|
Re: 6th Street Embankment - US Court of Appeals Ruling
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
 
|
Quote:
I'm not sure that is correct. If this ruling holds up (which seems likely, but not guaranteed) then the original sale is voided. Conrail resumes ownership of the property. Conrail then has to file for abandonment with the STB. If it's approved, then Conrail can put it on the market. They will be required by law to offer it to Jersey City at the same terms as they would a developer. However, there are lots of potential issues. Conrail might delay or refuse to file for abandonment, which would hold up the process indefinitely. They may claim that since the 2003 sale was voided, they can set a new price for the property. As they did in 2011, the Zoning Board is highly unlikely to approve tearing down the Embankment if the City doesn't back it. It is guaranteed that there will be much more litigation if a deal is not struck. Fortunately, it is possible that all parties will strike some sort of compromise; they came close in 2012, when Hyman and the City agreed to a deal (Conrail backed out). Unfortunately, as more time goes on, the property appreciates in value, which increases the incentives for Conrail and Hyman to hold onto development rights. I'd guess that the potential increase in returns outweighs their legal costs. So this ruling is a good step forward, but it is unclear how long this will go on, or how much the property will actually cost the city.
Posted on: 2014/2/22 12:54
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Paying it forward: Jersey City man's 30-day campaign for kinder world
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Whatever floats his boat. I'd definitely assume he's some sort of weirdo, though. ;)
Posted on: 2014/2/19 19:26
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Public Meeting with Port Authority Reps: 2/18/14 @ 7:30pm
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I stand corrected... by a bus line that runs ~10 times a day, and doesn't run on weekends. ;) They could add some buses, but ultimately, we're talking about a need to transport up to 20,000 riders over the weekend. There should be no question that even replacing a fraction of that will result in a strain on the Holland Tunnel, and will need some place to drop passengers off. It is much, much easier said than done.
Posted on: 2014/2/19 19:14
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Public Meeting with Port Authority Reps: 2/18/14 @ 7:30pm
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Each PATH car holds 130 passengers; one NJT bus holds 42. Replacing a single PATH train will require 27 buses. How long will it take to get 20 buses through the Holland Tunnel? Where will they drop passengers off? Where will they do the maintenance? PA does not run bus lines. NJT doesn't run any lines in NYC. I'm not sure what you're seeing, but it's surely not 20 buses showing up at once. The simplicity of the solution is belied by the difficulties of actually putting it into practice.
Posted on: 2014/2/19 18:27
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Public Meeting with Port Authority Reps: 2/18/14 @ 7:30pm
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Did you? How curious. You can drive from both locations. Rockland has Metro North; JC has PATH. Rockland has buses, but no ferries. Downtown JC has ferries, but no buses. What am I missing? Helicopter, perhaps? ;) Quote: If anything comes out of this insanity it would be the crazy notion that we need more options period?. PATH or no PATH. That would be great. But who's going to pay for it? We could add more ferries, but last time that nearly bankrupted NY Waterway. Who wants to subsidize and/or bail them out? The ARC tunnel was projected to cost $9 billion. Care to guess who foots the bill? We could send buses through the Holland Tunnel, but aside from increasing traffic in an already heavily trafficked area, who's going to pay for a proper bus station?
Posted on: 2014/2/19 17:57
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Public Meeting with Port Authority Reps: 2/18/14 @ 7:30pm
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I don't think that's the case. NJT has no problems putting in bus services that potentially overlap PA services. It's just not always easy to do so. For example, there is no bus station near the exit to the Holland Tunnel. Buses would need to get to Port Authority somehow -- e.g. either cut through Hoboken, or ride along the West Side Highway. I suspect that after doing that a few times, you'll curse NJT as much as PA. ;) Jitneys could work. But if they're dropping off 10,000 people on a Saturday, they're going to need somewhere to drop off and pick up riders. They might also not want to offer 24/7 service. PA has nothing to do with that process. Ferries just aren't very profitable in most circumstances. NY Waterway has little choice but to run a limited schedule with relatively high rates; iirc another company ran a water taxi, and they couldn't keep up service. Note that NY Waterway may not, in fact, be willing to take up the slack. They expanded service in 2001 to compensate for the lost WTC PATH train, and it almost bankrupted them. (When PATH service returned to normal, NYW couldn't cut its costs.) Even with subsidies, NYW may be reluctant to add service. Quote: For a while there were talks of a ferry from Greenville to Red Hook Brooklyn then Port Authority stop that quick by buying Greenville Yards.... I'm sorry, but I'm not seeing any indication that anyone wanted to put in a commuter ferry stop at Greenville Yards. The plan for the PA to buy it dates back to 2005. In fact, not only does PA own many of the ferry stations in the area, PA took steps to save NY Waterway's bacon when it faced bankruptcy a few years ago. For all their many sins, they aren't "afraid of competition," and they aren't trying to screw over the ferry services.
