Here are the ones listed on Academy's website.

Garden State News - 366 Central Ave - 201-659-5403
Grove News - 119 Newark Ave - 201-432-0423
Binny's Food Market - 310 Newark Ave - 201-798-8842
M & R News - 667 Newark Ave - 201-459-9369
Kenny's Market - 3563 Kennedy Blvd - 201-798-3131
City Grocery - 3418 Kennedy Blvd - 201-656-6020
J&M Grocery - 3244 Kennedy Blvd. - 201-656-7004
Happy Kid Stationary - 757 Bergen Ave - 201-432-6406
Bergen Bread & Butter - 529 Bergen Ave - 201-435-5071
National News - 3000 Kennedy Blvd - 201-653-1818
National News II - 2801 Kennedy Blvd - 201-656-7985
Ferrara Drugs - 2533 Kennedy Blvd - 201-434-0888
Gary's Sweet Shop - 444 Westside Ave - 201-433-0301
Corner Coffee - 129 Sterling Ave - 201-433-7311
Peppy's Deli - 1689 Kennedy Blvd - 201-433-2312
Global (McCorys) - 2 Garfield Ave - 201-433-7877

The timetable is here: http://www.academybus.com/Upload/PDFs/route_34.pdf

...But who knows if that is up to date...

Quote:

Is there and monetary incentive to take the train? I.e. do they give you like $20 match-bet or $20 cash when you get down there? My guess is that there's probably nothing given that it's such a nice way to travel than the bus...

In response to the OP's question - Other options are Port Authority using Academy bus tours or greyhound. Here are all their schedules: http://www.academybus.com/casinos_PDF_shedules.asp

You can also drive to the Cheesequake rest area on the GS parkway, park your car there, and take the bus the rest of the way. The Academy schedule is great b/c they literally run all the time, leaving every half hour/hour from the casinos. The most active route is obviously to Manhattan, but it looks like they have service to places in hudson county as well...

There's also the super-low-budget way to go, the China Town Bus - which used to be free ($20 for ticket, and then you get a $20 coupon, + Free noodle lunch, etc). The schedule getting back kinda sucks though.

Academy has always been my preferred way, you always end up with some funny bus stories. A very interesting cross section of people ride the bus to & from AC.

Saw this come up on Dow Jones News Wires:

Jersey City Condos Offered 'Regardless Of Price'


By Dawn Wotapka
Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES

NEW YORK (Dow Jones)--Florida-style desperation to move condo inventory is
headed for a neighbor Big Apple.

Metrovest Equities, developer of The Beacon in Jersey City, plans to auction
25 one- and two-bedroom luxury units June 27 at a nearby hotel. A dozen units
are being offered "regardless of price" - an attention-grabbing measure
designed to draw traffic. Suggested opening bids range from $150,000 to
$250,000; they were originally priced from $380,000 to $700,000.

The condo auction - aggressive for this region, but common in the Sunshine
state, which is battling a multi-year inventory glut - is designed to close out
sales in the first phase of the project, 315 units in two buildings, as well as
accelerate sales of the second phase, 25 live/work condos in a third building,
the developer says. The sale is also another indicator that the New York area,
which long seemed buffered from the nation's housing crash, is weakening as job
losses and foreclosures mount.

The Beacon project - a $350 million-plus transformation of the 10-building
Jersey City Medical Center - opened for sales at the height of the housing
frenzy in late 2005. Buyers rushed to sign contracts - 40 a month, at one point
- for the development replete with floor-to-ceiling marble, a billiard room
with $1 million of sculpted artwork, two theaters, a hot tub and an 8,000-foot
sundeck with a bar and barbecue grills.

But, by the time it was delivered in 2007, some buyers changed their minds or
couldn't secure financing, says George Filopoulos, Metrovest Equities'
president.

While the original phase, a former office building and hospital connected by
a lobby, was 90% presold, "when the market fell down the tubes, we lost about
50 original contracts," he says. It is now 77.5% sold and occupied.

The timing of the initial wave of condos was far from ideal, but Filopoulos
isn't giving up on restoring the art-deco campus built between 1931 and 1943.
Billed as the largest historical residential restoration project in New
Jersey's history, it will ultimately comprise 1,200 residences in 10 buildings
and 80,000 square feet of retail space.

Completion of five phases - originally set for 2010 - is now more likely
between 2012 and 2014.

"The work is very intense, number one," Filopoulos says. "Number two, the
market conditions changed significantly from when we first started."


