“So how come it’s ok and cost effective for suburban and wealthier kids to still live with Mom”
MM, you know I love you more than my luggage, but I disagree with you on this one. I think what Mrs. Flowers has done for the community is great. My issue is simply that taxpayers should not be subsidizing her and her 31 year old son in a 3-bedroom apartment. Period. I wouldn’t care if she and her son were as white and pasty as Etson, I’d feel the same way. Let her move into a 1-bedroom apartment, and let the son sleep on the sofabed, and then open up the 3-bedroom to a family in need. As for suburban and wealthy adult kids living with their parents, so long as it’s not in subsidized housing.
My thought when I read the article on Gowanus yesterday was that the woman should be given a stipend for all her good works in the projects. Why don’t you look on her spacious domain as a perk for that so you won’t mind our subsidizing her? If she were a paid social worker it’d cost taxpayers a lot more.
CGar, yes, I will clarify. Like I said, I find that article is racist. What is news here? That a woman who lives in the projects has a lovely domestic bent? Who the hell cares, although to the knuckleheads at the Times, golly gee, stop the presses – normal people live in the projects! Holy f*ing sh*t!
Last part of my rant re: airports is, just like the ineffectiveness of subway searches here, which allow people to leave the station if they don’t want to be searched, it is assinine how they announce increased security at 6 airports in Canada. Do they not think the terrorists read the papers and would then just fly out of a different airport that isn’t on the list?
My prediction is that if a terrorist act involving an airplane occurs again, it will be orchestrated amongst baggage handlers and insiders at the airport and not a passenger.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 11, 2010 1:15 PM
dibs,
the TSA is not currently unionized, although they is much talk about it.
so in the future,
we could not only be forced to put our hands down our pants every time we fly ,
we may also have to endure the groaning of TSA workers calling for their coffee break as you miss your flight.
Living in a studio sucks. Been there, done that. In Murray Hill no less.
Actually I only pay $1,400 for a 1,700 square foot two bedroom because my tenants susidize the rest.
“So how come it’s ok and cost effective for suburban and wealthier kids to still live with Mom”
MM, you know I love you more than my luggage, but I disagree with you on this one. I think what Mrs. Flowers has done for the community is great. My issue is simply that taxpayers should not be subsidizing her and her 31 year old son in a 3-bedroom apartment. Period. I wouldn’t care if she and her son were as white and pasty as Etson, I’d feel the same way. Let her move into a 1-bedroom apartment, and let the son sleep on the sofabed, and then open up the 3-bedroom to a family in need. As for suburban and wealthy adult kids living with their parents, so long as it’s not in subsidized housing.
My thought when I read the article on Gowanus yesterday was that the woman should be given a stipend for all her good works in the projects. Why don’t you look on her spacious domain as a perk for that so you won’t mind our subsidizing her? If she were a paid social worker it’d cost taxpayers a lot more.
1,000 bucks can get her a market rate studio somewhere in a “safe” neighborhood
none of us see the necessity for her to have a subsidized 3 bedroom (all other things being equal)
here’s a thought:
how about allowing people to check in and do the security check at the desk RIGHT before boarding the plane.
CGar, yes, I will clarify. Like I said, I find that article is racist. What is news here? That a woman who lives in the projects has a lovely domestic bent? Who the hell cares, although to the knuckleheads at the Times, golly gee, stop the presses – normal people live in the projects! Holy f*ing sh*t!
Last part of my rant re: airports is, just like the ineffectiveness of subway searches here, which allow people to leave the station if they don’t want to be searched, it is assinine how they announce increased security at 6 airports in Canada. Do they not think the terrorists read the papers and would then just fly out of a different airport that isn’t on the list?
My prediction is that if a terrorist act involving an airplane occurs again, it will be orchestrated amongst baggage handlers and insiders at the airport and not a passenger.
The TSA is unionized, correct????
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 11, 2010 1:15 PM
dibs,
the TSA is not currently unionized, although they is much talk about it.
so in the future,
we could not only be forced to put our hands down our pants every time we fly ,
we may also have to endure the groaning of TSA workers calling for their coffee break as you miss your flight.