Posted on: 2014/2/19 17:11
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Public Meeting with Port Authority Reps: 2/18/14 @ 7:30pm
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Probably. But it also depends on how much progress they're making on that tunnel, and how much work needs to be done. My recollection is that some of the work was already done, but the WTC tunnel was so heavily damaged by Sandy that a) work was pushed back by 4 months, b) they still have to get in there and power wash a bunch of the salt water off, and c) Sandy wrecked a bunch of of the new equipment. Unfortunately, the simple fact is that upgrading existing infrastructure is highly disruptive and time-consuming. Everyone wants the benefits, and no one wants to be inconvenienced to keep things working. C'est la guerre. Quote: Quite honestly, this whole mess with the PATH (and the assumption on my part that the same will happen in 2015 with the JSQ lines) have me rethinking my choice of living here. Well, do what you've gotta do, but no part of the NYC area is truly immune from these kinds of issues. To wit: ? If you stay on the NJ side, you're looking at ferries ($$$) or buses (very slow, even from Weehawken etc) or driving ($$$ AND slow) ? MTA does a much better job communicating closures and changes. However, they have been screwing around with weekend schedules for years (for repair purposes), and have been working on the 2nd Avenue Subway for decades. ? MTA's budget is also a total nightmare, and they're raising fares as well. ? Metro North and LIRR are no better than PA with communication and accountability. ? Good luck traveling between Brooklyn and Queens via subway. None of this excuses the absurd lack of communication about closing the WTC line, or more general silence by PA. We should just keep in mind that, as the cliche says: The grass is often greener on the other side.
Posted on: 2014/2/19 16:29
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: "Deeded" parking in a condominium garage?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
The condo attorney will give you the best information.
That said, an LCE does usually transfer with the title. My guess is, the next question is figuring out which units can prove they control a parking spot. Should be fun....
Posted on: 2014/2/19 12:14
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Who regulates ISPs/Cable TV?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
FCC handles cable and Internet.
FTC handles "truth in advertising" claims. That said, sales staff at every cable and Internet company I've ever dealt with, no matter how bad the service turned out to be, has always been very clear about pricing. If you really can't make heads or tails of the sales pitch, just call.
Posted on: 2014/2/17 2:37
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: $4 minimum wage would cure jobless rates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Does it? Really? 1) It is not the case that the law was motivated by racism. In fact, it was the exceptions that were motivated by racism. 2) The law was not designed to cultivate minority voters. 3) The Democrats were not particularly interested in minority voters at that time. (E.g. blacks were a heavily Republican constituency until the 1960s.) 4) It is the Republicans, not the Democrats, who seem to be associating minimum wages with minorities. E.g.: http://www.aei-ideas.org/2013/12/rais ... jobless-rate-is-now-44-3/ http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/ ... ike-will-hurt-minorities/ Meanwhile, the primary beneficiaries are mostly young and white. By the way, as far as I know the claim that "minority workers will be harmed by minimum wage increases" is not supported by any empirical data. And whom did Obama say he wants to help? This is from the 2014 SOTU Address: "Today the federal minimum wage is worth about twenty percent less than it was when Ronald Reagan first stood here. And Tom Harkin and George Miller have a bill to fix that by lifting the minimum wage to $10.10. It's easy to remember: 10.10. This will help families. It will give businesses customers with more money to spend. It does not involve any new bureaucratic program. So join the rest of the country. Say yes. Give America a raise." Also, review a transcript of Obama's remarks on the minimum wage. Minorities are never mentioned; he only discusses families. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-o ... nt-minimum-wage-lanham-md 5) The BLS did not start collecting employment data by race until 1952. For 1952 to now, black unemployment has consistently been higher than, and largely in tandem with, white unemployment. There is no correlation between minority unemployment rates and changes to the minimum wage. I know of no reliable data sources which claim that unemployment was lower for blacks than for whites prior to 1938. Such data would also be complicated by institutional racism, e.g. sharecropper systems, difficulty collecting data in the South. Not really seeing how any of the facts support any of your claims.