-By Dawn Wotapka, Dow Jones Newswires; 201-938-5248;
dawn.wotapka@dowjones.com

Quote:

Wow, that's random. I too finally got around to visiting that place yesterday (got off work early and went in the early afternoon) and it was fantastic. Had the Steak Gorditas, Chorizo Sopes, Chips & Salsa, and washed it all down with some Mandarin Jarritos! Everything was great, spent less than $20,and me and the wife left very happy.

+1 - great recommendation - I wasn't going to post a review for fear of bumping this thread back up, but since regulator already did....

OK: I'll play devil's advocate... It's all relative. If you don't think Gold is a good hedge against inflation, look at the terms that were doled out when FDR made it illegal to hold physical gold: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102 Or: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_Reserve_Act Figuring out the compound return from that point in history is relatively straightforward: Number of years = 76 Present Value (1933): $20.67/oz Future Value (2009): $950.00/oz ...Compound Annual Growth rate: 5.16% To put that return in context: Using the Dow as a benchmark if you had bought the Dow Jones Industrial Average on 5/1/1933 the value of the index was 77.79 and if you held onto that for 76yrs and sold today at 8500, that would give you a compound annual growth rate of 6.4%. (but this ignores dividends, so this return is clearly understated, call it about 9%?) On a side note, just looking at pure inflation, $1,000 in 1933 would be worth $16,335 in today's dollars (implying about 3.74% inflation)... Anyhow taking a step back, there is a pretty strong disagreement among economist as to whether we are entering a period of deflation or inflation. The housing bubble aftermath & destruction in household wealth (from the declining stock market) is incredibly deflationary -- i.e. people have a lot less wealth to spend on TVs, vacations, luxury condos, etc. In addition, less employment mean lower wages. (there is also less production, so falling prices are somewhat checked by that). However, layer in to that the massive amounts of household debts that need to be unwound and you can see that a lot of money will get diverted from consumption to debt reduction... On the other hand (cue your economist jokes here), the government has been pumping money into the system via stimulus & bailouts and has dropped short term rates to (effectively) zero. They've also artificially lowered mortgage rates much lower than what a true market level would be. Uncle Sam has also been buying its own debt (just think about that one for a minute). And there are a host of other issues that I won't get into right now. All of those items argue for inflation at some point down the road. To me, both of these arguments can coexist: We get deflation for a time during the slowdown and then inflation comes roaring back at some point in the future. So do I think gold is good to have? Absolutely, even at these prices! But if i wanted to hedge myself in case of Armageddon, i'd rather have rice, drinking water, a shotgun, and a farm in the midwest, but that's just me! Helpful links: http://www.djindexes.com/DJIA110/learning-center/ http://www.wolframalpha.com <---This site is *awesome* and it only just went live 2 weeks ago...If you've never heard of it (and it's brand new, so chances are you haven't) check out this introductory video, some very cool stuff: http://www93.wolframalpha.com/screenc ... roducingwolframalpha.html Another very cool scary site i happened across is this one: http://www.usdebtclock.org/ holy sh*t!

Anyone see this ad in the Saturday NY Times - it's on the inside front cover (page 2) of the Real Estate Section:

Click image for larger size...

Quote:

Sorry this is getting a bit off-topic, but...
Building another high rise apartment building doesn't seem like a very smart idea to me...

Lets see, AquaBlu, 77 Greene, 50 Columbus (does that still count or is that too old?), those rental buildings in Liberty Harbor, and god knows how many other apartment buildings coming online coupled with an economy that's still on the ropes... I gotta say, I'm looking forward to finding a new apartment when my lease ends in the early fall.

Quote:

Isn't that what real estate developers are? [ba dum ping] I'll be here all week, don't forget to tip your waitress!

On a side note, if you go to fields website and click on their "asset management" / "Investment opportunities" - you get a blank/non-working link: http://www.fieldscapital.com/ Seems like a sure-fire way to bring in investors.

Here's what Fields has to say about it - Good News, it was completed in August:

So this has been bugging me for a while, and I just thought I'd vent here. WTF is going on across the street from 149 Essex St?

I took some photos of the work they were doing here back in February of 2008. Here are some of the highlights (click on the pics for larger images):

Pumping something out of the ground:


Into these:


...and Financing brought to you by...:



So that was Feb 2008 - a year an a half ago. Well, i suppose a lot has happened since then, lets check in on our favorite "development", shall we? These were taken a few days ago:



So... they've dug a hole in the ground (and believe me, that's been there for about 6mo at least).

