JCishome wrote:
Here's a question/thought: I rode from Grove-33rd yesterday (not my usual route) and noted that very few people got off the train at Christopher, 9th, 14th or 23rd. Would it increase capacity to have "express" trains that skipped those stations and went direct to 33rd? This is a legit question, so there's no need to tell me what a dumbass I am.

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

HCResident wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Doesn't Fulop call himself a progressive?

Guess that's limited to passing meaningless gestures, like mandating that every city building have gender neutral bathrooms. Making substantive contributions towards his ostensible cause, like saving this school because it would tremendously benefit underprivileged youth (or even trying to drum up fundraising support), is apparently too much to ask.

And how do you propose the city government go about saving a private religious institution? I see your posts. Many seem to be of the right of center, market rules variety. Now you want the government involved?

SMH

It's about priorities. Mandating that all city buildings have gender neutral bathrooms is grandstanding, a complete waste of money, and accomplishes absolutely nothing.

That money would be much better spent trying to save this school, and to help the underprivileged youth make something of themselves and stay off the streets. And as I said, the least the guy could do is try and gin up support for fundraising.

It's the difference between caring about looking good vs. actually doing good.

Yvonne wrote:
St. Anthony High School had a national reputation for producing outstanding basketball players.

Frank_M wrote:
Quote:

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Quote:

Frank_M wrote:
Sleep?or a hassle-free morning commute.

Choose wisely

Or negotiate with your employer to come in later.

Hahaha. Cute.

Choose wisely

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
I thought they should have shown this when Obama was caught ramping up the NSA, spying on reporters, eavesdropping on foreign leaders like Germany's Merkel, surveilling Rooskies at Trump Tower, leaking sensitive information for political gain, that sort of thing. All those took place before last November as I recall.

When it comes to privacy rights, every President stands on the shoulders of previous Presidents.

I fully support criticizing these overreaches by Obama. But will you do the same when Trump follows suit? Based on your posting history, I doubt it. You support party over country.

Are you kidding? Most Republicans don't think President Trump IS Republican, lol. But please show me where you criticized Obama for his amping up the NSA and the like-I don't recall you getting wound up over this.

Monroe wrote:
I thought they should have shown this when Obama was caught ramping up the NSA, spying on reporters, eavesdropping on foreign leaders like Germany's Merkel, surveilling Rooskies at Trump Tower, leaking sensitive information for political gain, that sort of thing. All those took place before last November as I recall.

Frank_M wrote:
Sleep?or a hassle-free morning commute.

Choose wisely

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:

Frank_M wrote:
Sleep?or a hassle-free morning commute.

Choose wisely

+1

I'm been getting to work earlier and avoiding the crowds. 8:30 is impossible on PATH. Just don't do it.

Oddly enough, the return home commute isn't as bad.

val7101 wrote:
Quote:

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Quote:

val7101 wrote:
Forget the curfew law. Throw the parents in the can for child neglect. Why are a 13 and 15 year old out that late? Keeping track of teenagers is hard? Guess what, raising kids IS hard.

Yes, throw the kids in foster care, I'm sure that will do wonders for their development. -____-

Yes because it was obviously going so well.

val7101 wrote:
Forget the curfew law. Throw the parents in the can for child neglect. Why are a 13 and 15 year old out that late? Keeping track of teenagers is hard? Guess what, raising kids IS hard.

fat-ass-bike wrote:
I still believe that the root cause to crime that is motivated by money is a lack of blue collar, process factory work and manufacturing.

Look at the list of US corporation that do all their manufacturing in China and how many of them once were manufacturing in New Jersey and Jersey City.

http://www.jiesworld.com/international_corporations_in_china.htm

Trump, Christie and even Fulop need to pull their fingers out and look at ways to have more manufacturing, blue collar laboring jobs in our State and City

JC_Man wrote:
Quote:

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Quote:

JC_Man wrote:
As per King Steve "Gender diversity is welcomed here; please use the restroom that best fits your gender identity or expression."

So as a male, I can use the women's room any day that it "fits my expression". How grand.

Why aren't women up in arms about this?

Uh, no. You must have missed the part that said all bathrooms will be gender neutral.

Does that mean I have to cut it off?!! Oh No!!

JC_Man wrote:
As per King Steve "Gender diversity is welcomed here; please use the restroom that best fits your gender identity or expression."

So as a male, I can use the women's room any day that it "fits my expression". How grand.

Why aren't women up in arms about this?

Dolomiti wrote:
Quote:

stc4blues wrote:
I still don't understand what's going on with this $78M. De we have:

1. Doners' giving $78M to a non-profit entity, which then
2. loans it to a for-profit entity (against the value of the land?),
3. which must then repay the loan to the non-profit entity. Hence,
4. The City's 50/50 split of the net doesn't kick in until that loan is repaid.

Is that what's going on?

That's not my understanding.

1. LSC fundraises and gets $78m from donors
2. LSC will invite investors for another $55m worth
3. LSC takes out loans for the rest of the project
4. Nothing has to be repaid to the donors
5. The city starts getting paid for the land, after the project makes $78m in profits; they are paid 50% of subsequent profits.
6. Once the land is paid off, the city's share drops to 20%.

mndpacer04 wrote:
I am glad I moved from Grove Pointe to Paulus Hook when they added the bars downstairs. I knew the QOL would drop with that addition. The bar crawl is great for single folks/childless couples in the neighborhood. Not so much for everyone else.