Posted on: 2014/2/14 18:24
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: $4 minimum wage would cure jobless rates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Today, only 1.5 million workers earn the minimum wage. Another 2 million are in jobs exempted from MW (e.g. jobs that pay with tips). These two groups combined are around 4% of the workforce. 78% of minimum wage workers are white. Half are between the ages of 17 and 24. Most work part-time. The US passed its first minimum wage law in 1938. That same law barred most child labor, guaranteed overtime pay for numerous occupations, and set a 44-hour work week. The racism of the legislators who voted for the Fair Labor Standards Act wasn't in establishing minimum wages. It was in the exemptions for agricultural and domestic workers, pushed by racist white Southern Democrats, who wanted to maintain cheap African-American labor. Remember, at that time blacks voted mostly Republican -- that is, when they were allowed to vote at all.
Posted on: 2014/2/14 11:34
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Obamacare...creating more working poor.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
The costs to insure employees has been increasing substantially every year for almost a decade. In fact, it's only slowed down in the past year or so, though it is not clear yet whether the ACA was a factor. This was not only a problem long before the ACA was voted on (let alone enacted), it was part of the reason to pursue health care reform in the first place.
Posted on: 2014/2/11 22:58
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Obamacare...creating more working poor.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
As noted in the article, she didn't go to the US for care because of time constraints. She went because the best hospital for the procedure was located in the US. Americans also do a lot of medical tourism, notably to Mexico, because of the high costs of medical procedures. Quote: US emergency rooms are also overcrowded... as mentioned in the article you linked. Quote: How does a shortage of prenatal units indicate that the entire Canadian system is a disaster? This is not a serious critique of the Canadian medical system. It's a handful of isolated issues and problems. Meanwhile... ? Canada has a lower infant mortality rate than the US ? Canada has a slightly higher life expectancy than the US (82.5 vs 79.8) ? Total spending on health care as a percentage of GDP in Canada is nearly half that of the US You're going to need something a bit more comprehensive than a couple of articles, that don't really prove your point in the first place.
Posted on: 2014/2/11 22:54
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Eviction. Tenants rights please help.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
If you are truly broke, you should qualify for assistance from Legal Aid:
574 Summit Avenue (201) 792-6363 NNJLS@lsnj.org If you don't qualify, they may be able to refer an attorney. Posters here are well-meaning, but as far as I can tell, none are attorneys. You really do need sound legal advice.
Posted on: 2014/2/11 18:45
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Downtown Yogurt
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
The yogurt and toppings are fairly standard; same quality as other frozen yogurt places. The staff is very friendly.
Posted on: 2014/2/9 13:18
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: It’s Time to Kill the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
During that time, inflation increased by around 243% -- including the double-digit inflation of the 70s. By 1982, fares were only covering 25% of PATH costs. I support public transportation. I also support fares keeping up with inflation. Or at least, you should recognize that inflation exists, when discussing fare rates over 25+ year periods. ;)
Posted on: 2014/2/7 4:18
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: It’s Time to Kill the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
To be clear, I'm not criticizing this model. I'm only reminding people that a large number of people who do not use the PATH are helping to subsidize it. Quote: I can't say the same for a ridiculous 1776 ft erection that exists pretty much solely as symbol. The PA had no business clawing back the WTC after giving it up to Silverman.... It's difficult to be precise about such a messy, contentious and politicized affair, and I don't recall all the details. What I do know is that nothing and no one could have prevented the new WTC from being a mess. Again -- Pataki, Giuliani, Silverstein, PA, the families of the victims, the architects, the public were all pushing for different things. Silverstein was also a major player; e.g. he was able to throw Liebeskind off the tower project, and put SOM / David Childs in charge. And again, to many critics -- such as the author of the article above -- PA is "damned if you do, damned if you don't." When it's involved in WTC, the entire mess belongs to the PA who shouldn't have been involved. When it's the ARC tunnel, and someone else takes the lead (like Amtrak or NJT), PA is at fault for not holding the reins. Quote: And there was no justification to raise commuter costs to cover the overages of this vanity project. No matter how you slice it, the bulk of the costs were going to fall on the shoulders of taxpayers. If you have some magic way to prevent a project like that from generating cost overruns, then you should open a consulting agency. :D
Posted on: 2014/2/7 4:05
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: It’s Time to Kill the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I can't imagine anyone seriously holding that position. Every responsibility of an agency like PA has its own constituencies. Ports have shipping companies and dock workers; bridges have drivers and truckers; airports have airlines, workers, federal authorities, shipping companies, airline passengers.... Favoring one constituency, however large or powerful, is ultimately unfair and counter-productive. And I hate to shock you, but PATH fares actually haven't gone up much since the 1960s, when adjusted for inflation. http://www.hudsoncity.net/tubesenglish/fare.html As noted above: As with most transit systems, the PATH is heavily subsidized. Revenues (almost all fares) pull in less than half of its costs. If the PATH had to self-fund, fares would be over $4 per trip.