Another angle:


Brought to you by:


And...



As much as I love piles of rubble, holes in the ground, barbed wire fences (which are falling down in certain spots), etc, at some point isn't enough, enough? If you want to build more condos and/or rentals, go on and do it. If you ran out of money and the bank took the keys, shouldn't the bank do something like clean up this mess? Shouldn't the city demand that you not demolish & excavate a piece of land and then leave it sitting that way for months and months?

What I love about this place is that 3 different entities have signs up advertising their "brand" around this hole in the ground: Fields Development Corp, CH Kaufman Mortgage Company, and none other than the Healy Machine! CH Kaufman (i think) has taken their's down, but the others are definitely still there. Are they trying to take credit for something here? The funniest one is the Healy sign which was placed there probably in the last month or so. It's a shame the sign didn't say: "Progress you can see!" (Who was the genius who put this sign here thinking it enhances Healy's image?)

Finally, from the perspective of residents at 149 Essex (full disclosure, i do NOT live in 149 Essex), aren't they sick of looking out their windows and seeing this mess?

I'm just curious what others think about this...

CommanderKeen, your avatar is giving me a headache... (on the plus side, "Commander Keen" was a sweet video game back in the day).

Quote:

I guess you missed the point. I don't ask for weird sh!t on my taco, I don't complain or try to customize my order and yeah, the food's fine. I just don't need the attitude - period.

Take my order, take my money, give me my food and don't be a sh!thead - is that too much to ask? I guess they just have a slightly different take on things - c'est la vie.

Like I said in another post, everyone wins: I keep my money, they keep their tacos, and you my friend have one less person in line to contend with...

Quote:

Sorry Abe, but I wouldn't call my comments "taking offense" at their smugness. They're entitled to behave any way they like, I was merely commenting that their schtick is getting old to me (and it would appear others as well).

AlanWright hit the nail on the head with his response. But something tells me they aren't running that shop to maximize profits. Like I said, live and let live, they can do whatever they want.

I'll let Abe and others worship at the altar of Tacqueria, the rest of us will spend money at places where our business is appreciated - I can tell from his responses (and i'm guessing from Tacqueria itself) that our business won't be missed! Everyone wins...


And on a side note: amusing != hilarious.

Quote:

Hmm...Yeah, that whole section on their menu is not only not funny, but pretentious and obnoxious. It's their establishment, so good for them if they want to have it on there, but if "funny" is what they were trying to do, they should stick to making tacos. I'm not sure how you got "hilarious" out of that, perhaps your definition of humor is a bit different than mine.

As for the food versus attitude debate, whatever. I've made my peace with them being the way they are. Oh wow, they have bad reviews posted on their walls - that's so ironic & anti-establishment. Oh wow, they treat me like a dick when i order a taco - that's so edgy! Who knew i was in the presence of such uber-cool people?! That they even deign to serve us mere mortals I am forever in their gratitude...

Live and let live - I guess it's good to be the only game in [down]town.

PS: Publius - how did they "ban" you - did you sign your real name to a post & they compared that to your credit card? Did you put your picture in your post? I don't get how an anonymous post from a message board could get someone "banned"...

Quote:

How can we take a review like this serious when the reviewer joined 2 weeks ago, name is "LibTowers" and has all of 1 post?

Be honest, do you work at Green Cow or Downtown Pharmacy?

Give 'em a break, they've been open, what, two weeks total?

Quote:

Interesting post-script to this story, I was browsing rentals today and stumbled across this exact unit: Asking rent was $2500/mo.... I think my original post on this was back in January 2009, so it's been sitting empty for 3 months. Hopefully whoever owns this place (a bank maybe?) figures out a way to make it work with the maintenance and taxes.

Edit: Actually this place is still available to buy - $459k (unless there are two different 1700sq ft places available in the same building).

It's not just public cans, they sometimes will not even pick up our recycling, picking and choosing what gets taken. On trash night, they'll empty our trash and throw our cans all over the place. I'll find one can on its side in front of someone's car and the other thrown in my neighbor's front yard, and some people's trash bags not picked up at all.

Thx for posting the number, now i'll know who to complain to.

I have a question, what's up with all the "Net-Effective Rent" places that I keep seeing on craigslist?

