fully enclosed by human inhabited spaces with transparent walls, i.e., windows.

Its much cheaper for developers to build a concrete cage to hold cars than bother including any actual design. People keep buying and renting these buildings, and the city hasn't done anything to stop it. Meanwhile, the activists leading a multi-year fight against new development in various places never bothered arguing for better design, instead simply trying to stop new development entirely. That isn't helpful either.

Posted on: 2014/12/8 16:16

Topic | Forum

ianmac47

Re: PATH (pathetic attempt at transporting humans)

#144

Home away from home

Quote:

FakeGreenDress wrote:
Quote:

mastablasta wrote:
I'm diggin' this PATH Alert....

12/2/2014 1:53:02 PM
Due to a track condition, Path trains will operate 20 minute around the world service with en route delays.

PATH can now take us around the world.

"around the world service" = 33 via Hoboken, but I wouldn't put it past them to add stops in several other nations before crossing the river...

33rd Street via Hoboken, Antwerp.

Posted on: 2014/12/3 1:00

Topic | Forum

ianmac47

Re: Front yard parking

#145

Home away from home

Quote:

HeightsBrat wrote:

While not a bad idea what about those one family homes that have had those curb cuts since the late 80's or early 90's? Some of these homes have changed hands & it is certainly not fair to impose something like this on these families.

A fee to maintain the curb cut is ideal for those homes. Property owners who want to keep the curb cut would pay the fee. Property owners who don't want to pay the fee would lose the right to the curb cut restoring publicly accessible parking to the street. When it comes to fairness, its not particularly fair that some people have taken away public street parking available to everyone in order to create private street parking reserved only for them.

Posted on: 2014/12/2 14:26

Topic | Forum

ianmac47

Re: Front yard parking

#146

Home away from home

Quote:

HeightsBrat wrote:

Define illegal. I guarantee that the carport wasn't there when that house was built. This is an example of one of the carports that appeared magically out of nowhere I bet about 20+ years ago & herein lies another problem with Chico's proposal. What do you do about all those carports that were put in all those years ago? Do you declare them illegal & demand the owner restore the curb &/or pay a fine? While I am sure Chico's intentions are good, they just aren't practical or well thought out.

One way of dealing with would be to have a monthly or annual curb cut fee. For the larger properties, a fee would be nominal cost shared among dozens of vehicles. For the individual single family house, a fee might be enough to restore the curb.

Posted on: 2014/12/2 4:48

Topic | Forum

ianmac47

Re: Tomorrow (Wed) weather, and travel via train

#147

Home away from home

White Plains is probably going to be mostly or all snow. You should also consider that if the storm begins early enough that people living along the line stay home, the train will not be the usual Wednesday before Thanksgiving Crush. On the other hand, there is the potential that everyone is leaving earlier.

Either way, remember, you can buy beer on the platform of MetroNorth, drink on the train, and the all of Grand Central is the city's largest bar.

Posted on: 2014/11/26 2:45

Topic | Forum

ianmac47

Re: Fulop plans to gather top N.J. mayors for private dinner: The Auditor

#148

Home away from home

Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Methinks you've had too many PBR's and locavore pickles today-Christie is a 'radical' conservative? Many Republicans would call him a RINO, lol.

Tenure reform was progressive. Pension reform was progressive, but it turns out his compromise with the Democrats doesn't go far enough to save NJ taxpayers. 2% municipal tax caps is working wonderfully for NJ's middle class homeowners, although it can't reverse decades of Democratic led special interest giveaways.

And now Fulop and the other Democratic led money pit towns want more from the supply side suburban taxpayers, as we're learning now what his meetings in AC are about-as I said.

I guess you just don't understand progressive politics. Progressive politics is about protecting workers from employers, not stripping laborers from wrongful termination. Progressive pension reform is ensuring that workers' pensions are protected and pay out a living wage in retirement, not spending the money that should be reserved for workers' retirements to fund state operating costs. The tax caps are an ultra conservative measure, not a progressive one. Not only have the tax caps not actually worked -- municipalities have just moved from the "tax" column to the "fee" column many of the costs of operating the town -- but Christie had the state erase all the data to obscure the fact that taxes haven't actually gone down. Either way, starving government by artificial caps on taxation isn't progressive, its ultra conservative.

Posted on: 2014/11/16 23:04

Topic | Forum

ianmac47

Re: Fulop plans to gather top N.J. mayors for private dinner: The Auditor

#149

Home away from home

Quote:

Monroe wrote:
I thought you had a deeper understanding, at least, of Christie. He has no filter, and is honest to a fault. If he was so concerned about his political future, do you think he'd have given Obama the bro-hug after Sandy?

Name me another politician in the US today who had achieved so many bi-partisan, common sense progressive reforms as he has. And he's done it, at times, holding his nose but he fully (unlike, say, Obama) realizes that the perfect is the enemy of the good.

Christie gave Obama a bro-hug because Obama's approval rating was skyrocketing, as is the case whenever a president tours a disaster area doling out money.

Also every time you use the word "progressive" to describe Christie's conservative to radically conservative platform it only reinforces that don't know what you are talking about. Its your choice to be Christie's lapdog, but when you're licking shit off his fingers, don't pretend its not shit.

Posted on: 2014/11/16 22:24

Topic | Forum

ianmac47

Re: Fulop plans to gather top N.J. mayors for private dinner: The Auditor

#150

Home away from home

Quote:

Monroe wrote:
The Brooklyn hipster once again has his knit cap (or fedora maybe?) pulled down so low over his eyes that he can't see the landslide support both Governor's enjoyed in their states-Christie's being even more remarkable, given that it was earned in a blue state. Carry on.

In no part of my statement did I mention either Christie's or Cuomo's popularity. I simply said they are both more interested in running for president than prioritizing their own constituents' needs. Its very easy to be a popular politician. Its much more difficult to do the right thing, something neither Cuomo nor Christie have done.

Posted on: 2014/11/16 19:18

Topic | Forum

Top

« 1 2 3 4 (5) 6 7 8 ... 81 »