Politicians Can't Back Sell-The-Projects Idea

housing projects, rc, rs, restrictive zoning

these are the "programs" that caused our present housing crisis

but that would require local politicians to have an open mind, instead of pandreing to the poor (votes)

love how very rich + very poor = diversity in these idiots' eyes

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 9:10 AM

I would love to see where this politicians homes are.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 9:13 AM

are they all Democrats?
probably

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 9:14 AM

textbook limousine liberals

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 9:17 AM

The politicians should stop begging for poor people votes, there is an abundance of rich people here now and you should concentrate on them!

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 9:18 AM

"...the diverse communities they help foster"

hahahahaha

fucking pandering idiots

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 9:21 AM

I'm not one to think the best of politicians, but I actually think the letter makes some important points. Selling housing projects does seem to be a one shot deal and where will all the displaced residents of housing projects go? I think a lot of the comments here are motivated by self-interest and not at all concerned with issues of affordable housing or what is best in terms of the city as a whole.

I'd be interested to see what residents of housing projects now think of an idea to sell. Something tells me they wouldn't be too keen on the idea.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 9:24 AM

i say we build extensions to each of these pol's homes and shove a couple of welfare families in them. would make for lovely "diverse" dinner conversation!

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 9:24 AM

projects = concentrated institutional poverty, unrealized tax revenue and economic activity, poor urban planning, susidized poverty, fostering crime, drug use and hopelesness...

bascially "impeding upward mobility" like these assholes are accusing HUD of

good lord i hate local politicians

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 9:30 AM

It's amazing how the hardworking middle class is always get shafted. We don't get support for housing and we don't get the tax breaks of the rich! Why are all liberal politicians short sighted lemmings? Why can't something be done with the housing projects like what was done in
Chicago? Create a diverse mix of housing with low and middle class tenants where all own and take care of their homes! The projects are drug and crime infested shitholes that produce less than stellar, uneducated citizens! The model in Chicago works!!!

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 9:41 AM

I love how so many people assume that only welfare families live in the projects when there are many more working families in them than some of you republican conservative neomorons care to admit. Families who struggle to make ends meet because employers pay them minimum wage, no health insurance or benefits. Tax paying families with kids who are working hard in school and can't afford books-unlike the big fat cat politicians who eat out every night on your dime, & CEO's who can afford $6000 shower curtains wile laying off thousands. Oh yeah- get a job? Do you mean the jobs that American employers are shipping to India and China as fast as they can? But I guess if you have money or a high paying job and investment portfolio why should you care? You got yours.

I love listenting to the Wall St. types scream about the projects- look at the statistics. Black on Black crime takes a far greater toll in the projects than on any Gucci wearing, bespoke suited "upper echelon" New Yorker. So how about admitting that you really know nothing about life in the projects beyond news coverage (and we know how balance that is) and your own prejudice.

Dem Lib and Proud of it

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 9:43 AM

You better speak Quest!!! Let them know.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 9:46 AM

9:43 is a typical phony lib

so the only types of people in new york are;

1) "wall street types", CEO's

and

2) mimimum age earners with kids who can't afford books

screw anything in between

go fuck yourself

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 9:49 AM

Does anyone know the percentage of people in the projects who work? Growing up near LG I distinctly remember folks leaving there in the morning to get on the subway to go to work.

Also, nobody in the projects likes them. They are horrible for children and teens especially.

Many of my friends who grew up in the projects had mothers who went to work every single day. All of these friends are now college-educated professionals. The mother of one of these friends was a nurse, another one was an admin assistant to some big wig at Lincoln Center.

What all of these families had in common was that there was no father. Don't demonize these folks.

Also, don't generalize. (I hope I'm not doing that.) Some projects are primarily Hasidic and Latino. I went to some projects in Canarsie that had lots of working-class whites.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 9:50 AM

Not everyone who lives in the projects is on welfare. I know of a few rookie COPS who live in the projects because it is all they can afford rather than be a 30 year old shacking up with mom.

If you want to get rid of the projects fine, but build affordable housing for THEM in the form of town houses or something of the sort. Don't put a up some ugly glass condo so some nyu/wall street yuppie can say he lives in the reformed hood.

Many of the people from the projects are your delivery men, customer service reps, maintenance people, security guards, sales people etc.

Let's see how fast you will check out in Macy's when you only have one cashier because the other cashiers have a 2 hour commute.

P.S. Before anyone says I must be a resident of the proj., I am not. I live in a midtown condo high rise but I am sick of seeing some kid with an inheritance coming to New York and demanding, everything should be laid out for them. What have they done for themselves besides spending Grandma's money.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 9:51 AM

"... I am sick of seeing some kid with an inheritance coming to New York and demanding, everything should be laid out for them. What have they done for themselves besides spending Grandma's money."

What a ridiculous over generalization. New York is full of people who have made it on their own. Nobody helped my husband and me buy our apartment.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 10:13 AM

Here are the facts:

Average family income in Conventional Public Housing is $21,520

Working families account for 44.3% of NYCHA families

14.0% of NYCHA families receive public assistance ("welfare")

Social Security, SSI, a pension, Veteran's benefits, etc., support 41.7% of the families

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 10:18 AM

9.51 AM;

You are so full of it, you should consider running for office to join the band of idiots who wrote this letter.

Tell me: where do the "few" rookie cops you know live? How is it that someone who lives in midtown hi-rise know a few rookie cops. You are such a BS artist, and the fact that you speak in broad generalizations proves it.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 10:18 AM

Why would we house poor people in $2M apartments - Who on this board thinks that's a good idea? The idea behind subsidized housing (originally anyway) was to give people a TEMPORARY place to stay while they got back on their feet. The current turnover rate in the projects is 3% (and if you exclude people moving out because they die - the real turnover rate that is people who move out of their own accord is less than 1%) - ARE YOU KIDDING ME - how is this helping anyone - it's ruining generations. Projects have now created multigenerational poverty. Kicking people out of these "Coffins in the SKY" will be the best possible thing we can do for them.

Sell these buildings off and use the money to build scatter-sight housing throughout the outer boroughs. AND these new units should only be for people who can't take care of themselves. If a government provides housing for some middle class people it must provide housing for all middle class people. It's just not fair otherwise.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 10:28 AM

More facts:

The New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) currently has a Working Family Preference in place. From the NYCHA Web site:

… 50%, one out of every two new vacancies in public housing, will go to a working family, putting the working family on an equal footing with the non-working family in obtaining affordable housing.

A working family, like all public housing residents, is a low-income family. The one- person family maximum annual income is $39,700, the ten-person family maximum is $83,900.

More:
Applicants are not required to have a minimum income but the individual applicant or a family member who will reside with him/her must have some type of income.
Rent is based on 30% of the family’s adjusted gross income.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 10:29 AM

Thanks for those facts. So, 14% of those in public housing are on welfare. The rest are not.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 10:35 AM

Lots of trolls - or maybe just one out this morning

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 10:40 AM

10.35 - social security...if you want to split hairs

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 10:56 AM

So now it's impossible for someone living in midtown to know a couple of rookie cops? How absurd. The opportunities to know anyone doing anything in this city is one of the great things about it - you can meet rookie cops on the subway, in church, on line in the supermarket, and gasp! they could be from your childhood neighborhood - not everyone in NY is from somewhere else. Talk about generalizations.

And since the starting salary for cops is under $30K, they certainly qualify for public housing. That's a crime on several levels. Lesson taught here - people's conceptions of who lives in public housing is based not on fact, but on the evening news, the NY Post, and zipping by in a cab with the windows rolled up.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 10:56 AM

The projects often do seem to be isolated islands of poverty, and underachievement and certainly this can be good for no one. However, simply selling off the projects without more will certainly displace the most vulnerable in society including many working people.
As with virtually everything now a days it seems like you have to be in one 'camp' or another, when the solution is probably in the middle.
There is probably a solution that can make the projects less homogeneous for the benefit of all as well as raise money for their continued role in our city. As a proposal, I suggest using some of the vacant land/parking for new construction as 50/50 affordable housing with the 50% being culled from the projects themselves - as the existing buildings begin to have vacancies - either convert those units to market rate (which will be lower then prevailing rates - at least at first) or sell them as condos. Eventually with a re-investment from the proceeds of the construction and the more balanced demographics - the projects can serve as an affordable as well as good place to live.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 11:05 AM

I agree 10:56. It says so much that someone would think that someone living in midtown could not possibly know any cops. This is because this person knows no cops. This person feels the way they do about the projects because they fail to see the residents as humans.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 11:08 AM

10.56;

Still full of it. Can't answer the question about how you know the rookie cops, and where they live. However, as usual, you are ready to launch into a lecture about the ills of society, and the "lessons" we should learn.