Here is a typical example: If you sign a 13 month lease, the company will give you the 13th for "free" - so even though the check you write every month is for $2500/mo, your net effective rent $2307...

I assume this just a way for big rental companies to not have to "lower" their rents and that way if the market recovers they can raise your rent based on the $2500/mo number instead of the $2307 you've really been paying...

Has anyone had any luck in saying: No, i won't sign your one month free lease, but i'd be happy to sign a one year lease at $2300/mo? Seems like doing it the other way, is just a way for them to distort where the true market level for an apartment is.

Quote:

I get his emails... I'm assuming that I got put on his distribution list b/c it got passed along from the Obama email database. Healy & Booker were (relatively) early supporter of Obama, so I'm sure they got hooked up with Obama's email list for their respective areas (which i'm sure was much more comprehensive than their own list...)

That's just my theory...

Quote:

Yes. And a view of the statue of liberty -- Does yours?

Quote:

I live in Paulus Hook and have virtually the same specifications and price that you listed - How anyone would pay that in the heights is beyond me, but to each his own...

I was going to ask "whatever happened to this place" but I got my answer:

http://www.libertyrealestate.com/publ ... ?listing.listingID=791706

New offering price is $3.95mm
Property Tax: $17,529
Home Insurance: $6000
Down Payment: 30% (a cool $1.2 million)

Still, the pics are nice:

You might want to ask JimmyB for his Monthly sales report. Email him at JimmyBenito@gmail.com

I think the last report that he publicly posted on this website was July 2008. ---> Look at post #62 on that thread.

I think that report is just a monthly version of the "State of the Downtown Real Estate Market" that used to get published quarterly. That might be your best bet to get it pretty quickly.

That, and it doesn't support JC (unless I did something wrong).

Click for Larger View:

Quote:

Some fine points you've made - I guess I failed to make a true distinction in what i was talking about. If you have a cash flowing property that is strictly an investment with relatively stable tenants (or at least a property you can keep rented the majority of the time) I think that over time it's a good way to grow your wealth assuming you have the liquidity to manage those periods when your building may not be 100% leased or unexpected expenses come up.

I guess I should have titled the thread "The problem with the JC *condo* market" because painting all real estate with the same brush is just silly on my part when there's a fairly large difference between a multi-family/commercial property and a condo.

I guess I'm just grasping at what the right model for the affordability of these places is. There's its relationship to incomes in the neighborhood, there's the relationship between price to own and price to rent, or the value of the property as an pure investment. The last of these is what i was getting at earlier - the IRR of holding the condo over a period of time. At current prices, that return seems negative over the shorter term and no better than alternative investments over an intermediate-to longer term.

But valid points all around.

Quote:

I think the idea of leverage works very well in an increasing or stable property price environment, but in the current environment, the idea is less palatable. If you can cover all your expenses and amortize your loan, that works. The key is A) getting the price you need on the property B) getting a low enough interest rate on the loan that makes it cover and C) getting the loan on the property at all (no small feat in today's lending environment).

I guess my main point was that even with leverage the prices people want for these days don't make it work.

Given inflation over time, it should all work out (devaluing your debt and increasing in nominal dollars the value of your property) but leverage giveth and leverage taketh away...

In another thread (about Zillow prices, etc) someone made a comment about rent vs. current market values. I think this is a common sense way of looking at things, i.e if you buy something and don't want to live there, what can you rent it for? That person suggested if properties went to 10x rent that they would be a buyer. Now I'm not saying that's the right number, seems a bit low to me (maybe they were only looking at a specific area), but it certainly makes calculations much easier...:

Since I live in Paulus Hook, I'll be selfish and do an example from there... Take your typical 2br/2ba "luxury" unit which rents for about $2500/mo (I called up 3 major places in Paulus Hook and they quoted me rates right around this level for a 1,000sq ft place). So using a 10x multiple, that would imply that the price on a comparable unit should sell for $300,000 - which (to me) seems like a *long* way from where we are now.

Running the numbers: $300k - 60k down payment = $240k mortgage, $1300/mo mortgage payment, and if you add another $1000/mo in taxes & maint (which is the minimum for one of these "luxury" places), That certainly makes sense versus renting for $2500/mo. A buyer could stand to lose a little money in price depreciation if they don't have to pay rent. So a place like that might make sense if you intend to live there and can get it on the cheap - but if you're an investor (correct me if i'm wrong all you investors out there) - if you buy a place like this, at least a $1,000/mo of your cash flow is going to pay tax & maint, so you only clear $1500/mo x 12 - that's only $18,000/yr if you're renting it out. Why not just take your $300k and buy a high quality corporate bond and earn 7-9% on your money (21k-30k)? I must be missing something here...Ok, so you can depreciate the property over a number of years so you get a tax benefit for that, and if you can buy it cheap enough maybe you can get the taxes lowered b/c it's worth a lot less than originally assessed..But still...

