135jc wrote:
There is plenty of oil everywhere. I don't buy that argument anymore.

GrovePath wrote:
Any cost should be paid by the bars on the plaza -- not by other businesses along Newark Ave or in the SID.

Really they should just end the closed pedestrian plaza since it has proven to create a space for loud rowdy bar-goers to hang outside.

bill wrote:
Quote:

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Someone who wants medical attention but fears retaliation from thugs. Maybe you haven't heard of this before but it's a real thing in the hood.

This person is 23, that is an adult who is 2 years removed from college. If you want medical attention you get it and leave, you don't have the hospital call your parents.

bill wrote:
Quote:

JerseyCityNj wrote:

They went to question her at the ER, which is common with victims that require medical attention. Her parents were there and were told what happened and passed that on to police since she wouldn't. What part of that is fishy?

So if you got a call your 23 year daughter was in the emergency room after being attacked you wouldn't show up? They probably want someone to be arrested for this even if the daughter is scared. In the comments to this on the JJ website a commenter said the mom is even going as far as checking to see if any cameras in the area might have caught this on video.

Sounds like concerned parents that want justice to me.

What kind of mixed up individual goes to the ER and has the hospital call her parents ESPECIALLY if she doesn't want to cooperate with the police?

GrovePath wrote:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/02/28/ ... rleading-competition.html

Three people died and two others were hurt after a small plane carrying them home from a cheerleading competition crashed into two Southern California homes and sparked a major fire Monday, investigators said.

GrovePath wrote:
https://youtu.be/Nw_GasRX74Y

Just last week, Harrison Ford was involved in an incident that nearly became a fatal plane crash. In an act that would disappoint his very own Han Solo, Ford flew his private plane directly over an aircraft with 110 passengers. He was supposed to land his plane on a specific runway, but proceeded to land on the taxiway.

https://youtu.be/Nw_GasRX74Y

GrovePath wrote:
Manhattan Plane Crash Kills Yankee Pitcher

New York Times
OCT. 12, 2006

Firefighters looked at the wreckage of the plane that crashed into a building on East 72nd Street, rattling nerves all over the Upper East Side with unwelcome reminders of other planes and other buildings.

A single-engine plane carrying the Yankees pitcher Cory Lidle smashed into a 42-story building on the Upper East Side yesterday, killing Mr. Lidle and his flight instructor, the authorities said.

The afternoon crash beneath overcast skies sent debris clattering hundreds of feet to the sidewalk and started a fire that destroyed several apartments and left a charred smudge on the face of the building.

Fourteen firefighters and four people in the building were injured, officials said, including a woman who had been in an apartment hit squarely by the plane and escaped the inferno, suffering burns.

The plane left Teterboro, in Bergen County, at 2:29 p.m., officials said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/12/nyregion/12crash.html

GrovePath wrote:



They have to ban joy riding small planes and helicopters from the dense urban areas - this was a flight school -- and Airshows are even worse

JCishome wrote:
Well yeah, relax. Just think how much worse it will be when (if?) they build a Whole Foods across the street from there.

JadedJC wrote:
Anyone else notice how an already bad intersection is made even worse by the idiots who park/stand on Marin right outside KK now, with their hazard lights flashing? One guy was even parked into the crosswalk. I was driving south on Marin and had just cleared Columbus when I had to slam on my brakes to avoid being sideswiped by some asshat who abruptly pulled out without checking for traffic. It goes without saying that the cops directing traffic right at that intersection appear to be oblivious or indifferent to the Krispy Kreme congestion.

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
I type the number of terrorists attacks since 2016 and they are broken down by months. There are people who want to destroy democracy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_2016

Luckily for America, the important people already know this. We've won, and President Trump will continue enacting measures to make us safer.

Let these bitter, nasty "progressives" on this site spew as many lies as they want. Doesn't matter, they lost.

Yvonne wrote:
You know what ...bike? Poland did not accept any immigrants and guess what? There are no immigrants blowing up bombs in Poland. This is something to think about.

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Obama had a two year ban on political appointees from lobbying; President Trump not only put in a 5 year ban, but a permanent ban on any of his administration officials EVER lobbying on behalf of a foreign nation. Rather refreshing, and something both sides can support, right? And he supports term limits.

Don't be silly. Everyone knows it is our moral duty to oppose President Trump no matter what he does. After all, he is the next Hitler.

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Regarding Trump's travel ban, how is it effective to ban visa or green card holders? They went through the process legally.

Also, why was Saudi Arabia not on the list? Clearly, Saudi Arabia supports terrorism so if you're going to have a travel ban, they should be #1. I wonder if Trump's business deals in Saudi Arabia kept them off the list?

Does Trump want to be effective or not?

1. Green card holders weren't banned. It's just that if they leave the country and want to return, they will have to go through additional screening. Fine by me.

Why would they need additional screening if they travel? They already have a green card.

If their behavior/background requires additional investigation, that should happen regardless of travel.

Quote:

2. Saudi Arabia was not on the list because unfortunately, they are a crucial ally in the Middle East. Apart from Israel, they are our biggest ally there.

I can't STAND them, but for the time being we need them.