You are FOS.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 11:09 AM

How do I know a few rookie cops? Maybe because I went to high school with them. Maybe I helped one furnish his STUDIO in east NY projects less than 2 months ago.

People on this board kill me. They are priced out of Manhattan, and they want to trample on homes where people already live.

Tear down the projects, fine but make sure these people have a place to go thats not in Idaho. You want to put luxury high rises up? Allocate a % of the building to the former residents, and I am not talking about a lottery where everyone can apply, I am talking about those people from those projects where they once stood.

I bet some people would not like to be THATCLOSE to them. huh?

I too, work for a living and am not some BS Artist. I do not know many Artist who can afford to live in these ugly facades going up across NY.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 11:12 AM

The areas immmediately surrounding public housing are consistently bleak and never seem to change. Meanwhile, if you go a few blocks away the areas have generally improved significantly over the past 10-15 years. The onus should be on the NYCHA to do something ab out that.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 11:14 AM

110.09 is someone who only has the tenacity of a bulldog online. I bet you quiver on Canal St.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 11:17 AM

Here's my personal experience. I'm a white Jewish woman, born in the Bronx (a "townie," as native NYers were being described on another board recently, which I think is hilarious). My parents moved to Yonkers when I was born. When I was 6, my mother kicked my father out (not a nice man, was he) and discovered that he had left her in serious debt -- utilities and rent unpaid, the whole shebang. My grandparents lived in a Mitchell-Lama building in the Bronx, and paid the super $500 to fast track my mom into an apartment (yes, you read that right -- A BRIBE!). We lived there until I was 13, and my mom worked her ass off, starting as a secretary and working her way up the corporate ladder to become an executive (with no college education) while my grandma took care of me. My mom actually paid my grandmother a "salary" to be my caregiver, since my grandma had to quit her job to stay at home with me. I went to public school, my mom saved every dollar, and when I was 13, my mom remarried and we moved to Westchester. My grandmother, who went back to work as a secretary at Lehman college in the music department (and who was adored by everyone -- students, professors, her neighbors, her doctors, the local gangbangers, I mean EVERYONE) died in that building. So while it is not an exact comparison, what I can tell you is that subsidized housing enabled my mother to make a better life for us, gave my low-income grandma a clean, relatively safe place to live, and gave me the incentive to go to college, get a good job, and work hard at it so that (God willing and the creek don't rise) I won't ever need to live in subsidized housing. I know people who share on this board often get blasted, but I did want to put a face on this. It helped us during a rough few years, and we were grateful to live there and grateful to leave. My grandmother made a home there, and she paid her rent and was part of her community and took amazing care of her apartment. I am certain there are people just like we were in the projects, so I am slow to judge what goes on there, even if it frustrates and frightens me.

stuck_in_the_middle

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 11:21 AM

"Allocate a % of the building to the former residents, and I am not talking about a lottery where everyone can apply, I am talking about those people from those projects where they once stood."

why????

why should they entitled to lux condos in a prime location. whearas someone who makes the astronimical sum of say 60K /yr has to commute 90 minutes from the outer boroughs?

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 11:23 AM

Because 11:23 you that was the exchange for tearing down where they live and also life is not fair. You win some, you lose some.

And because it is already being done. I have a friend who lives not to far from Columbus Circle and pays 3,500 per month for a 1 bedroom, and her neighbor across the hall pay 653.00 per month for a 2bedroom, 2 bath.

New York City provides tax breaks for buildings who do this....

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 11:32 AM

11:21 - thanks for the story.
A few points that we should all make note of:

-Bronx location - not prime manhattan waterfront types
-You used it as temporary safety net. Bravo for how it all turned out, and you had the integrity to work hard and move on when appropriate. As opposed to generations of handouts for the underachieving.Unfortunatly you cannot legislate integrity.
-The ML program is a bit bettre than typical housing projects, since there is some sense of ownership and the buildings have a somewhat better design

i have no problem with the situation you described and glad it served its purpose. but its a far cry from the failed experiments in housing that Manhattan and parts of Brooklyn have been artifically forced to accept

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 11:32 AM

11:32 illustrates the mentality of these politicians..

"why do such and such?"
"cuz thats the way its always been done"

think.outside.the.box

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 11:35 AM

11.21 AM;

Your story is not convincing, from a public policy point of view (though I am glad things worked out fine for your family). Basically you are stating that the city's taxpayers' should subsidize folks who need temporary help, so that they can get back on their feet and move to Westchester.

I must respectfully say that it is exactly this type of policy that drives the middle class out of NY. During the heyday of liberalism in NY (which I believe is the period you are talking about), politicians continually presented to the taxpayers the notion that they should fork out so that the city could serve as one giant social services organization. The result was a city that teetered on the brink of bankruptcy.

There are many things a city must do with its tax base: build roads, sewer systems, schools,etc. These should not be in the business of providing subsidized housing on a lottery basis. By your own account, your family had to pay a bribe to rig this lottery in your favor. Also by your own account, your family was not under any obligation for this privelege. When your mom found herself in a better situation, she moved to Westchester. Did she feel any obligation to the City for supporting her during her down time?

I am not trying to be harsh with your mom - she did what she had to do for her family, and I would have done the same thing. My criticism is towards a system that allows this.

Once again, let me state that I am glad that things worked our for your family.

Benson.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 11:41 AM

no one has ever answered me this...while i agree that there is a need for public housing, why are they entitled to live so close to the city...whats so wrong about living an hour out and commuting via subway like most new yorkers???

thats what pisses people off the most, i think, and yes its may be for selfish reasons....but a valid argument

so i say no public housing in manhattan
phase out RC/RS asle (which is slowly happening)

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 11:51 AM

There was an aricle in the spring (I believe)in the NYT about job creation in NY. Know where 30% of the increase in jobs was? Home health care. Not Wall Streeters. So if that is the largest segment of job growth (and they make like $8/hr.), we have to have safe, clean affordable housing. These are the people who are taking care of our parents now, and will take care of us all too soon.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 11:56 AM

Why does the city/state/fed have an obligation to provide housing to anyone?

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 12:00 PM

It's amazing how quick people are on this board to completely discount poor people. I see some merits in selling some projects (and absolutely agree that they are a failed experiment) in the more expensive areas - but those of you who want to displace all of those residents to the far reaches of the outer boroughs are nuts. Maybe you want to live in an exclusively rich white city, but I don't. That's not, nor should it ever be, New York.

Any sale of public housing, and the following displacement of tax paying citizens, needs to be done with great care.

It never stops to amaze me how angry, short-sighted, and ignorant many posters here are.

Native New Yorker who owns a coop apartment in Clinton Hill.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 12:09 PM

10:56,

The starting salary for a rookie cop is NOT under $30,000. Cadets are paid $25,100 when beginning the ACADEMY. That's right, while the rest of the world accumulates five- and six-figure debts to attain education and training, police officers are PAID to go to school. Upon graduation, pay is raised to $32,700. Within five years, the salary increases to $59,000. Not bad for a job that doesn't even require a bachelors degree. Yea, yea, I know that 59K is less than in other areas, but it's far better than the picture that Pat Lynch and the PBA love to convey ad naseam (even though they agreed to it during union negotiations).

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 12:28 PM

Montrose Morris:

"I am so sick of the pervasive attitude that poor people are somehow living soooo large in the projects, while "deserving" people like you are reduced to commuting. You have no idea what poverty is."

Is poverty $150 sneakers, the latest iPod and cell phones, and shiny new SUV's in the NYCHA parking lots? And don't tell me it's a small minority. The parking lots (free no less!) are full of late model cars.

These impoverished people seem to have a lot of disposable income.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 12:35 PM

Montrose;

Why don't you feel some compassion for a working person who is paying taxes and trying to make it on their own? THESE are the people I tip my hat to.