Posted on: 2014/2/7 1:53
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: It’s Time to Kill the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
1) Please spare me such nonsense. 2) Re-read my post. I'm not defending PA. I'm saying that the article's view of PA is contradictory, and that breaking it up won't fix the problems. It won't stop the cronyism, it won't make PA more accountable, it won't make PA more responsive, it won't force them to divest their real estate holdings. Happy now? Quote: By lumping essential maintenance and new projects into the same "plan", they're hiding true costs and benefits. You are completely and utterly incorrect. Google search "port authority capital plan 2014" http://www.panynj.gov/corporate-infor ... 4-public-capital-plan.pdf 60 pages detailing the 10 year capital plan. New projects like the Airport extension are broken out right on page 4. Type of project, page 5. More detail, and costs of the EWR extension are listed on page 19. Quote: And you seriously think New Yorkers and tourists will pay a fair contribution for the PATH extension to Newark? Yes. PA's revenues come from tolls, airport fees, facility fees (airports and ports), and rents. This is spread all over the region. The PATH is a money loser for PA. In 2012, they collected $141 million (almost all in fares), and spent $300 million. (http://www.panynj.gov/corporate-infor ... 12-preliminary-budget.pdf) So yes. Citizens of New Jersey, New York, tourists, businesses are already subsidizing the PATH.
Posted on: 2014/2/7 1:32
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: It’s Time to Kill the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I have to say, I'm underwhelmed by the article's suggestions. The GWB issues happened specifically because Christie had control of the NJ side. It was Foye, a Cuomo appointee, who ordered a stop to the traffic rerouting. I.e. cronyism will not go away because the agency is split into two. Bi-state control of PA did not cause the WTC mess. In that case, you had too many people asserting or fighting for control (Pataki, PA, Silverstein, Giuliani, ) or making demands (families of the bereaved). The public also felt invested, especially after seeing some of the master plans and memorial designs; putting in a dumpy utilitarian transit hub was not going to happen. Even the architects got into the act -- Arad, SOM/Childs and Libeskind were all feuding terribly, not far out of public view. If the PA was split before 2001, that would have added another agency with a different agenda to the decision process. I don't see how that could possibly produce better results. I also find it fascinating that the author blames the failures of the ARC tunnel on the PA not being involved. "The PA sucks, and they should have been in charge." Wha...? And of course, it blames the PA for not having the funds to redo the Goethals. The solution the author proposes? Put their main sources of revenue into the states' general funds. Which basically guarantees that PA will be underfunded, as there is no question that politicians would reallocate those funds elsewhere. I will admit that I don't know what the solution is, and divesting from real estate holdings probably is part of the solution. But ultimately, I suspect that the real issue is the inability of our elected officials to properly supervise the PA, and at least part of the solution is to make the PA more communicative and accountable to the public.
Posted on: 2014/2/6 13:56
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: It’s Time to Kill the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Try reading the article you cite next time. The extension will cost $1.5 billion. The $27 billion is for all capital improvements over the next 10 years. Anyway. Yes, extending the PATH to EWR sounds fantastic. They should've done it years ago. Quote: They'll tax NJ commuters with fare and toll increases.... PA also raises revenues from New Yorkers and tourists. Quote: ....to pay for an improved service that simply benefits air travelers getting from their airport to NYC. And Newark. And Harrison. And Jersey City and Hoboken. And anyone who can get to a PATH stop via the Light Rail. They could still screw it up, of course. But the basic concept is a good one, and long overdue.
