RichMauro wrote:
Years ago statues of the Virgin Mary were made with Her crushing a serpent at Her feet. Could be some misguided symbolism at work at Holy Rosary.

Here's a link to the image:

https://bradbeaman.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/img_0013.jpg

bodhipooh wrote:
Politicians should look at San Francisco's experiment with the $15 minimum wage. One of its many unintended consequences was forcing a lot of "mom and pop" shops into closing down, and for low skilled workers to see their hours cut back.

There have been many studies done, and here is a Forbes write up on the matter:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/adammills ... -wages-impact-employment/

These results don’t necessarily mean minimum wage increases are bad policy. They do, however, support the notion that higher minimum wages have a cost, namely fewer employment opportunities for lower-skill workers. It’s important that we recognize this cost in any discussion about minimum wage policy.

TheBigGuy wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
This is really a slick move to increase tax collected by the state. Hopefully it wont put too many places out of business or cause too many to decrease staff.

Businesses suffering the most will be McDonalds franchieses and other shitty employers.

It's not going to chase anyone out, but it may lead to price increases for consumers that consume shitty, cheap products.

Tax collection on people making minimum wage isnt going to make a dent in the budget.

Curious what you mean by "McDonalds franchises and other shitty employers". Is there something wrong with those types of jobs... or the businesses themselves?

jerseymom wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
This is really a slick move to increase tax collected by the state. Hopefully it wont put too many places out of business or cause too many to decrease staff.

You also have to consider the unintended consequences to the individual. If a minimum wage worker who supplements their income with state assistance has their income "bumped up" how does that impact their benefits? Will there be a group of workers who somehow find that their net gain doesn't adequately cover the assistance they used to receive - or will the increase deem them partially or completely ineligible? Is that one of the goals of the Fight for Fifteen?

135jc wrote:
This is really a slick move to increase tax collected by the state. Hopefully it wont put too many places out of business or cause too many to decrease staff.

JCBORN wrote:
I didn't realize the VNA has that kind of power. Does that mean the developers have to put this project on hold? I was hoping to see this work get started. That building is currently an eye sore.

iGreg wrote:
Shockingly sweetheart deal again from the redevelopment agency. This would have drawn double on the open market.


Quote:

The five-parcel lot, which sits on Newark Avenue and Cottage Avenue in
Journal Square and had been previously transferred to the JCRA, will be purchased by Canbis LLC, for
$8.7 million.

hero69 wrote:
what's the deal with 359 5th street? i passed that monstrosity the other day. it takes up 100% of the lot and towers over neighboring houses. how was that every approved?

hero69 wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

Sandra Cunningham wrote:
According to the new school funding formula, Jersey City is dramatically overfunded, but when you look around at our public schools that doesn’t seem to be the case. Our students are being provided with a high quality education

Untrue. Our unionized employees are being better paid than 98% of their NJ peers, but our students are being shortchanged. The district is now being run by and for it's employees. I dare anyone to try and read the "user friendly budget" and figure out where the money goes. I found terms used there that Google couldn't even define!

it is so easy/convenient to blame teachers for poor jc public school system, and i don't doubt that there are many lousy teachers out there, but i don't think people focus enough attention on lousy parents who raise lousy students/children.

JSleeze wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:

The ones suffering in all this is the students and the shitty education they receive.

Case in point.

Bike_Lane wrote:
Quote:

JCBORN wrote:
what is the status of opening another path stop in the marion section? Is this still being considered?

The Port Authority does not want to build a station in Marion. City forced the Port Authority to study it as part of the legal settlement over back taxes. Study is supposed to be done sometime this year. I'd be shocked if it said anything other than "Marion station is not feasible in the near term due to (x, y, z reasons), so no further action will be taken."

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
Another week and another legal defeat for Jersey City. Next Mayoral election, I'm voting for the candidate that won't continue pissing away valuable tax dollars on legal fees fighting lost causes.

This is sad news. I do believe the mayor's heart and intentions are in the right place, but there has to be a better way to go about these things. It seems like JC has been on the losing end of too many recent court cases.

Take politics out of the process and do what is best for residents. It seems from the details of the case that the entire argument of the city was "well, even though it was a deposit towards future charges once you opened, we already spent the money, we don't want to give it back, nor are we able to do so."

Chris_NJ wrote:
Is this property cursed? Will anything ever happen there? I remember when the previous structures were finally demolished in like 2005 thinking that something would finally be built.

brewster wrote:
Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
The same research entity ("Wealth-X" -- who?) also indicated that NYC alone had nearly 1 million millionaires.