You were indignant that I asked someone, who had benefited from subsidized NYC housing and then moved to Westchester, about their obligation to NYC and its taxpayers? This is nonsense, and exactly why these projects are so dysfunctional. The folks in the projects are under no obligation to society in return for the subsidy they are receiving from WORKING TAXPAYERS. This is exactly the philosophy of the old welfare system.

Well, as I've said before: these projects' days are numbered. Just like the old welfare system came crashing down, so too will these vestiges of the days when socialism was rampant in NYC. It is inevitable, as they are running big deficits that no one (the federal, state and city governments) is willing to pay anymore, despite this "hats out" letter from these local hack politicians.

Benson

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 12:36 PM

11:34 "These people don't care about the lives of families they don't see or know."
Wrong - we see how poorly your efforts are working and demand a CHANGE. YOUR PROGRAMS AREN'T WORKING - THEY AREN'T WORKING - WAKE UP!!!! YOU'RE RUINING LIVES NOT HELPING!!! Your policies have created multigenerational poverty. So many of these people can care for themselves. Stop feeding them a fish each day. Give them the pole and push them out the door. It may shock you at how resourceful, competent, and self sufficient they are. You continue to underestimate them. Stop it!!!

I say we slowly fade out this subsidized housing - sell off the best locations first. You can still easily find apartments for less than $1,000/month within 30 minutes of Manhattan. The wealthiest tenants get kicked out first. The poorest should be placed in permanent housing (I understand some members of our society can't care for themselves - I'm happy to spend my tax dollars and charitable donations to ensure they have a place to stay). But as a society we should either prove subsidized housing for every working person or no working person. It's unfair otherwise. And it makes NO SENSE to provide $2M apartments for anyone.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 12:37 PM

I would like to point out that housing projects are not failed social experiments. there were built as middle class and sometimes high end housing and as those groups vacated, the working poor moved in. I also grew up in the Bronx and in housing projects. I saw them change as the middle class moved to the suburbs, or Florida. Huge apartment complexes were the "thing to do", not a speculative neo-communist incursion into a capitalist society. Their fortunes rose and fell with the city's. As those of us who were born and raised here know.

As far as Benson's "There are many things a city must do with its tax base: build roads, sewer systems, schools,etc. These should not be in the business of providing subsidized housing on a lottery basis. " well excuse me? Why should I, who do not own a car pay for your roads? Why should I who did not have children pay for public schools? Why should my taxes subsidize every corporate tax break and subsidy that I do not benefit from and yet I can't expect anything in return when I need help? And believe me, I have been in the position of needing help desperately and not being able to get it because of people like you who think a capitalist society means only the rich deserve to have a life. You need to go back and reread the documents that founded this country- where do they say money buys you rights?

I'm with Montrose Morris- I'm sick of people who think money entitles them to everything good and lets shove aside those who can't. Unless we need them to wait our tables or rake our leaves, or man our cash registers.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 12:40 PM

"These impoverished people seem to have a lot of disposable income."

Now that's bullshit.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 12:40 PM

If they don't have disposable income then how can so many nail and hair stores survive?

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 12:44 PM

12:28- until the day you are willing to put your 100% cashmere coated, desk- sitting, restaurant-stuffing, pretentious, ignorant, ungrateful ass on the line for another human being I strongly suggest you not parade your ignorance any further than you already have. When you can begin to comprehend one iota of what a cop's life is like, then you can say something. One thing I do know for sure- the day comes you want one, you'll be very ready to kiss their underpaid butts. Until then please stick to subjects you know something about- like wine.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 12:48 PM

I don't suppose it occurs to you that working people should be able to spend it on hair and nails too? At least they aren't spending $6000 on shower curtains.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 12:50 PM

I don't suppose anyone thinks its susidizing when we give huge tax breaks and subsudies to FCR or big corporations? Where do any of you think that money is coming from? Hello- your taxes. Don't hear any of you "compassionate conservatives" types carrying on about that.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 12:53 PM

12:48 Cops are overpaid - simple as that - they just chose to funnel all of their budget to pay the salaries of the top brass. I feel safe in the city -clearly we're paying cops enough to ensure safety. Why should we overpay them - if they want better pay tell them to become a stagehand.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 12:53 PM

guest 12:40:

Let's put aside the small luxuries like the iPods, designer clothing, etc. and try to offer the explanation as to:

- Why are NYCHA parking lots full of late model luxury vehicles? And I'm not exaggerating.

- Why do they even offer free parking? This is NYC, probably the best public transportation system in the world.

On a simplistic level, I can understand subsidizing their shelter, but cars and parking? Poverty, gotta love it.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 12:57 PM

11:51 here

still no one answered my question

public housing : ok, but why so close to the CBD???

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 12:58 PM

Excuse me, Benson, but while the poster's mother lived in NYC, she certainly was paying back in the form of the taxes she paid the city as a resident, and in the form of all of the other taxes - sales, etc, that everyone pays while living and spending money here. Why hold her, or anyone else, up to some ridiculous standard of pay back? Because she got some help, she's supposed to do what? She did it already. Working people in public housing are paying taxes, just like you and I do, their subsidy is not "free".

And puhleeeze, 12:35. Can we stop the stereotypes? For every SUV in a projects parking lot are 200 residents who have no car at all, and can't scrape up the $2. for the subway. For every pair of sneakers are those who barely have shoes. There are far fewer parking spaces than residents, so your so-called factual evidence is only an observation made as you cruised by a project on your way out of the vacinity. And perhaps someone scraped and saved for months for that I-Pod? You don't know what you are talking about.

And if a cadet gets a whole $25,100 as a student in the Academy, that hardly is enough for anything but public housing. Cadents don't live in dorms, you know. $32K is hardly compensation for risking one's life everyday until that glorious day you reach $59K. What difference does one's educational background make when you are either a target, an object of fear and derision, or have to live with the consequences of having shot someone, innocent or not? Funny how no one wants to be a cop, or pay them decently, but still scream there aren't enough of them to protect them from those people in the projects.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 12:59 PM

12:53- very intelligent, well thought out answer. I congratulate you on your forward thinking and short memory.

the reason you are feeling so safe today is because they are working so hard to keep us that way. Perhaps a little research on your part would make you sound less ignorant on the subject.

Idea for you: if the city is safer why would that be? Did you honestly think it came about by itself? Did the Fairy of Safety wave her magic wand over the city and say "despair not my post 9-11 city, I have sprinkled safety dust over you and you are now safe"?

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 1:00 PM

BLACK, WHITE - meet gray

so sick of these threads turning into poor vs rich with ZERO consideration for the true middle class in NYC...you know, the ones that keep the economy afloat

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 1:00 PM

Probably, 1:00 because they are squeezed out. Middle class gets it from both ends- and sadly no one bothers to understand how crucial the role of the middle class in society is. A huge mistake, and a costly one for all of us.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 1:05 PM

Hi Benson, it's 11:21 (stuck_in_the_middle).

I'm not sure why my story isn't convincing, as is it is 100% true. Perhaps I misunderstand you?

We moved to Westchester because my mom had $10,000 to put down on a house, and upper upper Westchester was where she could afford to go. She wanted to be an owner, and this was a place she could afford to own (it was Yorktown Heights, in 1983, if that means anything). We lived in the Bronx from 1975-83.

What's comical to me is that so often on these boards I read that people who can't afford to live in NYC should leave. Well, that's what my mom did. When she had enough money to buy, and her life was such that she could (part of the reason we stayed in the Bronx was so that my grandma could watch me) she moved to the place where she could afford to. It wasn't Scarsdale or another river town. She and my step-dad commuted 4 hours a day from our Yorktown Heights house (30 mins to the train station, 60 min on the train, 30 mins to their offices, twice a day).

In any case, I shared this story just to give a perspective from someone who was helped by subsidized housing.

On behalf of my mother, who is nothing short of a superstar, I thank you for your kind words on the success she made of herself in the face of very difficult circumstances.

stuck_in_the_middle

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 1:14 PM

I. TO THE POSTERS OPPOSED TO PUBLIC HOUSING

While you resent your tax-dollars subsidising shelter for the poor, you forget that the vast majority of gov't housing subsidsidies goes to those making over $100,000. Mortgage tax-deductions are a form of welfare as much as public-houing is. To that, I might add all of the tax-breaks given to developers. The issue isn't free-market vs. hand-outs but who gets the hand-outs and under what conditions.

