Sparks Fly over Bailout for Downtown Development

G-Man
"A low quality job has a salary too low to allow independent living, doesn't offer health insurance or other benefits, doesn't teach the employee new skills or otherwise provide for advancement, or merely some of these characteristics."

Actually many retail jobs do provide Health Ins, and EVERY job teaches employees new skills and provides for advancement - especially when compared to unemployment.

As for bailing out the developer...

this is hardly a bailout - it is TAX-EXEMPTION - that is the city is foregoing taxes that it has not (and may NEVER) collect on a development that may not ever get started. and the TOTAL bill is $340,000 over 30 years.

Which ignoring the taxes that will be collected on wages, sales, etc... if the construction starts - is probably worth that much to Brooklyn simply to avoid a multi-decade vacant land site on one of the most important strips in Brooklyn. Think about what this empty lot costs Brooklyn by virtue of the fact that virtually ANY person, institution, or Corporation that is thinking about moving,or investing in Brooklyn will have to pass a horrible vacant lot on their trip into our Boro. Not to mention the depression on the current RE values in the immediate area - whose sales/transfers and assesments generate significant tax revenue for the city/state.

Finally if I am not mistaken, the developers Sitt and now Arcadia (I believe) do not own the land but instead control it through a 99year lease (I could be wrong but it is how I recall the deal being done) Forcing the collapse of the development would also hurt the city as the residual owner.

Posted by: fsrg at September 14, 2009 10:18 AM

MM - "Yes, working at McD's will teach you the skill of showing up on time, how to flip burgers, work the fryer, and mop the floor, but that hardly translates into getting any kind of job that involves more marketable skills that mean ever getting out of poverty.And standing bored behind the scarf counter at Daffy's, or the checkout at Pathmark won't do much for you either. "

MM - have you ever tried to hire someone?

Did you ever hear the expression 80% of life is just showing up? - well its mostly true - and when you are talking about working life its probably more like 90%, and the other 10-20% is knowing how to speak/act like a reasonable person.

Your analysis ignores the reality of many entry level workers - who learning to reliably show-up and not act like an idiot on the job is the MAIN thing preventing them from getting anywhere beyond perpetual poverty.

You also the ignore the reality of a large majority of workers who work at decidedly non-entry level jobs - including many that pay well into the 6 figures...many/most jobs do not offer an opportunity to "rise up from there without further schooling or training in more specialized skills." - most jobs are dead ends - within the organization in which it is situated....but they give you a resume and credibility to move up the ladder at another company or organization.

I have hired people at 2nd level jobs (i.e. higher than entry level but hardly glamorous) and I can tell you if someone sent me a resume showing a multi-year consistent employement in a lousy (Mickey d's type enviroment) job - I'd move them to the top of the pile; because it demonstrates the most important quality (and the one hardest to find and impossible to train) - dedication and an ability to work within a constrained structure.

Your attitude is arrogant and frankly ill informed in my opinion, no one is saying that retail/entry-level jobs are the end all-be all...but unless you already have great experience in some field or have received specialized training, they are the jobs that are necessary to move up the ladder....and as been expressed here many time before - using the low-end retail employees in Brooklyn as an example - it should be clear to many that vast numbers of the people in NYC who hold these jobs are unqualified to do almost anything (at this point) because of their horrible attitude, poor work ethic and lousy communication skills.

Posted by: fsrg at September 14, 2009 11:59 AM

"In fact, I promise that 90% of the money will be spent on wages and taxes."

I am sure - except once the grant was gone - so would the stimulative effect...a building will stand for ever, likely always generate $ and can perpetually pay workers from this generated money....sort of the "teach a man to fish...." thing.

Besides - this is FEDERAL STIMULUS money- if not spent/tax abated here - then where? - We are going to be paying the tax and interest on the 700B forever anyway, might as well use it for Brooklyn's benefit

Posted by: fsrg at September 14, 2009 12:03 PM

MM- "Very, VERY few people can move from the mail room to the board room anymore,"

Thanks for proving my point about you're viewing being an arrogant one.....no one is talking about moving to the boardroom - that isnt an option for the class of workers we are referring too - and frankly how many people here (or anywhere) have ever even been in a true corporate boardroom -

we are talking about moving from UNEMPLOYMENT to making a decent liveable wage - and on that track.....low wage employment is generally a necessary (if a lousy step) on that path.

