radryan03 wrote:
Bringing this topic back up... we were harassed at the same spot around 3PM on Sunday...

The clowns were launching water balloons from the center section of that housing project at us - across the street on Manila. We did a WTF when one splattered on a light pole above our heads... took a second to realize what was taking place and then three more followed within proximity of us...

Fortunately, a cop was on Manila... hailed him down and he pulled over... they AHs ran off.

To anyone who pulls the - this is minor, kids having fun, what?s the big deal, at least they're not robbing or dealing drugs - do me a favor - take a water balloon (unexpectedly) to the head from 100 ft away...

vindication15 wrote:
This discussion is very interesting. First off, no one should be harassed and no, it doesn't come with living in the city. City living does not equate to being harassed. "City" is generally an urban settlement with a large population and with that comes more pollution, more cars, more restaurants, more people, etc as compared to the suburbs or rural areas. Harassment is not associated with "city". That is like saying terrorism is associated with Muslim which is also blatantly biased and completely subjective.

As far as project housing, I think it is safe to say that although the idea might be noble, the implementation and "checks and balances" has been a colossal failure.

But to get right to the point, our schools in JC are failing our children (any viable measure of this proves my point - test scores, graduation rates, reading level, math level, etc.) so when these children grow up to be delinquent teens and delinquent young adults, are you really surprised?

Forget about your tax dollars funding public housing, how about your tax dollars funding these failing public schools - Dickinson, Snyder, Lincoln, Ferris? By any reasonable measure, they should all be closed down ASAP.

And yes, I'm aware that there are bright kids at these schools and hard working teachers but when overall, you have a failing institution, one or two kids or teachers does not justify failing the majority of kids. It's like a company with 1 or 2 hard workers and 99% failures. Would that company ever last more than a day? Can you imagine having your tax dollars pay for that company to stay open and produce a piss poor product? Unfortunately, the piss poor product that our JC public schools produce are the delinquents you see in the streets.

So far, no one running - Healy or Fulop - has really addressed what they will do to make our children more competitive.

ripple wrote:
We need to instill more respect for the commons, especially across ethnic/racial groups. People only treat the city like it's trash because they lack respect for their neighbors, and ultimately, themselves.

Tyler wrote:
Speaking of High Schools.

2 Dickinson High students stabbed outside school during lunch period: cops

Dolomiti wrote:
Quote:

RUinHamiltonPark wrote:
Article from February announcing demolition of some Hoboken projects

You might want to re-read the article.

They are increasing the number of public housing units from about 800 to 1000. They aren't doing it to chase "bad people" out of the neighborhood, they're doing it to replace aging buildings.

RUinHamiltonPark wrote:
Article from February announcing demolition of some Hoboken projects

JasonLLEE wrote:
Quote:

vindication15 wrote:
Quote:

AlexC wrote:
You can model any HS in Jersey City to McNair, but if you do not get the top ranked, motivated, dedicated high achievers, PLUS, parents who are committed to the program and are willing to get involved in their child's education and the institution, it's not going to work. It's a partnership between the teachers, the administration, the student and their parents.

I think in this particular incident, those kids parents are to blame. They should be the ones held accountable. How? I don't know.

but I still think some kind of non-lethal, physical beating should be an option


[quote]
JasonLLEE wrote:
In response I would like to point out

Dr. Ronald E. McNair Academic High School on
123 COLES ST. is ranked #50 for the best High School in the United States.

So to answer your question, why don't the mayor use this H.S as a model to set the standards for the rest of Jersey City H.S?

as a newly transplant for San Francisco, the board and SF mayor's used a similar standard model of having underachieving H.S. follow Lowell (nationally ranked H.S.)as an example. Currently, San Francisco now has over 3 H.S ranked in the top 500 US schools.
[quote]

McNair is not a normal high school as an entrance exam is required to attend. They also accept students from outside the city.

Yes, the other High Schools should be more like McNair, I agree with you 100%.

Why should all JC high schools not try and get "the top ranked, motivated, dedicated high achievers, PLUS, parents who are committed to the program and are willing to get involved in their child's education and the institution"

JC would be infinitely better if those children and those parents lived here.

It seems the more and more of "Those" parents are moving into Hamilton Park, Newport, Van Vrost etc... but i disagree with you.. if you may recall.. H.S. has a big impact on teenagers.. if the High School culture embraces education, high achievement, and integration to a higher standard of living (imagination, dedication, drive, goals, careers) then why not?

