|
What is so great about that guy that he deserves 350k/yr to find new ways to cut teacher salaries? Can't they just hire some petty teacher to cut those salaries for half the price?
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2018 21:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 08:07 |
|
|
The guy LOOOOVES charter school so good riddance I say.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2018 23:17
|
|
|
Shageletic posted:The guy LOOOOVES charter school so good riddance I say. I was going to make that accusation as well, but I didn't want someone to ask for a link.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2018 23:48
|
|
|
supposedly he got cold feet because the teachers and students at Miami-Dade didn't want him to leave. this isn't on de blasio but every single media outlet in this city will take any chance they can get to poo poo all over him, especially if they have to pick a side between him and cuomo (it's the latter 100% of the time)Shageletic posted:The guy LOOOOVES charter school so good riddance I say.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2018 14:15
|
|
|
get that OUT of my face posted:supposedly he got cold feet because the teachers and students at Miami-Dade didn't want him to leave. this isn't on de blasio but every single media outlet in this city will take any chance they can get to poo poo all over him, especially if they have to pick a side between him and cuomo (it's the latter 100% of the time) That still leaves you with a proponent of school choice as a mayor, though. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2018 17:17
|
|
|
if he's super for charter schools and deblasio was going to put him there then he deserves any poo poo he gets.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2018 17:17
|
|
|
Matt Zerella posted:if he's super for charter schools and deblasio was going to put him there then he deserves any poo poo he gets. this guy got it
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2018 17:33
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:That still leaves you with a proponent of school choice as a mayor, though. Eh, Deblasio is less of a ‘proponent’ of school choice (that’s our governor), than he is someone who lacks any real will to oppose it. Which is, not great, but better than just about every alternative option that we’ve had available in the past 30 years.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2018 17:53
|
|
|
de blasio is less than 100% supportive of charter schools which is why eva moskowitz and the post paint him out to be a villain
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2018 19:19
|
|
|
cynthia nixon looks like she's gonna run in the democratic primary against cuomo. honestly, why the gently caress not? it's not like terry gipson's making any noise
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 02:50
|
|
|
get that OUT of my face posted:cynthia nixon looks like she's gonna run in the democratic primary against cuomo. honestly, why the gently caress not? it's not like terry gipson's making any noise What's the deal with Stephanie Miner, thought she was maybe gonna throw her hat in
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 03:14
|
|
|
Glambags posted:What's the deal with Stephanie Miner, thought she was maybe gonna throw her hat in
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 03:16
|
|
|
get that OUT of my face posted:cynthia nixon looks like she's gonna run in the democratic primary against cuomo. honestly, why the gently caress not? it's not like terry gipson's making any noise it looks like she's a big advocate for public schools?
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 03:24
|
|
|
Matt Zerella posted:it looks like she's a big advocate for public schools?
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 04:42
|
|
|
Haha what the hell, I’ll vote for her
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 04:42
|
|
|
I still like de blasio. but yea anyone who is actually anti-charter/pro-public-schooling isn’t all-bad.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 04:58
|
|
|
speaking of which, the actual new DoE commissioner sees more eye-to-eye with de blasio when it comes to schools, particularly when it comes to community schools instead of charter ones. it's a bit weird that he seems like the complete opposite of carvalho, so i'm not sure who exactly he was looking for, but at least we dodged a bullet
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 05:06
|
|
|
get that OUT of my face posted:cynthia nixon looks like she's gonna run in the democratic primary against cuomo. honestly, why the gently caress not? it's not like terry gipson's making any noise She played a lawyer on TV, I guess that’s as good a qualification as anything in our sin-cursed world
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 07:13
|
|
|
Danny Glover shouted down by hotel union workers at a pro-AirBnB rally
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 07:17
|
|
|
man, I’m getting too old for this poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 13:22
|
|
|
i was wondering why the guy behind childish gambino and Atlanta was shilling for Airbnb, but i once again mixed up my famous Glovers
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 20:30
|
|
|
I watched lethal weapon for the first time yesterday and that ending is really dumb
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 06:43
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/sarbetter/status/972081646886359045
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 13:09
|
|
|
I'm curious to see how this plays out. (white, racist) People in Broome County/Binghamton have been complaining about downstaters (read: poor, black, homeless, addicts, etc.) being shipped upstate for a couple decades now
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 17:18
|
|
|
Unironically every suburbs should shoulder the burden of sheltering the homeless. Since they are all massive externality generators anyways
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 17:19
|
|
|
Yeah seriously - giving them homes by paying their rent some place reasonable is a lot better than cramming them into a crowded nyc shelter where you way more per square foot. Can we form a militia, seize the subways and secede yet?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 17:29
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:Yeah seriously - giving them homes by paying their rent some place reasonable is a lot better than cramming them into a crowded nyc shelter where you way more per square foot. Can we form a militia, seize the subways and secede yet? You know what they would hate even more. Taking away their fygm self-government and god awful planning so they can be ruled properly by the Metropole. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 17:39
|
|
|
the city should have lower rents so that bill could pay people to live in it but one problem at a time i guess sorry sad suburb dude, maybe act christian for a minute.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 17:46
|
|
|
Real hurthling! posted:the city should have lower rents so that bill could pay people to live in it but one problem at a time i guess sorry sad suburb dude, maybe act christian for a minute. "What's that"
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 17:47
|
|
|
hmm the homeless are becoming a problem in the Upstate you say? well good thing they’ve been such staunch proponents of strong government social programs to help deal with this issue
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 18:18
|
|
|