If you are so opposed to welfare, feel free to return your mortgage deductions to the public coffers (and your parents' deductions).

II. TO THE POSTERS OPPOSED TO *SELLING* PUBLIC HOUSING

Many of your arguments emphasize the economic benefits to NYC of income diversity ("these are the people who serve your food, clean your homes and offices."). Yet several of the projects being considered for sale are federally-designated NORCS ("Naturall Occurring Retirement Communities"). Significant numbers of their residents aren't in fact contributing to the full-spectrum economy you celebrate because, well, they've retired. NYCHA's "working-family preference" will change that at a glacial pace given the miniscule turn-over rate. There may be good moral arguments in favor of not selling the projects in more desirable neighborhoods, but the economic one's don't hold up under close scrutiny under current policy.

One can support public housing and also support the sale of these projects, assuming an equal number of units are built elsewhere.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 1:20 PM

Stuck_in_the_middle;

When I said that your story wasn't convincing, I meant that it did not make a strong enough case of the benefits of subsidized housing, from a policy point of view. Of course I believe your story itself!

I respect your point-of-view, but I have to disagree. In my mind, one of the reasons that NYC is so expensive (which is why your mom had to move out) is all of these inefficient subsidies. I really believe that we would all be better off if these subsidies would be eliminated. It would lower the cost of living in NY, allowing room for all. This is the way it used to be in NYC, before rent control, before the projects, etc.

By the way: we have a similiar story. When I was a boy,my family's wooden shack in Red Hook burned to the ground, and we were placed in the Red Hook projects on an emergency basis. My grandma lived in the projects for 39 years (in the Canarsie area). So, you would think I would be a big supporter of the projects. My experience has shown me, however, that these projects do more harm than good. They trap alot of people in a dependent life style.

Good luck!

Benson

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 1:32 PM

Benson,

NYC's rent control emerges in the 1940s and is firmly in place during the halcyon days you refer to when you say "This is the way it used to be in NYC"

Subsidies may be inefficient, but the marketplace can be as well -- as the historic and on-going failure of developers to produce low-income housing demonstrates.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 1:39 PM

1.39;

I was referring to the 1920's, when 250,000 units of housing was produced PER YEAR, as opposed to these days, when the figure is more like 35,000/year.

The production of housing ground to a halt when rent control was introduced.

Benson

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 1:47 PM

"12:28- until the day you are willing to put your 100% cashmere coated, desk- sitting, restaurant-stuffing, pretentious, ignorant, ungrateful ass on the line for another human being I strongly suggest you not parade your ignorance any further than you already have. When you can begin to comprehend one iota of what a cop's life is like, then you can say something. One thing I do know for sure- the day comes you want one, you'll be very ready to kiss their underpaid butts. Until then please stick to subjects you know something about- like wine."

Despite your little tantrum, you have provided not one shred of evidence to disprove what I wrote at 12:28. Care to debate me with facts rather than presumptuous generalizations?

I have a lot of respect for police officers, but for a job that does not require a college education, they do pretty well after only five years on the job. I only wish that I could retire with a pension and medical benefits after 20 years of working.

BTW, I'm a beer drinker. Wine's not for me.

Sincerely,
A person who was not paid to go to school

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 1:51 PM

I believe "middle class" now refers to anyone who makes too much money to be afforded any kind of help (via subsidized health insurance or housing), yet cannot afford to buy a home and is just managing to cover life's necessary expenses (which, for me, include food, housing, health insurance, disability insurance, renter's insurance, clothing, commutation costs, and monthly saving, but not necessarily iPods, cars and vacations). Essentially, if you slip neatly through all the cracks, you are middle class. I am in the same boat as you Montrose. I make a good salary (more than a rookie cop but less than a first year attorney), commute 2 hours a day to Brooklyn, work full time, and rent. And yes indeed, I pay my taxes! I have been saving for a down-payment, but my nest egg has not increased in pace with prices, and I also need to actually be able to afford to LIVE in the place once I buy it. Because of the way I grew up, I am very conscious of how easy it is to slip from "us" to "them." Heck, I was "them" for most of my childhood! What's to be done? I don't know. For myself, I sleep at night by staying out of debt, saving what I can, and volunteering through NY Cares to offer some comfort to single moms and their kids. It's not much probably, but it's something.

stuck_in_the_middle

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 1:51 PM

NYC is not so expensive because of inefficient subsidies- unless you are including those for big business. There we are talking billions of dollars of revenue lost, subsidized by taxpayers- rich and poor alike. FCR is a case in point. I grew up the projects in the Bronx. My family lived in them for years. The problem with the projects is that they are - for good or bad- affordable to the lower middle class and working poor. And i think anyone who truly thinks eliminating housing subsidies is the answer is shortsighted. Eliminate the subsidies and tax breaks to all those big businesses, stop throwing money at them while they take their jobs overseas, if you want to see any real difference. But blaming housing projects for NYC's ills? Puhleeze.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 1:54 PM

Benson,

But you're engaging in the post-hoc ergo proctor hoc fallacy ("Since no world wars happened after TV and 2 happened before TV, TV must produce peace"). A more accurate picture emerges if we consider the larger policy shifts of the time.

By the 1950s, gov't subsidies for new construction in the suburbs plus changes in legal changes in depreciation accounting lowered the comparative rate of return for investment in the city vs. the suburbs.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 1:56 PM

"Funny how no one wants to be a cop, or pay them decently, but still scream there aren't enough of them to protect them from those people in the projects."

I don't think people are complaining about that on this thread. If you're making a generalized statement, the people on the street who ARE complaining about cops are complaining more about them shooting people, so it follows that they'd want less of them around.
The cops don't create safety. Economic prosperity does and lack of hunger and envy create safety. Economic divides tempt people to break laws. Cops enforce laws, and in doing so, usually disrupt safetly with more violence.

Why is everyone talking about the cop who lives in the projects? Who cares. Boo freakin hoo. It means nothing to the projects or the topic.

New York City should force more cops and other civil servants to live in the projects. It should be part of the curriculum at the academy.

If the story is true, we should be glad a civil servant has chosen to live within NYC. It's his choice though.

There are plenty of people who make 25K or less who aren't living in the projects. Lil' piggy in training should go to craigslist and find himself a rent share. He'll find that there are plenty of fact checkers, freelance artists, and students from all sorts of academies who support themselves and make less than him. New York isn't all trust fund kids yet.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 2:03 PM

1.56 PM;

I don't disagree with your point that there were other factors working against the city at the time. However, doesn't this really reinforce my point even more? If you've got factors at play that are not in favor, then why in the world would you heap on another disincentive to private investment (i.e. rent control)?

In my mind, this was the essence of the failure of NYC's leadership after WWII - they operated in a vacuum. They continued to pass laws that reduced the incentive to private investment, and at the same time continued to hand out subsidy after subsidy that raided the treasury. They took no account of the lure of the suburbs. The results? Mass disinvestment...Middle class flight...the welfare state.

Fortunately, these mistakes from the past are slowly being corrected. As I said above, the projects are one of the last vestiges from those bad old days.

Benson

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 2:09 PM

hey 1:56, the Brookings Institute just called and they want to award you a prize for the most wonky thought put into a forum where it mattered least.
They also want you to unknot your panties.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 2:10 PM

Ah, I see what you're saying, Benson, and you make valid points. You can't legislate responsibility, accountability, and ambition, and yet you can't deny that despair is a huge part of the experience of being poor, that it's hard to see a way out of generational poverty. I don't know what the solution is, but I am certain that forcing homelessness on the residents of the projects will NOT help to cure what ails the projects! It's quite a tangled mess I think, and of course, not everyone is my mom (for one thing, not everyone had my grandma to help them). And certainly we can't solve it on a blog. But I do respect the quality of discourse on this thread. I'm glad housing was available to your family when you needed it, and I wish you good luck too. Now this working girl has to get back to work!

stuck_in_the_middle

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 2:13 PM

Just FYI- Most City civil servant jobs actually require NYC residency within 90 days of commencing the position. Some people would gladly live in fringe areas and commute to their poorly paying City job, but alas...that stupid residency requirement gets in the way.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 2:14 PM

1:51- well, I am of the opinion that those who are willing to put themselves on the line for others to keep them safe deserve a little extra consideration. Debate you with facts? Calling police officers "overpaid" is your opinion, and an ignorant one at that. I fail to see how you can claim respect for them in one sentence and then state:"but for a job that does not require a college education, they do pretty well after only five years on the job." Yeah- your respect really show.