If you disagree then you underestimate the influence of H.S. culture it can make you better or it can make you worse. Back to the issue at hand growing up.. i saw a dramatic change in certain school systems in California where the "being white" for getting A's was accepted, education and athletics can be combined, H.S developing imagination working with firms around the area "Genentech" teaching new ideas and learning environment not familiar to the usual Math, Reading, History etc.. but actual hand on training and learning which accepted majority "minority" students.. they learned and embraced the culture of creativity, education and success.

I, for example, speak of first hand experience and not a "i know so and so did x" on this subject. I lost food stamp assistance a while ago when I came off of unemployment and my new income made me ineligible. I actually reported it, like a law-abiding citizen. I was also never eligible for cash assistance (welfare) because I still had a source of income.

What is more than likely the case, is that they were illegally not reporting income.

vindication15 wrote:
Quote:

AlexC wrote:
You can model any HS in Jersey City to McNair, but if you do not get the top ranked, motivated, dedicated high achievers, PLUS, parents who are committed to the program and are willing to get involved in their child's education and the institution, it's not going to work. It's a partnership between the teachers, the administration, the student and their parents.

I think in this particular incident, those kids parents are to blame. They should be the ones held accountable. How? I don't know.

but I still think some kind of non-lethal, physical beating should be an option


[quote]
JasonLLEE wrote:
In response I would like to point out

Dr. Ronald E. McNair Academic High School on
123 COLES ST. is ranked #50 for the best High School in the United States.

So to answer your question, why don't the mayor use this H.S as a model to set the standards for the rest of Jersey City H.S?

as a newly transplant for San Francisco, the board and SF mayor's used a similar standard model of having underachieving H.S. follow Lowell (nationally ranked H.S.)as an example. Currently, San Francisco now has over 3 H.S ranked in the top 500 US schools.
[quote]

McNair is not a normal high school as an entrance exam is required to attend. They also accept students from outside the city.

Yes, the other High Schools should be more like McNair, I agree with you 100%.

Why should all JC high schools not try and get "the top ranked, motivated, dedicated high achievers, PLUS, parents who are committed to the program and are willing to get involved in their child's education and the institution"

JC would be infinitely better if those children and those parents lived here.

I don't think it is unreasonable to take people off of public assistance when their earned assets puts them over a certain income level.

corybraiterman wrote:
Quote:

JerseyCityNJ said that the woman receiving SUBSIDIZED HOUSING PAID BY MY TAX DOLLARS can simply afford a benz WITHOUT BREAKING ANY RULES.

A) exception to the rule
B) anecdotal evidence that might not even be true
C) scamming said assistance doesn't mean assistance is bad
D) all of the above

Quote:

Forget about their income. Imagine a truly needy, genuinely poor person. Let's also stipulate that it is our obligation to provide that person with shelter.

Can someone explain to me why is it our obligation to provide said shelter in the most expensive neighborhood?

For starters, Manila ave wasn't always the most expensive neighborhood. In fact, it still isn't. Perhaps some time in the future it will be, but perhaps the projects will cause all of you crybabies to leave and it will degenerate into a barren neighborhood. Who knows. In fact, much of the area around Hamilton Park, Newport and Harsimus Cove were among the very poorest flophouses in the city, where low-wage warehouse workers lived close to their jobs.

Thusly, there's no reason to suddenly move where people live at merely because they are being given assistance to. There's no line of demarcation on the poverty scale that says "oh, your neighbors now make X. Time for you to leave." The buildings are built, the families live there and none of you whiners will ever get to do anything about it.

JerseyCityNJ said that the woman receiving SUBSIDIZED HOUSING PAID BY MY TAX DOLLARS can simply afford a benz WITHOUT BREAKING ANY RULES.

Forget about their income. Imagine a truly needy, genuinely poor person. Let's also stipulate that it is our obligation to provide that person with shelter.

Can someone explain to me why is it our obligation to provide said shelter in the most expensive neighborhood?

vindication15 wrote:
Quote:

JerseyCityNj wrote:
she might simply be able to afford it and isn't breaking any rules.

I want to point this out because some people might not have noticed it but out of all the comments I have EVER read on this forum, this one infuriates me the most.

JerseyCityNJ said that the woman receiving SUBSIDIZED HOUSING PAID BY MY TAX DOLLARS can simply afford a benz WITHOUT BREAKING ANY RULES. Notice how he rules out inheritance, gifts, etc.