Townhouse lady you are correct, but i will presume that before working as a manager, you worked as a regular retail sales/floor person, I also assume you put your retail experience on the resume that you used to get the job at the Ins Co (higher paying I also assume)...if my presumptions are correct, your experience proves my point

Posted by: fsrg at September 14, 2009 12:55 PM

No my pronouncement (that the class of worker we are talking about wont likely ever see the corporate boardroom) isnt arrogant - its realistic - I make well into the six figures, have an advanced degree and I have never been inside a corporate boardroom either (and likely never will) - so it isnt arrogance it is realism.

Now please go back and read what I posted earlier - because I never said that a retail salesperson/floor worker, or McDonalds employee is going to rise up the ladder at that organization; he/sh very well might not - but when they apply for the NEXT job at a different organization, their prior work history (assuming successful) is going to be their entree. And before you jump all crazy- I am not suggesting that the "next" job is going to be CEO of IBM - the next job might just be one level up (in pay and/or responsibility) but it is the 'next' job; In my career - the only real (i.e. not a meaningless job title increase or small % raise) promotion I ever got was by moving companies - and I do not think I am in any way unique.

The point is, the jobs you poo-po are a necessary rung on the ladder (albeit maybe a short ladder) for millions of people and without them, the only other choice will be unemployment.

Posted by: fsrg at September 14, 2009 1:35 PM

"I should take pride in doing a good job for people who will never be bothered to appreciate my work? "

Yes! assuming your getting paid for the job - that is how it works!, this isnt kindergarden, mosty employers arent giving out pats on the back or stickers.....

But thats not the point anyway - and I'll say it again - the point of these low level jobs - or most jobs for that matter - isn't simply so you can stay within that singular organization and slowly rise up until you become CEO.

Its to get paid, health ins, etc... and to better YOUR credentials so YOU can get a better job - likely at ANOTHER organization.

If you have no credentials (i.e. no work history, little education, etc...) you have to start somewhere. And these jobs offer that opportunity....

I really don't know what the alternative is? An unemployed H.S dropout isnt going to get hired into a middle management position (nor is the middle manager likely ever to see the boardroom btw). And the fact that your job is a deadend (beyond pay & benefits) doesnt mean that YOU are at a deadend, it just means that once you acquire the requisite experience, you need to get another job.

Posted by: fsrg at September 14, 2009 3:34 PM

Bxgrl - what does this even mean "That said, I still think it's pretty arrogant to talk about taking pride in a job that is used to demean someone. "

1st of all I never talked about taking "pride" in anything - all I said was that it is arrogant to "poo-po" entry level jobs simply because THAT job wont allow you to provide for a family or a comfortable life.

2nd - I know of not a single job that is "used to demean people" - some jobs are considered demeaning, and some employers demean their employees, but even the guy who cleans toilets for a living, is doing because....toilets need cleaning.

As for someones pride, or attitude - most employers have no idea what an employees true attitude or work ethic is, but they can check what their prior work history is...and so if you can show that you've been successfully employed in the past, you have a big leg up on those that cant....
therefore these jobs give someone that "rung" to get to the next level (even if the ladder never gets to the boardroom) - so as it applies to the retail workers we all experience with the lousy attitude - that is fine for them, as long as there attitude isnt so bad as to result in termination or a bad reference - as long as they can prove they are somewhat dependible and 'employable' - they have a shot at moving to the next level - like a nasty clerk at a Government office for example :)

Posted by: fsrg at September 14, 2009 3:47 PM

Bxgrl - "You called MM arrogant for making a point you didn't agree with. But I think it's a mistake to think that poor work attitude is what keeps people in low level jobs when I've seen so much of it at higher levels as well."

Except I never said anything like this...

I said MM had an arrogant attitude(after she called my opinion "crap" btw) for saying ""Yes, working at McD's will teach you the skill of showing up on time, how to flip burgers, work the fryer, and mop the floor, but that hardly translates into getting any kind of job that involves more marketable skills that mean ever getting out of poverty.And standing bored behind the scarf counter at Daffy's, or the checkout at Pathmark won't do much for you either."

IMHO it is arrogant attitude to simply pity those who earn less then you and assume they can't get any higher.

My view is that these jobs are necessary for some (those without the training, education, connections or experience) to begin to move higher (maybe not to the "boardroom but certainly higher than MM seems to think they can).

And I never said that a poor attitude keeps people in low level jobs - but I did say that for many (not so low level) jobs, a good attitude (even if fake) and a demonstrable work history is all you really need; so while I would acknowledge that the retail businesses that would likely end up at Citypoint (the point) cant supply someone with a good (or fake) attitude - it can give someone the necessary work history - which IS important, and why you shouldnt poo-po additional jobs like this.

Words matter and I generally use mine carefully - please stop putting other words in my mouth (so to speak)

Posted by: fsrg at September 14, 2009 4:03 PM