dr_nick_riviera wrote:
Quote:

JC_Man wrote:
Q: My 4th quarter property tax went up 20% anyone know why?

A: Because Biden was elected President.

Enjoy your new Arts Trust Fund tax as well, which I gleefully voted for (and I say that as a homeowner).

It's too bad Yvonne once again failed to mobilize her NIMBY army to stop it. What a lovely bitch slap to all the conservative morons on this forum, hahaha. Enjoy the next 4 years, snowflakes.

RichMauro wrote:
[quote]


Can you explain what you've said here? Makes no sense.

dr_nick_riviera wrote:

The president you and Yvonne fervently support uses that term quite frequently.

papadage wrote:
Dipshit conspiracies as always.

Why not keep talking about Arabs celebrating the WTCV going down, your other dopey pastime?

JPhurst wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

JPhurst wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
JC school taxes are incredibly low.

And they will go sky high.

Since JC taxpayers pay less than 20% of its own school costs it has a lot of head room to pay its own fair share.

Then let the state pay for our police, fire, and health infrastructure.

. And why should NJ taxpayers do that?

Because Jersey City and other cities generate most of the tax revenue for the state.

Yvonne wrote:
Heights Native, why do I bring up tax abatements? First, the school system do not discriminate against residents based on whether their building pays schools taxes. Secondly, tax abatements are a scam, what is told to the public is the amount of revenue that the tenants pay. What is hidden are the subsidies. As an example, a senior living in an one bedroom pays $2,200 a month in rent. Maybe that tenant only pays $300 a month based on their income, the rest comes from taxpayers. There are people paying rent in non-tax abated buildings paying similar rent and their landlord use that rent to pay school taxes. It is a scam.

Ralph_Abutts wrote:
Sorry, but $116 million is not a tiny amount nor a tiny percentage.

dr_nick_riviera wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Yes, I have and as you know this plan is in NYC. The NYC firefighters do not like this plan because it contributes to delays. http://www.newgeography.com/content/0 ... HWboh6a7pbg6_f1J3CczuHgro

But wait, I thought Yvonne refused to patronize downtown JC because it would require her to pay for parking, which she believes she is always entitled to get for free?

At least this means she?s probability conceded the war to preserve and build more parking lots. Most likely someone told her that only LGBT people use bike lanes and that?s why they?re now the new object of her ire.

HeightsNative wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
And Jersey city taxpayers are paying for this with a $2 million subsidy when the city already has sky high taxes.

Correction: jersey city residents *have one of the lowest property tax rates in the state.

Don?t confuse what happened in the reval for anything other people paying taxes based on the current market rate of their homes.

hero69 wrote:
And Jersey city taxpayers are paying for this with a $2 million subsidy when the city already has sky high taxes.

MDM wrote:
Quote:

JCFam wrote:
What makes a neighborhood great for families is typically a sense of community! Here are a few Jersey City neighborhoods that are particularly popular to raise a family in JC.

http://jcfamilies.com/the-best-neighb ... -a-family-in-jersey-city/

For my tenants, unless they can afford private school, they head for the suburbs when their kids hit kindergarten or 1st grade.

dr_nick_riviera wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
If the city would create municipal garages throughout this city, you would not see citizens turning on each other. When I record a neighborhood meeting the same issue comes up. The need for more parking.

Of course Yvonne with her sick parking fetish is defending illegal behavior. Rules and regulations apparently shouldn?t apply when it comes to almighty private parking.

135jc wrote:
No. From my perspective it's up to the city to do something. Not a nosey or jealous neighbor.

Bike_Lane wrote:
Quote:

sullyx wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:

You are the ass. It's none of their business

nope, you're the asshole here, it's entirely the business of neighbors that live on that block to not have an asshole like yourself move in and take on street parking away via an illegal front driveway, there's a process involving getting approval if you hadn't heard

upvote

tern wrote:
> Back to reality, of NJ?s 422 high schools, Snyder ranks 322, Dickinson 285, Ferris 345, and Lincoln 339.

And McNair is #1.

What does that tell you? Think about it

Robin.

dr_nick_riviera wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
At this point I'm not a huge Fulop fan, but your headline is fully slander/fake news. At no point in the linked article is it even alleged Fulop did not pay for the renovation. They merely state they don't know who paid what to whom when.

It figures that the NIMBY loser that wrote this article is one of Yvonne?s main allies and serves as a news source for every crank on the NA boards.

dr_nick_riviera wrote:
Quote:

HeightsNative wrote:
Dude, give the Yvonne obsession a f'n break already, it's pathetic and obnoxious.