FYI- since it is very obvious you do not know a single cop- many times their college educations are law enforcement related, and most of them spend a great deal of time doing community volunteer work and working with kids are at risk populations. I do volunteer work- do you?

20 years? let me enlighten you as to a few facts about being a police officer (and no I am not one): average age of death is 66; high stress levels put officers at a higher rate of heart disease than the average population; 68% increased probability of cancer with increased exposure time to police radar ; Elevated mortality risk of colon cancer and other digestive cancers ; One of the worst effects of stress on police officers is of course suicide. Twice as many police officers die by their own hand as do in the line of duty.
A study of 2376 Buffalo NY police officers found that compared to the white male population police officers had higher mortality rates for cancer, suicide, and heart disease. The suggested reason: Higher stress levels."; "The national divorce rate is 50%. All research shows police suffer a substantially higher divorce rate with estimates ranging from 60 to 75%. "; and if you want to know the biochemical dynamics of stress and physical damage to the body you should do a little investigating. What they go through in 20 years most people go through in 40.

FYI - I wasn't paid to go to school either but I am more than happy to have my tax dollars help police officers, soldiers and hardworking poor people get a good education.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 2:18 PM

2:03 - I don't want to debate your post too much but I would like to know how your "economic disparity and envy=crime theory" accounts for the significant drop of crime in NYC in the past 15 years at a time when economic disparity is increasing and also how the crimes of rape, dwi, domestic abuse and pedophilia fit into your theory.

Thanks

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 2:19 PM

Divorce rate for cops is so high b/c so many are f'ing on the side.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 2:21 PM

Benson,

You write "at the same time continued to hand out subsidy after subsidy that raided the treasury"

So, I assume you are against any policy that reduces tax-receipts -- which would include subsidies to developers now.

However we assess the City's post-war leadership, it's simply not true as you write that "they took no account of the lure of the suburbs."

Moses explicitly used public funds to create incentives to keep the middle-class (and their $) in NYC. Mitchell-Llama, Title 1 projects, all aimed to stem suburban out-migration.

Finally, as commentators from both the left (Moody's _From Welfare State to Real Estate_) and Right (Morris_The Cost of Good Intentions_) NYC's gov't was not more generous to unions and the poor than were other cities at the time, it was contracts for supplies and equipment (and to a lesser degree, CUNY) that drove the city's finances into the red.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 2:21 PM

I'm wondering how loud 2:03 will scream when the "little piggy-in-training" doesn't come fast enough when he needs them. I'm just amazed at the ingratitude of people on this board toward first responders. I suggest those of you who would prefer NYC without a police force might try living in a lovely place like Iraq- courtesy of our present administration.

I simply cannot figure out where you people grew up? On some white supremicist-survivalist camp in the wilds of Idaho? Do you have any clue as to how a city functions?

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 2:26 PM

2:21- can you please explain further what you meant about CUNY?

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 2:28 PM

2:28

Charles Morris, who served as assistant NYC budget director at the time and later worked as a vice president at chase, crunched NYC deficit numbers carefully in _The Cost of Good Intentions: NYC and the Liberal Experiment_, and concluded CUNY's move to open enrollment had a significant effect on the budget crisis.
He demonstrates that social programs had a negligible impact.

Kim Moody, from a more left perspective, adds to Morris's argument by addressing the role of the city's "contract, supplies, and equipment budget" as the culprit.

Neither blames the usual suspects, welfare, union contracts etc..

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 2:36 PM

2.21;

In answer to your question: yes, I am against hand-outs for developers.

I suppose you can say that Title 1 and ML were an attempt to keep the middle class in NY. However, I still maintain that the leaders were operating in a vacuum, and these programs are proof of it. What kind of a choice did it really present? On one hand you could have your own house to do as you please, in a pleasant environment, with a nice tax deduction and government-sponsore mortgage. On the other hand you were put up in a tower isolated in the neighborhood, with all sort of restrictions about your upside and how much you could earn. Most people voted with their feet.

Finally, to say that welfare and the union contracts were not significant contributors to the City's fiscal condition is just not based in reality. My father was a civil servant, and I grew up in a an area and environment that was dominated by civil servants. HOURS of conversation back then were dominated on how to bilk the city, how to get off with a 3/4 pay diability pension, how to charge double overtime. At the peak, 1,000,000 people in NYC were on welfare. To state that 1 in 8 residents being on welfare is not a significant financial strain is just not reality.

Benson

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 3:02 PM

Benson,

Whatever holes your dad and friends may have punched in the city budget, far more damage was done by others.

To get wonky, 61-75 the city's total costs from labor went up 313.6% but since the total growth of all city costs went up 393%, it couldn't have been the driving force behind budget shortfalls.

As for welfare, after 1970 the city's growth rate was slower than the national average.

Far more of your tax dollars went out the door to politically connected supply and equipment contracts that rose at twice the pace of the rest of the budget in those years. Yes, welfare killed the city in the 1970s, but it was white-collar welfare.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 3:21 PM

3.21;

Oh come on. Your latest post reads like one of the NYT editorials from that time trying to convince everyone that the City was not really that profligate.

You cleverly talk about the growth of the welfare rolls post-1970, knowing full well that the growth of the dole (to 1 million people) occured in the 1960's. In the late 1960's, the city's welfare expense almost DOUBLED every year. Why don't you cite the statistics from the 1960's???? It then remained more or less at 1 Million until Giuliani came along. Do you really think that you are going to win a debate by being too clever? Come on - let's be adults here.

As for the growth of labor cost - am I supposed to be relieved that labor costs weren't the very top driver? Gee, the labor costs grew only 313% in 15 years!!! What a relief to the taxpayer!! This is a record that any CEO would be proud of!!! Once again - come on - let's be adults.

You are obviously trying to put a spin as to what happened to the city back then. Let me provide you with a reality check: when Giuliani came along, he reformed welfare, he reformed the labor contracts, he cut down on crime, and the city started to recover, both fiscally and in terms of violence.

Funny thing about dollars and dead bodies: there is no hiding them. Back in the days when liberalism was running amuck in NYC, there were dead bodies everywhere, and the city was broke.

Benson

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 3:42 PM

"Back in the days when liberalism was running amuck in NYC, there were dead bodies everywhere, and the city was broke.
"

As opposed to today when the neocons and conservatives have the upper hand and the dead bodies are in Iraq, the country is being bled dry by the war, our constitutional rights have been so degraded we are verging on a police state, millions of working people can't afford health insurance, Giuliani can show his family values by telling his wife he is divorcing her in a press conference, push Bernard Kerik as Homeland Security honcho, the vice president shoots his friend in the face and no one blinks, and the President of the United States can steal an election, lie and send us off to war in in a country that had nothing to do with 9-11, no WMD's and no Osama Bin Laden. Oh yes- let's look at the Liberals and how THEY have destroyed the country with welfare.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 3:53 PM

Wow! Guiliani is a superhero! All by himself, he changed the face of New York. He should run for president!

Gosh, golly - Rudy!

Thank you, 3:53! Well said.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 3:58 PM

Wow, it's amazing how hysterical people get when someone dares to question the orthodoxy of the PBA! And I thought that the AY crowd was bad...

In 1:51, I clearly stated that I have a lot of respect for cops. If sinning means that believing that a $59,000 a year salary is considered a decent, then I am guilty. I never said that I hate cops or am ungrateful for what they do. That accusation was made by 2:18 and the ever-pontificating, long-winded Monstrose Morris.

Interesting facts, 2:18, but they still do not refute my original point: that the starting salary for cops is less than 30K, as stated by 10:56. That was where this all started, that was the extent of my point, and because I dared to raise it I have been equated with a cop-hater. I guess some things are taboo to discuss.