And that example runs the numbers on a 300k investment, It doesn't contemplate where people are actually trying to sell this stuff...

Also, keep in mind, i'm only talking about so-called luxury buildings, not your standard brownstone type building or subdivided brownstone that only has like $200/mo in maintenance. I think those should do quite a bit better.

I must be missing something...

You people are ridiculous. I was just there, and yes, it is good, and yes, the owner (or whoever that was behind the counter) was very nice. Pretzels were tasty as was the dip.

I think i have something like 400+ posts - am i shilling? Get a life on that score... If the guy wants to shill for his store, good for him. Most people have enough common sense to tell the difference between someone who posts here often and a random one-time post, they don't need you pointing it out

As for the pretzels, Here's a photo of a half eaten box of Rivets -- Would you like a timestamp and GPS coordinates to verify their authenticity:

Here is the Bloomberg news story associated with this proposal:

Obama Orders Pay Limits at Banks Getting Future Aid

By Roger Runningen and Hans Nichols
Feb. 4 (Bloomberg) -- President Barack Obama called bonus
payouts at banks getting rescue funds ?shameful? as he and
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner announced the government will
require financial companies getting aid in the future to cap
compensation of top officials at $500,000 a year.

?In order to restore our financial system, we?ve got to
restore trust,? Obama said at the White House as he set out new
rules for companies that seek ?exceptional? assistance from the
Treasury. ?And in order to restore trust, we?ve got to make
certain that taxpayer funds are not subsidizing excessive
compensation packages on Wall Street.?

Geithner said the economic crisis has been ?made worse by a
loss in faith? in the judgments of executives.

?There is a deep sense across the country that those who
are not responsible for this crisis are bearing a greater burden
than those who were,? he said, adding that he will outline a
?comprehensive? program for stabilizing the financial system
next week.

Obama also urged Congress to finish work on economic
stimulus legislation, saying that a failure to act ?will turn
crisis into a catastrophe and guarantee a longer recession.?


Public Outcry


Reacting to public outcry over bonuses paid to bankers
getting government bailout money, the administration is imposing
conditions that would force greater transparency for expenses
such as corporate jets, office renovations, entertainment and
holiday parties, and restrict severance pay when executives leave
the company.

While pay would be limited, there are provisions that would
allow additional compensation in the form of restricted stock
that can?t be sold until taxpayers have been paid back with
interest. Senior executive compensation plans also must be
submitted to a non-binding shareholder resolution.

The compensation cap may be waived for companies getting aid
through what the administration terms ?generally available
capital access programs? through full public disclosure and
submission of a resolution to shareholders if requested.

Companies also must have in place provisions to reclaim, or
?claw back,? bonuses and incentives from the top 25 senior
executives if they are found to engage in deceptive practices.

Outrage among the public and lawmakers has been building
since October, when Congress passed a $700 billion financial-
rescue plan for financial firms. Lawmakers complained that the
first half of the fund was doled out with little public
accounting of how the money was spent. A New York state
comptroller report that $18.4 billion in bonuses were paid out to
Wall Street executives and employees as the U.S. sank into a
recession further inflamed Americans.


?In Bad Taste?



?For top executives to award themselves these kinds of
compensation packages in the midst of this economic crisis is not
only in bad taste, it?s a bad strategy, and I will not tolerate
it as president,? Obama said.

Rules apply to companies that in the future take
?exceptional? amounts of bailout money from the Treasury, as
Citigroup Inc. and American International Group Inc. have in the
past. They don?t apply to companies that have already taken
rescue money, although those companies must in the future agree
to strict monitoring and oversight.

The compensation restrictions announced today are part of a
wider White House plan to overhaul rules governing the remaining
$350 billion in the Troubled Asset Relief Program.


Reworking Financial Rescue


Geithner and White House economic officials are reworking
the contours of the financial rescue program, which may include
establishment of a ?bad bank? to soak up soured assets and
revive consumer credit.

