JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

caj11 wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

caj11 wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

caj11 wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Scumbag wants top security clearance for his children. wtf

So someone says he wants to make America great and you call him a scumbag.

Some of us judge him by what he has done, like leaving a trail of stiffed contractors, bankruptcies, and molested women, rather than what he says he will do.

Regarding the stiffed contractors and bankruptcies, I've been to a few friends' BBQs in central and southern Jersey, and I met more than one family who went without a Christmas after the Taj Mahal filed bankruptcy, because their family run businesses had been sub-contractors or vendors for that property. Most got around 33 cents on the dollar of what they were owed if they were lucky. Many long-time family owned small contractor businesses were simply ruined after Trump used the bankruptcy process to weasel out of paying what he rightfully owed. Despite all those families being ruined and going to work for other contractors or any menial job they could get, do you think Trump ever stopped riding around in his limousines, yachts and helicopters after the Taj's three separate bankruptcies? I doubt it. His lifestyle was not affected.

It's not just this that matters though - Trump has zero elected experience. He is as qualified to run this country as Jesse Jackson was when he ran in 1984. If you're going to run for the most powerful elected office in the world, you should have *some* lower office experience first - you don't need to be a career politician like Bernie Sanders, but at least one lower level elected office would be nice.

Trump will demonstrate to you how instincts and judgment are far more important than experience in a President.

More importantly, all of Hillary's experience is bad. She's like a CEO who ran her former company into the ground. Think of the election as picking the CEO of a new company. While it's true to say that Hillary was the only candidate with CEO experience, she sucked, so it's not like her experience is much of a positive factor when you put it into proper context.

He's surrounded by the best people and that suffices.

Hillary Clinton did not stiff her suppliers and sub-contractors and weasel out of contractual obligations by filing bankruptcy. I suppose all those families in central and southern New Jersey whose businesses were ruined and went without a Christmas after getting stiffed by Trump doesn't matter to you. And while plenty of other developers and contractors are guilty of doing that, they didn't run for President.

Ok, so you've completely abandoned your second point? Good to know.

Regarding your first, it's self-serving and you know it. Funny how I've never heard anyone describe the bankruptcy process as "weaseling" and implying it's a crime (you use the phrase "guilty") before Trump ever ran. The law is the law. If you don't like it, lobby for a change. So no, someone using valid legal processes doesn't bother me.

If you have a proposal as to how the bankruptcy law should be reformed, feel free to share it. Maybe President Trump would lobby for it.

No, I didn't abandon my second point but you already have your mind made up. Furthermore, it's a fact that even before filing bankruptcy, Trump was known for stiffing or underpaying contractors and vendors at his casinos and other properties. I don't really have a problem with the bankruptcy law either but if Trump had any integrity, he would at least made an effort to make good on honoring his contractual commitments and paying what he owed. Instead he got a lot of services and goods for his casinos at for far less than he said he would pay or for free, basically on the backs of a lot of family-owned businesses that ended up suffering and ended up having to go bankrupt themselves. But did he suffer? No, he continued to enjoy his limousine rides, helicopters and private planes. If you think that's alright I can't change your opinion but at the end of the day, sometimes personal integrity and a clear conscience counts for me. It obviously means nothing to Mr. Trump.

I mean, you say you don't have a problem with the bankruptcy law, but from the rest of the post it is clear that you do. You just couch the attack under the guise of having "integrity."

My understanding is that he followed all the laws. You are saying that he should go above and beyond the laws, to demonstrate "integrity" and "pay what he owed." I am not aware of any other people who have been held to this standard. Maybe the law makes it too easy for a rich person to file for bankruptcy. But that is a problem with the law and not the individual who is simply using the process laid out. I doubt others have paid more than they had to.

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

caj11 wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

caj11 wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Scumbag wants top security clearance for his children. wtf

So someone says he wants to make America great and you call him a scumbag.

Some of us judge him by what he has done, like leaving a trail of stiffed contractors, bankruptcies, and molested women, rather than what he says he will do.