Also, 2:08, I agree that people who put their lives on the line deserve special consideration. That's why, once again, I respect cops, as well as soldiers in Iraq, cab drivers, EMT workers, convenience store clerks, and bodega and deli owners.

To answer your question about volunteering, which was seemingly posed with the assumption that I do not do so, YES, I volunteer with the elderly twice a week. Does that change anything?

Lastly, I can never understand why people like our esteemed Monstrose Morris use the same stale line: "If you're in trouble, who do you call?". Who else am I supposed to call when I see a crime committed? The Department of Buildings?

So, to state this once again, loud and clear, so that all of you knee-jerk, hysterical types can understand me: I RESPECT POLICE OFFICERS AND AM GRATEFUL FOR ALL THAT THEY DO. I never stated otherwise. I only noted that their starting salaries are not less than 30K. (Please read this final paragraph a minimum of five times and do deep breathing exercise for 90 seconds before responding)

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 3:58 PM

that post was from Dem Lib and proud of it, not 3:21. Benson- you are clever- 3;21 is intelligent. I doubt you know the difference but if a few manipulated stats only expose the fact that your racial tunnel vision is showing. I'm tired of you so-called conservative types using "welfare" as the excuse for every ill this country has. If you want to live in a country that lacks compassion, morals and humanity sorry to tell you you missed Nazi Germany over 50 years.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 3:59 PM

Folks;

I'm signing off: the nuts have arrived. I can't debte with people who reach into the gutter and call others they disagree with "Nazi's"

Benson

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 4:02 PM

Benson,

OK, I'll bite.

From 1961 to 1970 the welfare rolls in NYC expanded by a factor 4 -- but so did the rolls nationally. NYC was not exceptional.

Moreover, as slice of the budget, welfare payments went down 6.2% between 1969 to 1975. Hardly, then, the cause for the budget crisis.

As for Guiliani and crime, who's being "clever"? As you know, the crime rate starts droping well before Guilliani takes office and dropped by similiar percentages in other cities that pursued different policies. Why don't you cite the pre-Guilliani statistics?

No doubt we can attribute some of the crime drop to police strategies -- but no more than about 15% and some of those strategies are pre-Guilliani. To be generous to the pro-Guilliani side, we can probably settle on him being responsible, then, for about 1/10 of the crime drop.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 4:04 PM

":"but for a job that does not require a college education, they do pretty well after only five years on the job." Do you not see this? What respect? I'll take those deep breaths when you can prove you have the mental capacity to understand what you said.

You obviously think a cop's job is so easy any uneducated jerk can do it? (Unlike your big-ass so-called educated self). The training cops get today make your college education look like kindergarden. You must be right out of college to so stupid as to think college is the only way to get an education. There are people who have learned more by living and doing that you will ever comprehend- and I don't care if you have 6 doctorates. You will just always be that ignorant.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 4:11 PM

Benson- I did not call you a Nazi- I equated the kind of society you seem to advocate with the one established by Nazi Germany. those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it. I so love being called a nut by guys like you- last resort of a bad argument. See ya!

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 4:13 PM

Heh. Godwin's Law remains true.

"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."

-sg

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 4:23 PM

If college educations are so irrelevant to being a cop, then why does having a bachelors or masters degree accelerate promotions?

My comment about college educations was NOT meant to imply that people who do not have one are stupid or lesser than (anyone with a degree knows that's not true :), only that in this day and age many fields offering a similar pay scale require a minimum of a four-year degree. That is the reality and that was the basis for my comment. I'm sorry that you misunderstood it, but hopefully I've clarified myself.

I also agree with your point that experience is the best teacher. Interesting, we seem to agree on many things, but I just can't be forgiven for my stance on that salary issue, can I?

For what it's worth, I have two cousins who are police officers, but I doubt that will matter to you at this point. I think that this has more to do with a line of logic prevalent amongst law enforcement: we put our lives on the line, therefore we are above criticism. This line is pulled out time and again and, overall, it's pretty effective as silencing critics, whether the subject is corruption, unjustified shootings, or, in this case, salaries and benefits.

So, we'll agree to disagree. You'll see me as an ignorant, cop-hating elitist and I'll still think that 59K after five years on the job, overtime, full pension, and lifetime medical benefits after 20 years of service ain't a bad deal in a nation where many jobs of similar pay and inferior benefits require a graduate degree.

And, despite this belief, I still respect police officers.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 4:47 PM

Actually, Monstrose, I think that you provide a better example than Mr. Bush.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 4:49 PM

Some sobering news, many people in "public housing" have other houses in other parts of the world. I'm not kidding. I've spoken to more than a few people who receive public housing subsidies here in the People's Republic of NYC, while maintaining nice carribean homesteads in places like Puerto Rico and the Dominican Republic. I also suspect, but haven't confirmed that many of the Hasidic community housing like that entire stretch along Kent Avenue, are classified as subsidized in some way. Therefore making the occupants of these restricted abodes eligible for government subsidies. Meanwhile I've also heard of Eastern Europeans who are married claiming that they are not married in order to receive two public housing apartments so as to rent one out to fellow travellers. Just a few things to think about as you continue to work hard on the books to pay your taxes, while every other contractor, pizza parlor owner and 99cent shop owner gets to take the money and run while insisting on getting paid in cash.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 4:51 PM

4:51 is correct but NYCHA's 2006 "Plan to preserve public housing" aims to correct these problems.

Not sure, though, that such petty corruption comes close to tax loopholes for private equity managers and the like. Everyone skims the system with the tools they have at hand.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 5:07 PM

Actually it does matter- I think our major point of disagreement is that NYC cops are far from being the highest paid. yet they certainly have law enforcement jobs that are far more stressful and demanding than at least those in 90% of the country. It goes with the territory. it's NYC, it's post 9-11, etc. I don't think cops are above criticism- in fact I think they are and should be held to a higher standard of behavior, and corrupt cops should be punished and given even heavier sentences because of their position of trust. But I also balance what we want and need cops to do for us- putting their lives on the line is a biggie. Being in harms way is huge to me. Maybe it's just that some jobs ask that you put more into a society than you take out and cops, firefighters, first responders are those kinds of jobs. The stats I mentioned are just part of the story of how much of a toll these jobs take on on them- from the psychological problems to heart disease (there is a direct co-relation between high levels of stress and heart disease) even to certain types of cancers)- and these stats are similar for soldiers, firefighters and other first responders). And thses problems are part and parcel of the job so while I agree that there are jobs of similar pay and less benefits that require you to have more education, they don't ask you to put your life and your long range health on the line. Education is important because it goes directly to job performance in a job where performance has real life-or-death consequences.
It's a real issue. When the 9-11 fund started handing out compensation packages, the highest awards went to the families at Cantor fitzgerald, Aeon, etc. They had a whole formula worked out based on projected earnings, position, etc. Without considering the extra millions that firefighter families received from other funds and millions in donations, how fair was that formula when there is no criteria for dying on the job trying to save others? Who is really more valuable to society? I can argue for both sides but in reality a police officer or a firefighter will have much more impact on my day to day life than a wall st. financier.

I wonder if there is a way to balance criteria better? I know we give the police great responsibility and demand great things of them. they are necessary for us to function- I honestly don't believe that these types of jobs can be assessed the same way a corporate position or an academic job can.

So I do thank you for clarifying that- I thinks perhaps it is more that you look at this from a fiscal standpoint and my position is a much more emotional, anthropological one.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 5:20 PM

1:00 - the city got safer for 2 reasons. First -we have enough cops and pay them enough to keep them. BTW -we'll need fewer of them in the future so if some quit that's ok. Second - real estate prices have soared forcing much of the rift raft out.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 5:23 PM

5:23 ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!ROTFLMAO Safer!!! what a card!! need fewer of them in the future-- gasp!! gasp!! A ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!

The fairy of complete idiocy got you good!! 'scuse me- I have to wipe my eyes. In them meantime, maybe you should read a newspaper.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 6:05 PM

5:23 - "rift raft"????? (Not to mention the rest of your silly post.)