On Wall Street, there is concern that compensation curbs
would hinder a company?s ability to attract top-notch employees,
and that would lead to a talent drain, Meredith Whitney, an
analyst at Oppenheimer & Co., said on Bloomberg Television.

?If you cap compensation, the best and the brightest are
still going to figure out a way to make money and it may not be
on Wall Street, when those minds are needed most,? Whitney said.

William Cohan, a former investment banker at Lazard Ltd. and
JPMorgan and author of ?The Last Tycoons? about Lazard,
disputed that notion.

?What do they do? They push paper around,? Cohan said,
?Where else can you get paid $500,000 to do that??

Pressure has been building in Congress for restrictions on
executive compensation and more disclosure from companies getting
bailout money.


Congressional Action


Senator Claire McCaskill, a Missouri Democrat proposed last
week a bill to limit compensation in salary, bonuses and stock
options to $400,000 a year, the president?s salary. She said
small-business owners are calling the bonuses ?obscene? and
other lawmakers say they are getting angry calls and mail from
constituents on the subject.

McCaskill said today the Obama plan is in line with what
lawmakers are seeking in an effort to change ?the arrogant,
greedy culture that created this mess in the first place.?

Representative Elijah Cummings of Maryland today introduced
legislation to force TARP beneficiaries to disclose details on
corporate travel and marketing expenditures.

Cummings, a Maryland Democrat, called the ?profligate
spending and millions of dollars in bonuses? a ?slap in the
face of the American taxpayers.?

JPMorgan Chase & Co. Chief Executive Officer Jamie Dimon
said this week that it?s wrong for politicians to criticize Wall
Street pay without differentiating between companies where
compensation is commensurate with performance.


Making Distinctions


?It?s unfair to talk about us as one,? Dimon, who was paid
$1 million last year and didn?t accept a bonus, said at a
conference in New York. ?Not every company was responsible.?

Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch &
Co., Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. and Bear Stearns Cos. awarded
their employees a cumulative $145 billion in bonuses from 2003
through 2007, according to estimates based on company reports.

That?s more than the annual gross domestic product of the
Philippines. Lehman has since gone bankrupt, while Bear Stearns
and Merrill have been taken over by commercial banks.

Wall Street firms? pay has traditionally been tied to
performance of the companies. As the bonus portion of employees?
pay has grown, many started to expect it regardless of
performance. Some employees have been receiving incentives ?for
basically turning up,? Barclays Plc Chairman Marcus Agius said
last week at the World Economic Forum in Davos.

As the public outcry over Wall Street pay escalated, top
executives at Morgan Stanley, Bank of America Corp., Goldman
Sachs and Citigroup have agreed to forego bonuses. Governments in
the U.K., Switzerland and France have pressured banks, including
UBS AG and Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc to limit executive
pay after taxpayer-funded bailouts.

Bank of America CEO Kenneth Lewis, who was paid $24.8
million in total compensation in 2007, won?t receive a bonus this
year after the lender reported a $1.8 billion loss in the fourth
quarter, its first deficit since 1991.



--With reporting by Julianna Goldman, Lorraine Woellert, Heidi
Przybyla and Christopher Stern in Washington. Editors: Joe
Sobczyk, Laurie Asseo.

Quote:

I'll play devil's advocate...

From the WaPo article you quoted, there's this bit:
"Advocates for the cameras point to research such as a recent national study by the Federal Highway Administration that showed the number of broadside crashes dipped 25 percent at sites with cameras. The study found that rear-end crashes rose 15 percent at camera locations. But because broadside crashes are more dangerous and cause greater damage, the study concluded that the cameras can help reduce the costs of traffic accidents."

Intuitively to me, it doesn't make sense why the traffic cameras would contribute to higher traffic accidents, however I would be willing to bet there are a number of confounding variables that would make the analysis far from conclusive:

--Are there more cars on the road in 2005 vs. 1998?
--Cellphones are more prevalent in 2005 than 1998, Which are a contributor to traffic accidents (the study found that all traffic accidents went up over the period studied)
--Traffic cameras were only installed at the busiest intersections which are more accident prone than other less-busy intersections (so you'd expect more accidents there, no?)
--The sample size of these studies seems pretty small
--Are there other factors at play (different traffic patterns, construction, etc) that could have an effect on drivers at these particular traffic lights?

Bottom line though, it's a much more efficient way to collect fines. If they want to make some more money I could think of quite a few places they could post cameras for not coming to a complete stop - that'd be a goddamn gravy train!