Posted on: 2014/2/6 13:35
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: JC business accepting bitcoin
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
The monetary response to the 2007 financial crisis was very different than the reaction to the 1929 crash. Remember, Bernanke has extensively studied the Great Depression, and obviously did not want to repeat the mistakes of the past. In the Great Depression, the government basically let the banks fail. There were repeated bank runs, which wiped out depositor savings. The Fed raised rates before the 1929 crash, despite the nation recovering from the 1927 recession. Many other nations also raised interest rates, which resulted in a global economic slowdown. The Fed only temporarily loosened the money supply after the crash, and tightened up by 1930. By 2007, the FDIC was protecting depositors, and coverage was increased. Some banks did fail, but few had bank runs. Rates were low (most likely too low) for years before the financial crisis, and the Fed has kept rates low. Quote: Deflation was the issue in the late 20s and was combated by wholesale issuing of currency by buying Treasuries. Fed actions didn't create the debt deflation. What caused it in 1929 and 2007 was that after years of too-cheap credit, which caused a big speculative bubble, all the lenders were terrified and didn't want to make loans. There were also non-monetary deflationary pressures. And again, keep in mind that the US has had almost no deflation since the 1940s.
Posted on: 2014/2/3 4:04
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Obamacare...creating more working poor.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
C'mon, man. The majority of Republicans are pro-life, and have been for years.  Opposition to abortion has been a routine part of the GOP platform for years. Republicans elected to office are all but required to be pro-life. It seems to me that the moderate, pro-choice Republicans are leaving the party, and becoming Republican-leaning independents. Quote: Abortion will never be outlawed. Never. Ain't gonna happen in our lifetimes. Abortion opponents are doing everything they can to outlaw it. States like Texas are passing laws with the intentional purpose of making abortion unavailable -- e.g. http://www.theatlantic.com/health/arc ... abortion-in-texas/283045/
Posted on: 2014/2/2 18:19
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: JC business accepting bitcoin
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Meaning what, the past week? ;) Quote: and as adoption increases, it should become more stable. Most of the fluctuation is because of speculators -- which is why the conversion rate soars and crashes based on news items. Also, if demand for BTC outstrips supply, you'll have deflation. More people chasing BTC = each BTC becomes more valuable = people hoard BTC anticipating future increases in value = deflation. Roughly 4000 BTC are mined every day, and that's been consistent from the start. If there were no speculators, and demand for Bitcoin increased by more than 4000/day, then it would deflate. When the supply is permanently fixed, the value of BTC will strictly be a function of demand. Quote: IT equipment has always undergone deflation and yet, people still buy them. A Bitcoin is not a piece of equipment. It's a type of scrip.
Posted on: 2014/2/2 13:03
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hmm, would I live in 300 s.f. to be in Chelsea?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
300 sq feet is doable, if you live alone, use the space efficiently, and don't have a lot of stuff. It also prevents you from buying a lot of stuff.
That said, downtown JC has pretty much everything I need these days, is much more affordable, and is bigger than 300 square feet. ;)
Posted on: 2014/1/28 1:34
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Australians investors buying up Jersey City housing
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
It isn't. Dixon Leasing is a subsidiary of Dixon Advisory, which is an Australian company: http://www.dixon.com.au They're also only buying a fraction of the available housing -- and as noted, they've apparently stopped for now, and are focusing on fixing up their properties. It does seem that hedge funds, REIT's etc are moving into residential, and they probably are cutting into some of the supply. But this isn't all bad -- since we now have companies like Mack-Cali building large residential projects in JC. The real issue facing prospective buyers nationally is that mortgage standards have become incredibly strict after the crisis. In addition, some big tax breaks for 1st time home buyers ended a few years ago. And locally, the big issue is that there just isn't a lot of inventory -- and hasn't been for years. The only way to fix that problem is to build more, a choice that has its own pros and cons. Quote: Many are confused why such properties are showing a rise in value in distressed neighborhoods . It simply means these vultures are buying it up... The properties will be fixed up and rented out and offered at market rate rents. Why are they "vultures," when they buy properties, fix them up and rent them out? It's only a problem if they are not doing a good job of managing the properties, and that's just as likely to happen with a small landlord (who doesn't give a crap about his or her reputation) as with a larger company. Or perhaps you think it's a bad thing to fix up a building and rent it out...? Quote: The rents are bundled and traded in Wall Street like REITs. This is the new form of AMERICAN GREED ! Erm... Real estate has been a form of wealth and investment for centuries. MBS's