I donno, Broome's got a point. 95% of the new buildings have been built to be empty, and NYC is quietly shuffling people it has failed away from the city instead of changing things. The wording is hosed up and shows that the real problem he's got with it is ungrateful moochers are coming in and taking their services, but it is kinda hosed up to just quietly send people upstate like they're the dogs we took to the vet who never came back. This isn't an agreement between governments, either, that's the issue. NYC is just sending them away from the city.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 18:25
|
|
|
Grondoth posted:I donno, Broome's got a point. 95% of the new buildings have been built to be empty, and NYC is quietly shuffling people it has failed away from the city instead of changing things. The wording is hosed up and shows that the real problem he's got with it is ungrateful moochers are coming in and taking their services, but it is kinda hosed up to just quietly send people upstate like they're the dogs we took to the vet who never came back. This isn't an agreement between governments, either, that's the issue. NYC is just sending them away from the city. Don't you towns in other states that ship their homeless to New York though
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 18:26
|
|
|
Lawman 0 posted:Don't you towns in other states that ship their homeless to New York though No? I mean, maybe by lack of resources they go to cities, rural and suburban poverty is plagued by the fact that there's hardly anything for those people. But I'm pretty sure there aren't agreements set up to send needy families to NYC, especially when it's crossing counties.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 19:12
|
|
|
If the city has a choice between providing some number of homeless people housing in the city, or can instead rent out that housing to wealthy people, and use the revenue to house twice as many homeless people in the cheaper suburbs, there's a pretty compelling case for helping more people. There is a huge opportunity cost to housing them in the city and NYC pays for it either way. I don't think the NYC government should need permission of a municipality to buy housing on the open market there and then use it for its intended purpose.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 20:04
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:If the city has a choice between providing some number of homeless people housing in the city, or can instead rent out that housing to wealthy people, and use the revenue to house twice as many homeless people in the cheaper suburbs, there's a pretty compelling case for helping more people. There is a huge opportunity cost to housing them in the city and NYC pays for it either way. I don't think the NYC government should need permission of a municipality to buy housing on the open market there and then use it for its intended purpose. Um excuse me that's SOCIALISM
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 20:25
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:If the city has a choice between providing some number of homeless people housing in the city, or can instead rent out that housing to wealthy people, and use the revenue to house twice as many homeless people in the cheaper suburbs, there's a pretty compelling case for helping more people. There is a huge opportunity cost to housing them in the city and NYC pays for it either way. I don't think the NYC government should need permission of a municipality to buy housing on the open market there and then use it for its intended purpose. Ex-homeless person here, this is pretty crap on it's head and I'll break it down bit by bit. It's not a "choice." It's decades of foreign investment properties artifically inflating a bubble. It's a large part of how Donald Trump came to power, via doing no actual work of his own. On top of that, the wealthy who already multiply their wealth by buying a house, waiting for the value to be inflated beyond belief, and then selling it for profit that is produced by no labor whatsoever, have accountants and tax loopholes and a ridiculous amount of resources to cheat the tax system and pay as little as possible. All the while displacing people who are being treated as second class citizens and displaced to communities that don't have the resources to fend for themselves. Sure, the year of rent is covered, but who knows if that year of free living will help them get the stability they so desperately need in a new place where economic success is very often based on who you know and whose rear end you kiss most. There's already more and more homeless people on the streets of NYC by the day as this problem goes unchallenged - of the wealthy getting free reign to artifically multiply their profit holding their money in empty homes, while those unlucky enough to know someone to take advantage of the automated home buying of 95% of new homes are further and further displaced. A year is a short time in the grand scheme of things and it's no guarantee of actually helping these vulnerable people, it's simply pushing them out onto someone else's streets, who are more often far more conservative and far less generous than NYC's very strenuous and draining system. The empty housing for the homeless is sitting unused and empty on the streets of New York, the city needs to step in and take it from the already stupidly wealthy idle rent seekers as they continue to harm the poor and vulnerable who are the backbone of the city.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 22:34
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:If the city has a choice between providing some number of homeless people housing in the city, or can instead rent out that housing to wealthy people, and use the revenue to house twice as many homeless people in the cheaper suburbs, there's a pretty compelling case for helping more people. There is a huge opportunity cost to housing them in the city and NYC pays for it either way. I don't think the NYC government should need permission of a municipality to buy housing on the open market there and then use it for its intended purpose. Letting rich cities buy up poorer areas to send their undesirables is not a good precedent. In fact, it's kinda hosed up
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 22:46
|
|
|
Taintrunner posted:Ex-homeless person here, this is pretty crap on it's head and I'll break it down bit by bit. Like, I agree that the thing you've described is a huge issue, but it's not the same issue and fixing it will not fix homelessness. I don't think you can fault the people who can do nothing about pied-a-terre apartments but can provide homes for homeless people in another county right now, so they can avoid freezing to death, right now. Brushing up against a problem without fixing it 100% isn't a bad thing and, in this case, not doing so is even worse. Like, obviously there should not be people who want homes but don't have them in our society, it's ludicrous, but vetoing any policy that does anything short of fixing that will simply result in more dead homeless people.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 23:02
|
|
|
shipping homeless people to remote ghettos is one step from shipping them to camps where they can take nice ‘showers’ hth
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 23:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 08:07 |
|
|
I realize that living upstate without having to pay rent sounds a lot like a concentration camp to your average nyc resident but uhh, no, it's not.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 23:57
|
|