And FYI, this list is just a start. It will probably keep growing, thankfully.

Saudi Arabia is a business ally but they are absolutely not an ally when it comes to terrorism.

So Trump wants to ban travel from certain countries to make us safer but won't limit the country that sent 15 of 19 suicide bombers on 9/11? It doesn't make sense and you know it.

Does Trump want to be effective or not?

You are being obtuse and repeating yourself. I suggest you read my post again.

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Regarding Trump's travel ban, how is it effective to ban visa or green card holders? They went through the process legally.

Also, why was Saudi Arabia not on the list? Clearly, Saudi Arabia supports terrorism so if you're going to have a travel ban, they should be #1. I wonder if Trump's business deals in Saudi Arabia kept them off the list?

Does Trump want to be effective or not?

1. Green card holders weren't banned. It's just that if they leave the country and want to return, they will have to go through additional screening. Fine by me.

2. Saudi Arabia was not on the list because unfortunately, they are a crucial ally in the Middle East. Apart from Israel, they are our biggest ally there.

I can't STAND them, but for the time being we need them.

And FYI, this list is just a start. It will probably keep growing, thankfully.

135jc wrote:
Quote:

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
Quote:

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
Since Mexico does not want to pay for the wall what is their suggestion to keep their citizens within their own boundaries? Maybe they will want to reimburse the US for all the services the immigrants will receive here in the US curtosy of the taxpayer

Why is it Mexico's concern?

You don't think this is a black eye for Mexico? They want to be part of a global world and can't manage their own boarders?

The rest of the world is too busy laughing at America's black eyes.

Anyways, people will always try to improve themselves if possible. You can shame them but it's still going to happen.

The rest of the world needs America a lot more then America needs them. Maybe soon you will realize that too.

heights wrote:
Quote:

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Great article on immigration:

America's Immigration Challenge

Coming to the United States would benefit millions?but policymakers seldom ask whether their arrival would benefit the United States.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/a ... /2015/12/refugees/419976/

The benefit to the US depends on who the immigrant is.

If the immigrant is talented and productive, then clearly their presence benefits the US. Ask Google about bringing in foreign talent, they know a little about HR. Or ask a low margin small business owner who needs low skill manual laborers (ie jobs that the typical American won't do).

You make Americans sound as if they are refusing work or are not smart enough to do the job. From manual labor, to ball players, to computer techs, to doctors, just to name a few. Perhaps we should put an official moratorium on foreign staff so only Americans need apply first. Would you choose over your family for someone on the outside ?

JCMan8 wrote:
Great article on immigration:

America's Immigration Challenge

Coming to the United States would benefit millions?but policymakers seldom ask whether their arrival would benefit the United States.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/a ... /2015/12/refugees/419976/

135jc wrote:
Quote:

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
Since Mexico does not want to pay for the wall what is their suggestion to keep their citizens within their own boundaries? Maybe they will want to reimburse the US for all the services the immigrants will receive here in the US curtosy of the taxpayer

Why is it Mexico's concern?

You don't think this is a black eye for Mexico? They want to be part of a global world and can't manage their own boarders?

Yvonne wrote:
Between 2013 and 2014, the foreign-born population increased by 1 million, or 2.5 percent. Immigrants in the United States and their U.S.-born children now number approximately 81 million people, or 26 percent of the overall U.S. population

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

Azul_the_Cat wrote:
Not to mention a 30ft wall only creates a market for 31ft ladders and rope. It's not like some magic force field. I personally don't understand the point of wasting all this money, especially when the majority of illegal immigrants have overstayed visa's and did not cross the border illegally.

I wonder how Trump will blame this on someone else when it blows up in his face.

Plenty of countries use walls for protection, such as Israel, and they work fine.

Plus, you act like it won't be patrolled. They'll have drones to patrol huge areas at once and can spot people trying to get over the wall. This will allow border security to arrest them.

Also, it's around a 50/50 split between illegals who sneak through the border and those who overstay their visas. Trump said he will aggressively target both problems.

Finally, just the wall is not enough, but it is needed regardless. As General Kelly said, now Director of National Security, the wall is necessary for border security but not sufficient.

If drones can patrol the border, why do they need a wall?

To make it much more difficult for them to get over. While I'm sure some still will try, and a fraction may make it over, far fewer will be able to. Is this a serious question?

135jc wrote:
Since Mexico does not want to pay for the wall what is their suggestion to keep their citizens within their own boundaries? Maybe they will want to reimburse the US for all the services the immigrants will receive here in the US curtosy of the taxpayer

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

Azul_the_Cat wrote:
Not to mention a 30ft wall only creates a market for 31ft ladders and rope. It's not like some magic force field. I personally don't understand the point of wasting all this money, especially when the majority of illegal immigrants have overstayed visa's and did not cross the border illegally.

I wonder how Trump will blame this on someone else when it blows up in his face.

Plenty of countries use walls for protection, such as Israel, and they work fine.

Plus, you act like it won't be patrolled. They'll have drones to patrol huge areas at once and can spot people trying to get over the wall. This will allow border security to arrest them.