We definitely need to spend more money on education here.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 6:31 PM

Just burn all the luxury condos down. This city is getting too rich it's fucking out of control. Push the ceo's and corporate types to nebraska and kansas. Leave the people in the projects alone.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 7:14 PM

Now that Ingersoll has been emptied, I look forward to its sale - progress marches on as politicians go through the motions.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 8:59 PM

Montrose Morris,
True, people skim the system at all levels. But that by no means justifies it. Our discussion centered on the projects so I alluded to some of the rampant misuse of our taxes to subsidize many who don't need subsidizing. Huge case in point; we had over one million people on welfare prior to the Guiliani administration crack down. Less than 400,000 today. Where did those 600,000 people in "need" go? The streets are not flooded with needy people from what I have seen in the last 15 years. The answer is that they went back to their off the books jobs, they got legitimate jobs, they saved, they went to live with family, they went to school, they learned a trade, etc. etc. Another statistic; we spend more on medicaid here in New York than California and Texas combined. We have less than one fifth of their population! Who's spending all these tax dollars on suppositories and Ensure?Corporate corruption is a separate matter and it is being delt with: cases in point: Bernard Evers, Kenneth Lay (died before his prison term), Michael Milken, Ivan Boesky even Martha Stewart. So don't start playing the "class struggle" card here. we are too smart for it. Not every citizen is on the take, there are honest, decent folk still making a go of it.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 11:10 PM

Montrose Morris wasn't the one who pointed out that people skim the system. Montrose simply made the point that singling out people who lived in subsidized housing for that type of behavior is to overlook the even worse hypocrisy of those who skim the system and don't even need the money.

You may not like the class struggle card, but the whole subsidized housing/welfare issue certainly does bring up the question of why are poor people in projects so often stereotyped by posters who then get their knickers in a twit when you point out that the poor are hardly the worst offenders?

People on this board get more upset over poor people getting help for housing (and not great housing at that), but not a peep over the tax breaks and subsidies that go to big corporations and businesses, and they gloss over corporate corruption that can cost the economy billions of dollars.

IMHO, it is about race- it's far too easy to demonize a group of people who don't look or act or believe like you do. everyone does it- but no matter how much you want to blame welfare families and rent control for the problems of NYC, it doesn't make it true.

Posted by: guest at November 15, 2007 12:00 AM

why not move out of the city if you can't afford it? why not use birth control if you can't afford children? it's total bullshit.

also, you will never ever benefit anyone by giving them something for free. you will only hold them back. they'll never figure out how to survive.

public housing or welfare is disgusting.

Posted by: guest at November 15, 2007 12:47 AM

Unfortunately Montrose, as we've seen on far too many a forum here, some posters love to use Brownstoner as a venue for venting racism, elitist views and dysfunctional social psychology. Some just like to have malicious fun. I rarely read or post anymore because it's always the same story. Mr. B needs to have moderators on these forums. Other sites do. I'm all for freedom of speech and the web- but it is Mr. B's choice how he runs this website which has gotten an unfortunate reputation for race bashing.

Posted by: guest at November 15, 2007 9:23 AM

Montrose and 9.23 AM;

Keep trying to play the race and class card - but it won't work any more. You can try to shuffle as much as you want around simple facts like that NY spends more on medicaid then our two most populous states COMBINED, but folks see through it. We see through your attempts to play the race and class card.

As I told you on a previous board: your attempts to defend these projects is very much akin to those who tried to defend the old welfare system. The pathology of that system was as plain as day to anyone with a modicum of common sense, yet there were those who were so invested in it, they refused to concede that there was anything wrong with them.

Like the welfare scenario, your refusal to talk common sense about the projects,and at the same time play the emotional race and class card, means that you won't be taken seriously when it comes time to do something about these projects. And that day is coming soon. Some of these projects are 80 years old and will require major capital to upgrade. Moreover, the NYCHA is running an operating deficit that neither the city, the state nor the federal government will pay.

Kiss 'em goodbye!!

Benson

Posted by: guest at November 15, 2007 9:46 AM

"Race" is not the issue. We are all blessed to have life granted unconditionally through the love of God. Racism, economic oppression of a group based on its race is a matter of fact the largest issue. No one group or race escapes this life with out living it and the trials and tribulations that are more times than not society-based (murder, pedophilia, rape, various illnesses, etc). That is our Creator - the Lord God has blessed all living beings with all that we need, what we "lack" can be easily subsided through the grace of another living being. GOD IS GOOD!!!!!!!!!!

Note: Working together we have accomplished much, cures for major illnesses,etc - however I don't want to go touting our horn too much since we do have such very a long way to go.

Institutionalized Racism/ Racism is a whole other beast subsidized, fostered, and nurtured by society/ man. That is utilizing institutions to oppress/depress a group based on their undeniable and indistinguishable character of race.(poor quality schools, inferior education/information, corrupt and unjust criminal justice system such as policies & procedures (stalking black neighborhoods looking for "criminals" and not whites - apprx 70% of drug use amongst whites), inadequate & unequal gov't practices and polices, etc). Institutional Racism allows all groups who are not being oppress to flourish on the backs of the oppressed (slavery/ jim crow laws, not interrupted until 1964-5 Civil Rights Act). Basically, denying a group to compete while others expand (locking up and killing a bulk of the men of color while -judges/lawyers/politicians, and many of the other johnny whitelayman and their children compete so superficially amongst one another - CorRRNNYYY)

Now I probably wouldn't balk about much of the ignorance and disgustingness that is spewed on this site if that up until this day those who are cited as the problem were not being oppressed and who many others in this society have thrived on the backs of(literally; building up their broods while denying others rights and opportunities to also build,welfare was not instituted for blacks - whites were primarily the original recipients and would annihilate (kill,riots) blacks when they tried to obtain benefits - truly research the history,70's were an economic period where many across the board struggled financially throughout the country,..... ). Note: Personally, I am so disgusted by this creepiness - I'm nearly losing focus, however, I trust and believe in God (true higher power) and attempt at all points to show grace. As I know God had the First Word and Will Have the Last.(and, sometimes I question is it grace or stupidity, since my ancestors were also Righteous and Beautifully Gracious, yet that true inferior group representative of "whites" have thrived; viciously oppressing now as was done then - but I respect that we still stand in Grace in spite of). I also know that no one has a monopoly on stupidity and ignorance, that it is a matter of choice. And, that just as I try to live in Grace I could truly run with the best of the devils and Evil Mongers. However, through God's Grace I hope to encourage, enlighten and uplift consciousness so that we can all thrive in God's Grace. Not withstanding, if we continue in this negative, uninspiring and crippling vein it is and will be to no one's advantage. Again: Bashing Heads and acting like fools we all can and it is a blessing that many of us respect ourselves enough that the majority do not behave in this fashion. The majority not representative of any one group. However, another racist concept that must be disbanded. Whites are NOT the MAJORITY in America or the overall World. Miseducation/ the fallacy of education particularly in this society is startling. (Italy and Spain were ruled by Moors/ Blacks for more than 700 years (by 1721 Spain had 21 caste systems primarily based on the variations in skin color/race mixing. America intially was not welcoming to the original Italian settlers, Jews (originally ethiopians), Irish, Turks based on their association with africans. OH, OH. Look, we can go on. Bottom line: Nethandral remains have only been found in Europe and Asia. They're many great and prolific African societies that pre-dated all others throughout the world (Timbuktu, Ghana, Zimbabwe, etc). Stoneheads and other artifacts have been discovered in the Americas mirroring Black Africans and dating back thousands of years, pre-dating slavery. North Africa up until most recently was the home of Black Africans (original Egyptians). And, do note the recent uncovered remains of King Tut. All Life began in Africa. Africans carry Dominate Genetic traits. Blonde Hair and Blue Eyes are Recessive Genes - diseased/inferior.) However, we are all here now!!!! And, "Everybody's got to live together....."