are about a decade old now, and since we've already had a big securities crash less than 10 years ago, no one can be fooled into thinking it's a sure bet. I.e. This is really nothing new. Quote: There is no law against this practice. Yep. It's legal and, as long as they treat their tenants well, entirely ethical. Quote: In time we will all eventually be a nation of renters in the cities. These banksters are disgusting ! ? There is absolutely nothing wrong with being a renter, or being a landlord. In fact, renting can often be highly efficient and advantageous, as you can invest your money elsewhere and have much more flexibility. ? There are lots of people who do not have sufficient funds to own a home, but want to live in JC. ? JC is already around 62% renters. ? Investing in real estate does not make bankers "disgusting." Their ethical failures manifest when they actually do engage in unethical behavior -- e.g. defrauding securities buyers, or improperly foreclosing on properties. If you're going to despise the bankers, you should at least be accurate about the reasons why. ;)
Posted on: 2014/1/24 19:17
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Obamacare...creating more working poor.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Before the ACA went into effect, individual insurance was very expensive, and hard to get. Insurers would routinely refuse to cover individuals or medical issues based on "pre-existing conditions." Quote: As soon as the government gets involved in some industry, - immediately some people declare that this industry exists only because the government is in it. No one is saying that about health insurance. Quote: Like science, or education, or art. There is really no question that public involvement dramatically expanded the number of people who got an education, or that government funding has been critical for the sciences. Quote: I do not see how the logic works. It's simple. When governments offer health care to its citizens, they are in an incredibly strong position to negotiate rates with hospitals, doctors, labs, pharmaceuticals and so forth. E.g. why are drugs cheaper in Canada? The medicines are identical, and the costs are no different. It's because the Canadian government negotiates the prices down. In addition, health care is not a normal market, and treating it that way results in all sorts of distortions. Insurers don't care about covering their ratepayers, they care about profits -- so they do everything they can not to pay out or to cover people who rely more on insurance. Hospitals don't set the rates for procedures based on costs; they have to negotiate rates for every procedure, test and medication with insurers, so the rates are actually just a starting point with insurers... and if you don't have insurance, you get slammed with the "full" price. And so on. The result? The US spends more than twice the GDP per capita on health care than the rest of the OECD, and overall doesn't offer better care. The "free market" system does a very good job with some goods and services. Health care is not one of them. The ACA isn't a great fix... because it is ultimately a right-wing free-market fix. The idea is to prevent people from getting the benefits of insurance without paying into it first (what Romney calls the "personal responsibility principle.") It tries to preserve the status quo, including the inefficient insurers, the "chargemaster" rates at hospitals, the incentives to make more new erectile dysfunction pills than new antibiotics and so forth. But at least someone who is in their 30s can be a freelancer and get coverage.
Posted on: 2014/1/22 3:28
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City real estate prices going back to pre-bubble burst prices
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
It's not 2004 anymore. Lenders are still being very strict these days. They have fairly strict income standards, and ask for lots of documentation.
Posted on: 2014/1/14 1:06
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Chris Christie 'Suspiciously Connected' To Revenge Traffic Jam
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
NJ.com takes a first pass at today's document release: http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/ ... html#incart_river_default
NYT first pass: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/11/nyr ... -scandal-released.html?hp I have successfully downloaded the documents, but I have no interest in trawling through 900 pages of politispeak on a Friday night. ;)
Posted on: 2014/1/11 0:43
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Chris Christie 'Suspiciously Connected' To Revenge Traffic Jam
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Then why are you contributing to a thread about the Ft Lee lane closures? If the IRS issue is really all that critical, why are you wasting your time here? What about the threads about JC picking another ambulance provider? Or JC real estate prices rising? Should we all ignore those, and spend all our time today discussing the IRS? This is clearly not the thread, in fact not the forum to discuss the IRS investigation. There are plenty of general politics forums where you can discuss those topics. It is also screamingly obvious that you're not discussing the IRS because something happened today. You've repeatedly brought up Benghazi not because of any new news, but because you are trying to put Christie is a positive light, while distracting from the issue and/or trying to make Democrats look bad. If you're going to contribute to a thread about the Fort Lee lane closures, then at least have the courtesy to stay on topic.
Posted on: 2014/1/10 2:09
|
|||
|
||||