Quote:

dr_nick_riviera wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

MikeyTBC wrote:
Y'all homophobes are a trip man.
"teach LGBT history" - what do you think this is going to consist of? It's going to be one page in a 400 page text book and a ten minute discussion about civil rights for all and the Stonewall Riots. Maybe one question on a test or quiz. None of your kids will "turn" gay if they weren't already.

If you are right, that is a perfectly fine thing and perhaps this whole headline is just a grab for points with the base. Perfectly reasonable people would (or, should) be OK with what you expect. I think some people's reactions are based on the lack of information as to what all of this means, or what to expect. With some, like the Yvonnes of the world, there is nothing that would be acceptable to them.

Most likely it will be taught in history classes, in the same vein as the civil rights era in the 60s. I bet Yvonne's parents were complaining about "the black agenda" back in the 60s, too.

LOL. It's fun to see her snowflake minions get so easily triggered.

dr_nick_riviera wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

MikeyTBC wrote:
Y'all homophobes are a trip man.
"teach LGBT history" - what do you think this is going to consist of? It's going to be one page in a 400 page text book and a ten minute discussion about civil rights for all and the Stonewall Riots. Maybe one question on a test or quiz. None of your kids will "turn" gay if they weren't already.

If you are right, that is a perfectly fine thing and perhaps this whole headline is just a grab for points with the base. Perfectly reasonable people would (or, should) be OK with what you expect. I think some people's reactions are based on the lack of information as to what all of this means, or what to expect. With some, like the Yvonnes of the world, there is nothing that would be acceptable to them.

Most likely it will be taught in history classes, in the same vein as the civil rights era in the 60s. I bet Yvonne's parents were complaining about "the black agenda" back in the 60s, too.

user1111 wrote:
I prefer Riis Park and Manhattan Beach. The shore is a bore. Have fun !

elsquid wrote:
All these solutions have problems.

The cars they help replace have FAR worse problems, like, you know, relentless violent death and dismemberment, lung cancer and asthma deaths from air pollution, deaths from heart disease and other diseases of sedentary lifestyles, accelerated climate change, massive public (taxpayer) subsidy for precious driving and parking space on public land ...

And they?re not even here yet. BUT BY ALL MEANS, LET?S BITTERLY COMPLAIN ABOUT THEM! That seems sound.

Your city is on fire. Stop obsessing about whether fire extinguishers could be marginally safer, and use them, immediately, to PUT OUT THE DAMN FIRE.

Yvonne wrote:
Of course, nicky is so obsessed with me that no matter what he writes, I am in his head. Get a life nicky, life is short. Also, clean up your language.

mscottc wrote:
Quote:

uptown wrote:
Metropolitan Diary of last Friday afternoon....

While browsing early afternoon in Word, I heard this exchange between a customer (he did make a purchase) and the manager (? perhaps, older guy):

Customer: It would be good if you had more titles -- not just liberal and left -- more of a range.

Manager: This is what we have. Gotta a problem ; tough! (he went from zero to 60 pretty quick)

Customer: I'm just saying. There are a lot of people in this town. The selection is pretty slim.

Manager: Well you can shop elsewhere you creep!

That's verbatim....and it continued a little bit. The customer just paid for his hard cover (I think the place is often too $) and left.

We should all think about the echo chambers we occupy -- well, I do -- and this bothered me alot. Being the only bookstore in town gives Word a certain confidence I guess but I'll think more about just using NYC I think.

Well, it is the right of the bookstore, or any store for that matter, to stock the product it desires. If the customer was not satisfied, shop somewhere else?

At least the manager didn't refuse to service the customer, say like a baker who refused to bake a cake for a gay wedding. Or a county court clerk who refused to issue a marriage licence to a gay couple. Nor did the manager refuse to sell a customer a product in stock, like some pharmacists who refuse to sell Plan B or other contraceptives even though it's already on the shelf.

Please tell me how Word is so bad.

brewster wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Add in ESL, lunch, IEP?s, and I?m sure the average illegal kids costs well over $25,000/per student per year. Let?s say two kids-are their parents paying $50,000 a year in taxes?

Hell no.

No one, citizen or not, who actually sends their kids to public schools pays taxes that come close to the education cost of their kids. We as a society decided education was a thing we needed to do with taxes from everyone, even those with no children.

hero69 wrote:
if the homeowner can no longer afford his/her home which is a sad situation, then the homeowner/s should sell and rent. or aybe buy someplace more affordable.