Also, it's around a 50/50 split between illegals who sneak through the border and those who overstay their visas. Trump said he will aggressively target both problems.

Finally, just the wall is not enough, but it is needed regardless. As General Kelly said, now Director of National Security, the wall is necessary for border security but not sufficient.

135jc wrote:
Quote:

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:

We're going to build a wall and we're going to pay for it (twice)

You simply added 20% to the cost of each vehicle. Some calculation! There is a 60billion dollar trade surplus for Mexico indoing business with the US. They are not going to let that walk away. A compromise will be reached. Geeze!

Azul_the_Cat wrote:
I hope everyone enjoys paying more for the same things.


"The presidential administration of Donald Trump came up with a brilliant idea to pay for the Mexican border wall yesterday. Instead of having Mexicans pay for the wall, he?d have Americans pay for the wall, through a 20 percent border tax on imported goods. And wouldn?t you know it, a lot of cars are imported from Mexico.

We?ve taken the liberty to calculate just how much those cars will cost you with their shiny new 20 percent price bump, thanks to the new president and his wall.

Call this a thought exercise. No one is sure how exactly the Trump administration could implement such a tax, whether it would be per each imported good or overall somehow. But let?s assume it?s the former, so we?re calculated a 20 percent increase from the current base price of every vehicle.

It should be noted that almost immediately after news broke of the potential border tax, White House officials walked back their remarks, saying that paying for the wall this way was just, well, it was just one of a lot of options, okay? Via the New York Times:

But a furious uproar prompted Mr. Spicer to temper his earlier remarks, saying the plan was simply ?one idea? that might work to finance the wall. Mr. Spicer said it was not the job of the White House to ?roll something out? on tax policy, while Mr. Trump?s chief of staff, Reince Priebus, said the administration was considering ?a buffet of options.?
Either way it?s going to be an expensive buffet for someone. We should say that this isn?t a direct tax on consumers, but that?s likely how it will end up, as corporations don?t like to absorb costs. They always pass the savings?and the increased expenses?on to you. Either way, Trump?s whole ?Mexico will pay for the wall? was clearly a complete lie, as now you, Americans, will pay for the wall.

We should also say that a likely scenario for many of these cars, if this tax comes to pass, is that they will cease being sold in the United States. They tend to be small cars, which are unpopular at the moment anyway given how cheap gas is, and thus with a low profit margin. If you think Ford will bother selling the Fiesta here at all if the price goes up 20 percent, forget it.

?Oh ho ho,? you say. ?But now the companies will just bring the manufacturing into the United States, and the price will magically stay cheap!? Not so fast. Even if that sort of scenario does come to pass, which it won?t, new manufacturing facilities take time to build anew or build out. That fantasy is years out, at best.

I?ve got nothing against the American worker or American jobs. Hell, we?re all American workers with American jobs. But if you want to buy American, or have the big beautiful wall, you?re going to have to pay for it.

(Please note! For some of these cars, not every example is built in Mexico. For example, not all Ram pickup trucks are made in Mexico, but the regular cab light-duty Rams are. Those are the ones we?ve based the pricing on.)"

Ford Fiesta
Old Price: $13,660
Mexican Wall Price: $16,392

Ford Fiesta ST
Old Price: $21,140
Mexican Wall Price: $25,368

Ford Fusion
Old Price: $22,120
Mexican Wall Price: $26,544

Lincoln MKZ
Old Price: $35,170
Mexican Wall Price: $42,204

Ram 1500
Old Price: $26,395
Mexican Wall Price: $31,674

Ram Heavy Duty
Old Price: $33,245
Mexican Wall Price: $39,894

Ram Promaster
Old Price: $27,935
Mexican Wall Price: $33,522

Toyota Yaris iA
Old Price: $15,950
Mexican Wall Price: $19,140

Toyota Tacoma (Double Cab)
Old Price: $24,950
Mexican Wall Price: $29,940

Mazda 3
Old Price: $17,845
Mexican Wall Price: $21,414

Jeep Compass
Old Price: $19,940
Mexican Wall Price: $23,928

Dodge Journey
Old Price: $21,145
Mexican Wall Price: $25,374

Fiat 500
Old Price: $14,995
Mexican Wall Price: $17,994

Fiat 500 Abarth
Old Price: $19,995
Mexican Wall Price: $23,994

Nissan Sentra
Old Price: $16,990
Mexican Wall Price: $20,388

Nissan Versa
Old Price: $11,990
Mexican Wall Price: $14,388

Nissan NV200
Old Price: $21,330
Mexican Wall Price: $25,596

Honda Fit
Old Price: $16,090
Mexican Wall Price: $19,308

Honda HR-V
Old Price: $19,465
Mexican Wall Price: $23,358

Honda CR-V
Old Price: $24,045
Mexican Wall Price: $28,854

Volkswagen Jetta
Old Price: $17,895
Mexican Wall Price: $21,474

Volkswagen Golf
Old Price: $19,895
Mexican Wall Price: $23,874

Volkswagen Beetle
Old Price: $19,995
Mexican Wall Price: $23,874

Volkswagen GTI
Old Price: $25,595
Mexican Wall Price: $30,714