I think any sane rational person would argue that the mere fact that she can AFFORD to buy a benz means she should not be getting ANY TAXPAYER HELP.

Why am I subsidizing her when I don't even have a benz?!?! I hope jerseycityNJ doesn't mean this because it would literally be the single most absurd thing ever said on this forum.

Schooling has nothing to do with what mannerisms you pick up, what behaviors you model, what role models you have, how you dress, how you act!?

vindication15 wrote:
Quote:

JCbiscuit wrote:
Quote:

vindication15 wrote:
Quote:

JCbiscuit wrote:
Quote:

vindication15 wrote:
Quote:

Frank_M wrote:
Top ranked, motivated, and dedicated?? Most adults would struggle to fit that description, and none of it still has anything to do with being courteous to strangers.

Really??! Schooling has nothing to do with what mannerisms you pick up, what behaviors you model, what role models you have, how you dress, how you act!?

Did YOU go to one of the schools that I mentioned? That would explain a lot.

I went to a top-ranked high school. didn't stop my classmates from trashing my house at a party senior year.

We can argue over anecdotal evidence or use actual stats. I don't think you would argue that Snyder, Lincoln, Ferris, or Dickinson, on average, produces students who are more prepared for society - in terms of academic achievement. Just look at college admission rates, test scores, reading levels, etc.

So I'm not sure what point you are making by bringing up that one specific situation...

I thought we were just examining the courtesy angle.

Are you saying that kids from the schools I mentioned, on average, are more courteous than from McNair?

JCbiscuit wrote:
Quote:

vindication15 wrote:
Quote:

JCbiscuit wrote:
Quote:

vindication15 wrote:
Quote:

Frank_M wrote:
Top ranked, motivated, and dedicated?? Most adults would struggle to fit that description, and none of it still has anything to do with being courteous to strangers.

Really??! Schooling has nothing to do with what mannerisms you pick up, what behaviors you model, what role models you have, how you dress, how you act!?

Did YOU go to one of the schools that I mentioned? That would explain a lot.

I went to a top-ranked high school. didn't stop my classmates from trashing my house at a party senior year.

We can argue over anecdotal evidence or use actual stats. I don't think you would argue that Snyder, Lincoln, Ferris, or Dickinson, on average, produces students who are more prepared for society - in terms of academic achievement. Just look at college admission rates, test scores, reading levels, etc.

So I'm not sure what point you are making by bringing up that one specific situation...

I thought we were just examining the courtesy angle.

vindication15 wrote:
Quote:

JCbiscuit wrote:
Quote:

vindication15 wrote:
Quote:

Frank_M wrote:
Top ranked, motivated, and dedicated?? Most adults would struggle to fit that description, and none of it still has anything to do with being courteous to strangers.

Really??! Schooling has nothing to do with what mannerisms you pick up, what behaviors you model, what role models you have, how you dress, how you act!?

Did YOU go to one of the schools that I mentioned? That would explain a lot.

I went to a top-ranked high school. didn't stop my classmates from trashing my house at a party senior year.

We can argue over anecdotal evidence or use actual stats. I don't think you would argue that Snyder, Lincoln, Ferris, or Dickinson, on average, produces students who are more prepared for society - in terms of academic achievement. Just look at college admission rates, test scores, reading levels, etc.

So I'm not sure what point you are making by bringing up that one specific situation...

JCbiscuit wrote:
Quote:

vindication15 wrote:
Quote:

Frank_M wrote:
Top ranked, motivated, and dedicated?? Most adults would struggle to fit that description, and none of it still has anything to do with being courteous to strangers.

Really??! Schooling has nothing to do with what mannerisms you pick up, what behaviors you model, what role models you have, how you dress, how you act!?

Did YOU go to one of the schools that I mentioned? That would explain a lot.

I went to a top-ranked high school. didn't stop my classmates from trashing my house at a party senior year.

vindication15 wrote:
Quote:

Frank_M wrote:
Top ranked, motivated, and dedicated?? Most adults would struggle to fit that description, and none of it still has anything to do with being courteous to strangers.

Really??! Schooling has nothing to do with what mannerisms you pick up, what behaviors you model, what role models you have, how you dress, how you act!?

Did YOU go to one of the schools that I mentioned? That would explain a lot.

JerseyCityNj wrote:
she might simply be able to afford it and isn't breaking any rules.

Frank_M wrote:
Top ranked, motivated, and dedicated?? Most adults would struggle to fit that description, and none of it still has anything to do with being courteous to strangers.