Regarding the stiffed contractors and bankruptcies, I've been to a few friends' BBQs in central and southern Jersey, and I met more than one family who went without a Christmas after the Taj Mahal filed bankruptcy, because their family run businesses had been sub-contractors or vendors for that property. Most got around 33 cents on the dollar of what they were owed if they were lucky. Many long-time family owned small contractor businesses were simply ruined after Trump used the bankruptcy process to weasel out of paying what he rightfully owed. Despite all those families being ruined and going to work for other contractors or any menial job they could get, do you think Trump ever stopped riding around in his limousines, yachts and helicopters after the Taj's three separate bankruptcies? I doubt it. His lifestyle was not affected.

It's not just this that matters though - Trump has zero elected experience. He is as qualified to run this country as Jesse Jackson was when he ran in 1984. If you're going to run for the most powerful elected office in the world, you should have *some* lower office experience first - you don't need to be a career politician like Bernie Sanders, but at least one lower level elected office would be nice.

Trump will demonstrate to you how instincts and judgment are far more important than experience in a President.

More importantly, all of Hillary's experience is bad. She's like a CEO who ran her former company into the ground. Think of the election as picking the CEO of a new company. While it's true to say that Hillary was the only candidate with CEO experience, she sucked, so it's not like her experience is much of a positive factor when you put it into proper context.

He's surrounded by the best people and that suffices.

Hillary Clinton did not stiff her suppliers and sub-contractors and weasel out of contractual obligations by filing bankruptcy. I suppose all those families in central and southern New Jersey whose businesses were ruined and went without a Christmas after getting stiffed by Trump doesn't matter to you. And while plenty of other developers and contractors are guilty of doing that, they didn't run for President.

Ok, so you've completely abandoned your second point? Good to know.

Regarding your first, it's self-serving and you know it. Funny how I've never heard anyone describe the bankruptcy process as "weaseling" and implying it's a crime (you use the phrase "guilty") before Trump ever ran. The law is the law. If you don't like it, lobby for a change. So no, someone using valid legal processes doesn't bother me.

If you have a proposal as to how the bankruptcy law should be reformed, feel free to share it. Maybe President Trump would lobby for it.

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

caj11 wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Scumbag wants top security clearance for his children. wtf

So someone says he wants to make America great and you call him a scumbag.

Some of us judge him by what he has done, like leaving a trail of stiffed contractors, bankruptcies, and molested women, rather than what he says he will do.

Regarding the stiffed contractors and bankruptcies, I've been to a few friends' BBQs in central and southern Jersey, and I met more than one family who went without a Christmas after the Taj Mahal filed bankruptcy, because their family run businesses had been sub-contractors or vendors for that property. Most got around 33 cents on the dollar of what they were owed if they were lucky. Many long-time family owned small contractor businesses were simply ruined after Trump used the bankruptcy process to weasel out of paying what he rightfully owed. Despite all those families being ruined and going to work for other contractors or any menial job they could get, do you think Trump ever stopped riding around in his limousines, yachts and helicopters after the Taj's three separate bankruptcies? I doubt it. His lifestyle was not affected.

It's not just this that matters though - Trump has zero elected experience. He is as qualified to run this country as Jesse Jackson was when he ran in 1984. If you're going to run for the most powerful elected office in the world, you should have *some* lower office experience first - you don't need to be a career politician like Bernie Sanders, but at least one lower level elected office would be nice.

Trump will demonstrate to you how instincts and judgment are far more important than experience in a President.

More importantly, all of Hillary's experience is bad. She's like a CEO who ran her former company into the ground. Think of the election as picking the CEO of a new company. While it's true to say that Hillary was the only candidate with CEO experience, she sucked, so it's not like her experience is much of a positive factor when you put it into proper context.

He's surrounded by the best people and that suffices.

brewster wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Scumbag wants top security clearance for his children. wtf

So someone says he wants to make America great and you call him a scumbag.

Some of us judge him by what he has done, like leaving a trail of stiffed contractors, bankruptcies, and molested women, rather than what he says he will do.

third_street_hats wrote:
Where do I find the found a wallet and didn't return it statistics?