Many who are so proud of their financial acquisitions and tout them have obtained such through Racism (Native Americans/African oppression). A social agenda which has undeniably reduce the essence and being of great people. All the wealth fostered through recent NYC real estate acquisitions done so through exotic mortgage products that were otherwise unavailable to the vast majority prior (redlining,steering even recently into subprime products, etc). Wealth and great employment opportunities made available to most just because they carried the same skin. Without having to connect the dots from a-z; bottom line using others for a service without their will and not compensating them EEEVVVEERRR!!!!!!!!(no 40 acres and a mule or otherwise, Quotas benefitting white women more than any other, and Africans in Africa living and being treated less than human beings or citizens and the wealth and land in most hands that do not resemble African/ Black People, Diamonds and artifacts in the museums across the world with owner's names that are not Africans - yet many of the people in the homeland struggling to survive, and oil & natural resources of wealth not in their control, Hell - Venus' remains was just allowed to be returned home to South Africa apprx 1 1/2 yr ago) Incomprehensible, Reprehensible..... (nothing to hold your head up for, money doesn't necessarily comfort - people do - And to destroy the very concept of one's being provoking a form of mental illness and then gloat). Many probably should be glad that a few can be complacent and distracted by a "IPOD and expensive sneakers" to say the least). Again: "Losing Focus." You know what this SHIT hurts. Not so much what you do now, since I'm not my Ancestors - Do Or Die - Yes, You've come too the right HOOD. That is why the person I am today, was not around then. Oh, it hurts watching babies and our men folks gunned down savagely by who evers decides to take aim. However, I do Know that this will and can not continue as business as usual. I also know the ignorance and miseducation that proliferates throughout our society are utilized by the oppressor as red herrings. And, I would hope that we could respect ourselves and one another to make the world a better place for us all.

***Another Note: Original europeans settlers/pioneers in America were the "The Dregs of European society" and initially housed in its reformatories and Prisons representative of Prostitutes, murderers, thieves, etc. Basically the oppressed of Europe. Respect/ Self-Respect is the key. And, note many who believe and are being used as the gentrifiers of the "Hood" are only transients. Ultimately, you will recognize your real value in all this and it will truly be below the scale.

Posted by: guest at November 15, 2007 9:09 PM

"Race" is not the issue. We are all blessed to have life granted unconditionally through the love of God. Racism, economic oppression of a group based on its race is a matter of fact the largest issue. No one group or race escapes this life with out living it and the trials and tribulations that are more times than not society-based (murder, pedophilia, rape, various illnesses, etc). That is our Creator - the Lord God has blessed all living beings with all that we need, what we "lack" can be easily subsided through the grace of another living being. GOD IS GOOD!!!!!!!!!!

Note: Working together we have accomplished much, cures for major illnesses,etc - however I don't want to go touting our horn too much since we do have such very a long way to go.

Institutionalized Racism/ Racism is a whole other beast subsidized, fostered, and nurtured by society/ man. That is utilizing institutions to oppress/depress a group based on their undeniable and indistinguishable character of race.(poor quality schools, inferior education/information, corrupt and unjust criminal justice system such as policies & procedures (stalking black neighborhoods looking for "criminals" and not whites - apprx 70% of drug use amongst whites), inadequate & unequal gov't practices and polices, etc). Institutional Racism allows all groups who are not being oppress to flourish on the backs of the oppressed (slavery/ jim crow laws, not interrupted until 1964-5 Civil Rights Act). Basically, denying a group to compete while others expand (locking up and killing a bulk of the men of color while -judges/lawyers/politicians, and many of the other johnny whitelayman and their children compete so superficially amongst one another - CorRRNNYYY)

Now I probably wouldn't balk about much of the ignorance and disgustingness that is spewed on this site if that up until this day those who are cited as the problem were not being oppressed and who many others in this society have thrived on the backs of(literally; building up their broods while denying others rights and opportunities to also build,welfare was not instituted for blacks - whites were primarily the original recipients and would annihilate (kill,riots) blacks when they tried to obtain benefits - truly research the history,70's were an economic period where many across the board struggled financially throughout the country,..... ). Note: Personally, I am so disgusted by this creepiness - I'm nearly losing focus, however, I trust and believe in God (true higher power) and attempt at all points to show grace. As I know God had the First Word and Will Have the Last.(and, sometimes I question is it grace or stupidity, since my ancestors were also Righteous and Beautifully Gracious, yet that true inferior group representative of "whites" have thrived; viciously oppressing now as was done then - but I respect that we still stand in Grace in spite of). I also know that no one has a monopoly on stupidity and ignorance, that it is a matter of choice. And, that just as I try to live in Grace I could truly run with the best of the devils and Evil Mongers. However, through God's Grace I hope to encourage, enlighten and uplift consciousness so that we can all thrive in God's Grace. Not withstanding, if we continue in this negative, uninspiring and crippling vein it is and will be to no one's advantage. Again: Bashing Heads and acting like fools we all can and it is a blessing that many of us respect ourselves enough that the majority do not behave in this fashion. The majority not representative of any one group. However, another racist concept that must be disbanded. Whites are NOT the MAJORITY in America or the overall World. Miseducation/ the fallacy of education particularly in this society is startling. (Italy and Spain were ruled by Moors/ Blacks for more than 700 years (by 1721 Spain had 21 caste systems primarily based on the variations in skin color/race mixing. America initially was not welcoming to the original Italian settlers, Jews (originally Ethiopians), Irish, Turks based on their association with africans. OH, OH. Look, we can go on. Bottom line: Nethandral remains have only been found in Europe and Asia. They're many great and prolific African societies that pre-dated all others throughout the world (Timbuktu, Ghana, Zimbabwe, etc). Stoneheads and other artifacts have been discovered in the Americas mirroring Black Africans and dating back thousands of years, pre-dating slavery. North Africa up until most recently was the home of Black Africans (original Egyptians). And, do note the recent uncovered remains of King Tut. All Life began in Africa. Africans carry Dominate Genetic traits. Blonde Hair and Blue Eyes are Recessive Genes - diseased/inferior.) However, we are all here now!!!! And, "Everybody's got to live together....."

Many who are so proud of their financial acquisitions and tout them have obtained such through Racism (Native Americans/African oppression). A social agenda which has undeniably reduce the essence and being of great people. All the wealth fostered through recent NYC real estate acquisitions done so through exotic mortgage products that were otherwise unavailable to the vast majority prior (redlining,steering even recently into subprime products, etc). Wealth and great employment opportunities made available to most just because they carried the same skin. Without having to connect the dots from a-z; bottom line using others for a service without their will and not compensating them EEEVVVEERRR!!!!!!!!(no 40 acres and a mule or otherwise, Quotas benefitting white women more than any other, and Africans in Africa living and being treated less than human beings or citizens and the wealth and land in most hands that do not resemble African/ Black People, Diamonds and artifacts in the museums across the world with owner's names that are not Africans - yet many of the people in the homeland struggling to survive, and oil & natural resources of wealth not in their control, Hell - Venus' remains was just allowed to be returned home to South Africa apprx 1 1/2 yr ago) Incomprehensible, Reprehensible..... (nothing to hold your head up for, money doesn't necessarily comfort - people do - And to destroy the very concept of one's being provoking a form of mental illness and then gloat). Many probably should be glad that a few can be complacent and distracted by a "IPOD and expensive sneakers" to say the least). Again: "Losing Focus." You know what this SHIT hurts. Not so much what you do now, since I'm not my Ancestors - Do Or Die - Yes, You've come too the right HOOD. That is why the person I am today, was not around then. Oh, it hurts watching babies and our men folks gunned down savagely by who evers decides to take aim. However, I do Know that this will and can not continue as business as usual. I also know the ignorance and miseducation that proliferates throughout our society are utilized by the oppressor as red herrings. And, I would hope that we could respect ourselves and one another to make the world a better place for us all.

***Another Note: Original europeans settlers/pioneers in America were the "The Dregs of European society" and initially housed in its reformatories and Prisons representative of Prostitutes, murderers, thieves, etc. Basically the oppressed of Europe. Respect/ Self-Respect is the key. And, note many who believe and are being used as the gentrifiers of the "Hood" are only transients. Ultimately, you will recognize your real value in all this and it will truly be below the scale.

Posted by: guest at November 15, 2007 9:12 PM

so tell us how you really feel 9:12.

Posted by: guest at November 15, 2007 11:52 PM

Montrose;

I agree with you that you have not played the race card. I was referring to 9.23 AM's post. The subsequent posts on the issue of race have been - ahem- "interesting"!!

I think you are all wet on the issue of class (are you a John Edwards' supporter?), but your e-mails have been above board.

Peace

Benson

Posted by: guest at November 16, 2007 10:59 AM