Dolomiti wrote:
Quote:

iGreg wrote:
It was much better before they closed it off, seems like almost a 3rd of the storefronts are empty on that street now.

Wow. Exaggerate much? Vacancy is pretty low on that stretch of Newark Ave. There's also a number of new businesses, not all of which are restaurants.


Quote:

Anyone else remember when it was a servicable road that actually allowed traffic to pass down past the PATH entrance.

Yes, that was like.... 2 years ago

The Pedestrian Plaza is still, on the whole, a big win -- and is not, ultimately, causing this problem. If there was no plaza, we'd still have a bunch of drunk & disorderly people milling about, yelling at the top of their lungs while stumbling towards their cars.

mfadam wrote:
No question the original sin is the Restaurant Overlay. It wasn't well thought out and no one put much thought into the unintended consequences. Couple that with JC's inability to enforce laws on the book (think noise ordinances) and it is no surprise QOL is an issue around these establishments.

It's gonna get worse as the restaurants are going further from Pedestrian Plaza into areas that most would consider residential.

Every applicant claims to be a "quaint neighbor friendly" restaurant. Please. It's much easier to make fast money selling booze to the broboken drunks than serving gourmet fare to the foodies.

It's really sad to think that huge Hoboken style bars are the best JC could come up with to replace all the 99 cent stores. Blown opportunity in my book...

TonyTwoPoops wrote:
Quote:

JCman24 wrote:
Quote:

MDM wrote:
Between Costco, internet orders, and patronizing some local places (Young's for veggies and Mahoney's for beef) I hardly buy anything in ACME (formerly A&P) these days. Same for the StopnShop in the Heights.

I hope more people stop by just to comment on whether or not they shop at Acme

I seriously wonder what inspires people to respond to threads in this manner. "I have nothing relevant to say because I don't shop there so instead I'm just going to give a rundown on where I do grocery shop for no apparent reason"

K-Lo2 wrote:
Nor does cutting the Coast Guard and TSA budgets to build that stupid useless wall.

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
See that Saudi Arabia and it's practices pose a threat to the US

I'm glad to hear a conservative say that. I've seen too many Trump fans parrot his positions without using critical thinking skills.

(I know Hillary/Obama fans do the same. I don't like this either).

I'm a huge Trump supporter and I absolutely hate Saudi Arabia.

However, for the time being they are a necessary ally, unfortunately. Both because of their oil and because they will be funding the safe zones that refugees will go to, which is a more appropriate place for them than here anyway.

Using allies over there is fine.

I'm more concerned with defense of our own country. And you can't tell me we're keeping our country safe by allowing Saudi Arabians in the country after 9/11. There's no comparison between Iran and Saudi Arabia. It's a joke.

This is a silly point. Saudi Arabia will be added to the list when we don't need them anymore. Unfortunately, that probably won't be for a while.

But the perfect is not the enemy of the good.

You're missing the point. We don't need Saudis in our country period.

Yes, it's great to have a strategic ally in the Middle East. But not at the expense of keeping our border vulnerable to terrorist attacks. What happens over here is much more of a direct threat than what happens over there.

No, you are missing the point. The perfect is not the enemy of the good.

The list for the travel ban is just a good start. Of course it could be improved if other countries were added. But what we have now still is helpful.

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
See that Saudi Arabia and it's practices pose a threat to the US

I'm glad to hear a conservative say that. I've seen too many Trump fans parrot his positions without using critical thinking skills.

(I know Hillary/Obama fans do the same. I don't like this either).

I'm a huge Trump supporter and I absolutely hate Saudi Arabia.

However, for the time being they are a necessary ally, unfortunately. Both because of their oil and because they will be funding the safe zones that refugees will go to, which is a more appropriate place for them than here anyway.

Using allies over there is fine.

I'm more concerned with defense of our own country. And you can't tell me we're keeping our country safe by allowing Saudi Arabians in the country after 9/11. There's no comparison between Iran and Saudi Arabia. It's a joke.

This is a silly point. Saudi Arabia will be added to the list when we don't need them anymore. Unfortunately, that probably won't be for a while.

But the perfect is not the enemy of the good.

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
See that Saudi Arabia and it's practices pose a threat to the US

I'm glad to hear a conservative say that. I've seen too many Trump fans parrot his positions without using critical thinking skills.

(I know Hillary/Obama fans do the same. I don't like this either).

I'm a huge Trump supporter and I absolutely hate Saudi Arabia.

However, for the time being they are a necessary ally, unfortunately. Both because of their oil and because they will be funding the safe zones that refugees will go to, which is a more appropriate place for them than here anyway.

135jc wrote:
See that Saudi Arabia and it's practices pose a threat to the US

135jc wrote:
Quote:

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
There is plenty of oil everywhere. I don't buy that argument anymore.

I don't think it's necessarily oil, either.

But surely there's a reason why we support an authoritarian regime that sponsors Islamic terrorism. 79% of the 9/11 Bombers were from Saudi Arabia. Should we ban them? Nah

The fact that Iran is on the list and Saudi Arabia isn't is a complete joke.

Hopefully Trump will see it that way.