Yes, being a millionaire is not nearly as impressive as it once was. All it takes is having bought a nice house or apartment 20 or 30 years ago. Remember laughing at Dr Evil demanding a million dollars ransom? And that was quite some time ago.

Monroe wrote:
The top 1% of NJ taxpayers pay 43% of NJ income taxes.

bodhipooh wrote:
Not at all surprising. They better have good record-keeping, though! NYC (and NYS) are notoriously aggressive in pursuing millionaires who meet (or, exceed) the 183-days threshold that triggers residency. If memory serves me right, some CT billionaire ended up getting dinged (but later prevailed in appeal) when his private jet landed in LGA late at night on a Sunday, instead of past midnight on a Sunday, pushing him over the limit.

That one day difference could have resulted in him having to pay several millions more in taxes to NYC/NYS. It is no wonder so many ultra wealthy people are fleeing the area, especially now.

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
They're right though. This is a city issue and they are skirting on their responsibility.

Just because something might be right, it doesn’t make it correct.

The sole purpose of NJ Transit is to provide transportation solutions to NJ residents. They can’t do this if the infrastructure to do so is buried in snow. Instead of throwing their hands up in the air and exclaiming “... nor does NJ TRANSIT shovel snow at bus stops. Keep the phone number of the local municipality handy in order to request a bus stop to be shoveled.” they could be proactive about the situation and, as part of the job of route supervisors that do spot checks along bus routes, those same clipboard toting supervisors could call the appropriate city or county agency that can help clear or shovel a particular stop. Heck, drivers themselves could make a notation of inaccesible stops and turn that in after completing their runs for someone to call theight agency.

brewster wrote:
Quote:

T-Bird wrote:
to think "fitness freaks" are the only audience for a pedestrian/bike bridge misses the mark and to me is another symptom of the chronic obesity that plagues our country. Walking a mile and a half several times a week is the bare minimum of activity an adult should be getting.

I'll just note that there are plenty of people for which a greater than 10 minute walk to the subway or PATH takes a neighborhood out of consideration for them.

On_The_3rd wrote:
If the dress code for The Ashford is anything like Surf City, it's more sexist than racist. 90% of the clothing items they describe are typically worn by men. There's no mention of skirts too short, heels too high, or clothing too revealing. They are trying to keep certain kinds of men out, but have no objection to letting any kind of woman in. If you're comfortable supporting businesses with these kinds of bro-douche policies that aim to keep male attendance low and female attendance high, then have at it.

yesandno wrote:
I came upon this article about the Hoboken station from 2005...sounds like at the time they were going full speed ahead with plans at the time to fancy up the station with stores and whatnot. There really is a lot of huge space there that's not being used as far as I know. I wonder what happened?

https://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/21/rea ... -of-hoboken-terminal.html

brewster wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
maybe a cable car across the hudson could be made to make sense

http://www.bbc.com/future/gallery/201 ... se-of-the-urban-cable-car

That was very interesting. I guess it's viability depends on the numbers, but it still faces the "eyesore" hurdle and land use issues. I'm impressed that "One line in the Bolivian capital La Paz carries up to 65,000 people every 24 hours". That would be about half the capacity of the WTC PATH line, nothing to sneeze at, and a Hudson crossing would probably be a tourist draw on the order of the London Eye. What would be fascinating would be to have it multi-station, like Lincoln Park to McGinley Sq to Exchange Place to BPC.

Something is perplexing me about the numbers here https://www.panynj.gov/path/pdf/2017-P ... thly-Ridership-Report.pdf. It appears only 80% of the people who arrive in Manhattan by PATH leave by PATH. The ridership is quite asymmetric. What can account for this? Fare evasion in on the NJ side? It seems unlikely that 20% of riders who arrive by PATH would exit by NJT bus or train.

terrencemcd wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
One last thought - did the city give advance warning to the developer that they were failing to meet the conditions of the tax abatement? Was the developer given an opportunity for due process or an opportunity to correct deficiencies with the tax abatement while the building was under construction.

The tax abatement agreement says if the city warns of default, the developer has 30 days to fix the problem. There is the opportunity for a default.

The city issued the default on Oct. 23. 30 days later was Nov. 22.

The developer's lawyer last night claimed they didn't know until Dec. 17 about the potential revocation of the abatement, so he claims the 30-day period is still happening.

Toonces wrote:
If walking is really an option people are seriously suggesting, how about using the upper portion of the Holland Tunnel? Now, I don't know what sort of infrastucture is in there, but the tunnel itself is round - yet when you're driving, the visible "ceiling" of the tunnel is apparently 8-10 feet below the top of the circle (demonstrated, in part, by this picture taken during construction). Seems to me there's plenty of room above the roadway for a pedestrian/bike path.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/67827566@N00/11639849305