Yvonne wrote:
Quote:

caj11 wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
In an open letter, State Senator, Brian Stack sent to his constituents, he said to vote No on question one, Keep Elections in May! Stack said moving it makes it confusing.

I would not be confused, nor do I consider Senator Stack someone I'd take my voting advice from. I make my own decisions and so should you.

Stack is looking after the interest of his constituents in his district, I consider him a good man. After all, Union City is much cleaner than JC so he must be doing something right.

Yvonne wrote:
In an open letter, State Senator, Brian Stack sent to his constituents, he said to vote No on question one, Keep Elections in May! Stack said moving it makes it confusing.

Leo168 wrote:
Also, sad as it is to say, there are many seniors who work the polls and count on the money from one day at an election to help them catch up on expenses. It is only $225 a for the day, but that money can make a big difference for some people. Especially seniors on a fixed income. Vote NO to move the election.

CatDog wrote:
My PSE&G bills are way too high and theoretically, since multiple companies can compete for your business on the supply side, there should be some better deals out there. However, it seems like every company I come across is either a scam. Either they try to lock you into contracts, or they're pyramid schemes, or they give you good rates for two months before jacking them up, or whatever.

So does anyone have good experiences with a third party suppliers that have good prices and aren't scams? Ideally something without a contract, as I'd like to back out if the costs don't drop.

Sutherland wrote:
Again, I disagree with you with regard to the expectation of street parking. It's expected that most constituents would use the roads for both driving and parking. Without that entitlement commerce would come to a grinding halt as would other commerce clause provisions. My taxes go to the maintenance of the streets that is expected I would use for both parking and driving. It's further expected that I would park my car in a reasonable proximity to the home I own and on which I pay my real estate taxes. Therefore, it's a reasonable expectation that I would be parking there. Furthermore, to control parking the City of Jersey City, limits non-residence from parking to two hours, demonstrating the City's preference for residence parking over non-resident parking. Quote:

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
[quote]

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

Annod wrote:
Not every business qualifies for 3.5% in the zone. They have to apply and they may not qualify.

I was just about to add the same! The UEZ designation is not a blanket designation that forces businesses to only charge 3.5% sales tax. Each individual business is free to apply to participate in the program. Of course, not doing so would likely mean some loss of business (especially if direct competitors do choose to participate) but some businesses do choose to skip participating in the program because of the extra paperwork.

fat-ass-bike wrote:
payday loans are nothing more then predatory lending with exorbitant interest rates that targets our most vulnerable and desperate ... its far worse then the way casinos target their clientele base because casinos only want your cash while payday loan operators, gamble that you'll be unable to payback your loan and be stuck with a high interest rate for a long time and in debt to them without paying back the capital.

they should be outlawed and banks need to 'step-up' and be regulated to manage small loans to the value of $1000 without offering or pushing customers on credit cards, as they too carry a high interest rate for low income and desperate clients in financial crisis.

iGreg wrote:
Quote:

jerseymom wrote:
Quote:

caj11 wrote:
Quote:

foshizigity00 wrote:
@caj11 - you aren't very smart.

Care to elaborate? It remains fact that a state grant, coming from our state tax dollars was used to paint this mural, and part of that included a stipend paid to somebody who used to vandalize the city with his stupid graffiti no one wants to see. A criminal was rewarded, with our tax dollars, to paint this mural, while there are plenty of artists in Jersey City who never committed any crimes who could have painted the mural and been paid something for it. No, I am not one of them, nor do I have any that are friends or family, I've just met a few in passing and I know they can always use the work.

Yup, agreed (with Caj11).

Shepard Fairy was arrested many times before becoming an acclaimed 'recognized artist' who now runs a multi million dollar clothing and print company.

Dis Obey

Holla @ Yo Boyz

foshizigity00 wrote:
@caj11 - you aren't very smart.

Hamparkvet wrote:
By the way, the children in Hamilton Park do more damage to the trees, bushes and grass than any 100 dogs did in 25 years.

dtjcview wrote:
Quote:

caj11 wrote:
...
There needs to be criminal charges filed IMMEDIATELY and the dog taken away.

...

Dog-on-dog damage is considered property damage. Criminal options are pretty limited.