ACORN Protesters Storm The Beacon Tower
The anti-gentrification movement stepped it up a notch yesterday with ACORN protesters storming the open house at the Beacon Tower, Shaya Boymelgreen’s 23-story condo development at 85 Adams in Dumbo. What a shame! What a pity! We can’t live in New York City, the 50-odd protesters chanted while blanketing the sales office with flyers that…
The anti-gentrification movement stepped it up a notch yesterday with ACORN protesters storming the open house at the Beacon Tower, Shaya Boymelgreen’s 23-story condo development at 85 Adams in Dumbo. What a shame! What a pity! We can’t live in New York City, the 50-odd protesters chanted while blanketing the sales office with flyers that read, Beacon Tower developers get rich off the backs of working families.” The protesters main gripe? That luxury projects like the Beacon still receive tax breaks in a holdover from a program started in the 1970s to stimulated development. The ambushed Corcoran agents manning the open house called in the cops who removed the protesters. Prospective buyers didn’t appear to be too sympathetic to the cause. “Tell them to get jobs and go live in the projects,” said Jenny Malone, who was there checking out apartments. “People just want something for nothing.”
Activists Protest Dumbo Condos [Metro]
More coverage in the print edition.
nice post Anon 1:05- so what have YOU given to charity? Please read Bx2Bklyn’s post at 11:50 for our liberal attitudes. And if you really think no one should get special treatment- would that include all the friends of the moronic administration that presently infests the White House?
“Don’t know why I’m bothering to address anon screamer 1:05, but if my rusty econ 101 serves me, the reality of capitalism is that it works best with about 5% unemployment.”
The 5% you are talking about is what’s called “NAIRU”. I forgot what it stands for, but you can look it up. It just means that we have to assume that even in a time of “full employment” there will be some people without jobs. Some people will always get fired, or quit for some reason.
The point of that # is just to say that at a certain point you can’t push unemployment lower, even though some people will still not have jobs.
hard work…like i said before…
and then i get this bs saying poor people work really hard..totally missing the point..
Don’t know why I’m bothering to address anon screamer 1:05, but if my rusty econ 101 serves me, the reality of capitalism is that it works best with about 5% unemployment.
I’m a capitalism fan too, but we need to acknowledge that it leaves a significant amount of people out of the club–both the unemployed and underemployed. And I don’t think leaving the country is a reasonable solution.
And what’s the chief determiner of environment and education level? Hmmm, could it have anything to do with income?
“Being poor is tied to several basic factors: education, marriage or partnership, and children. Anyone with little formal education who fails to form some sort of union with a partner and who has one or more children before age 25 will most likely wind up poor.”
I don’t understand why people found the quote above from an anonymous poster arrogant. It’s not really controversial. It is a sad reality. Your environment and educational level are the predominant factors in determining how you do economically, no doubt about it.
to anonymous:
to quote myself: “this amazing machine of a city has come this far and is what it is because of the network of people rich and poor and middle class that make its wheels turn on a daily basis. we all make it happen, we all contribute so we all deserve the same amount of respect.”
whether poor, middle-class or rich we need eachother to make this city function. one is not more or less important than the other.
in essence thats why we are all arguing for or against 421a. there are those who say “screw the ones who cant afford it” and those who say “there has to be a better way to fit everyone in”.
you may say that my remarks are ad hominem, but in essence its assholes who make the world a fucked up place.
Crackers
Another thought. Shouldn’t RS/RC/public housing benefits be taxable?
If you are living in a 1000sq ft apartment in a project in Chelsea, that has a market value of $5000 then that should be treated as income. Or if you are paying $800/mo to living in a $10k/mo RS apartment? Then you are getting $9,200 a month in income.
If someone’s work pays for their apartment, or gives such a subsidy, it is taxable (for long term, primary residence, non-expat stays). This would be fair in that it would at least recognize the value of the transfer that is being given over.