Recent comments in /f/jerseycity

Vertigo963 t1_jc1axx7 wrote

For thousands of years, people of every racial and ethnic background have lived similar shameful histories, by creating states with unrepresentative and tyrannical governments, by subordinating and killing dissenters, freethinkers, and minorities, by waging wars of conquest against neighbors, and by keeping members of disfavored groups as slaves. This is the shared history of every human being and every community, regardless of skin color or ancestry. In my view, the only way to move past that history is to treat each other fairly, as individuals, in a new society that rejects the old prejudices and addresses the problems we have today. If doing that is laughable as f*ck, then so be it.

0

abhinav0794 t1_jc0vuia wrote

Two boots pizza for a late night beer + slice.

Uncle momo for their underrated bfast

Brick lane for some real deal indian tandoor

Mathew’s/Dullboy for bar bites and good cocktails ( Dullboy is my all time fav )

Lastly Orale for huge portion Mexican food

3

Zulumus t1_jc0siot wrote

As one of those blue collar Union City residents about to have his view blocked, I can guarantee you there aren’t many of these “millionaires” you’re dreaming up. Pretty normal people who just like to keep the little they have.

7

oseguera2020 t1_jc0oe4u wrote

You said earlier that I bragged about getting Stack’s endorsement, but you’re showing me a tweet where I said that he does retail politics better than other elected officials in Hudson County, which is just a statement of objective fact.

0

Able-Space t1_jc0o8t2 wrote

I think there might be some confusion on what a “YIMBY” is and why it’s worth critiquing. here’s a good explanation, and below is an excerpt if you don’t want to read the whole thing:

The problem, YIMBYs believed, was that a housing shortage was driving up rent prices. They rarely, if ever, talked about corporate landlords charging outrageous rents or that developers were demolishing rent-controlled apartments to build market-rate, luxury housing or that local and state governments needed to build more affordable housing and preserve already existing affordable-housing stock, such as rent-controlled apartments.

YIMBYs simplistically concluded that the housing market needed to be flooded with more apartments, and that would ultimately drive down rents. They knew developers built almost exclusively luxury housing, and that was okay with them. YIMBYs insisted that more luxury housing would solve California’s housing affordability crisis. From the get-go, YIMBYs embraced trickle-down economics or what’s now called “trickle-down housing” policy. As middle- and working-class people have long known, trickle-down anything doesn’t work — except to make the rich richer.”

3

JeromePowellAdmirer t1_jc0mg0j wrote

On 3/19/21, since deleted: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E1sK1zzWUAAXJ-x?format=png&name=small

Why was it necessary to say all the stuff about "this is a very densely populated community" if you didn't want it to pass? I also don't agree that the majority of Union City residents (an extremely Democratic city) oppose marijuana legalization. The true majority would have supported (had it not been for suppression through machine power) and a no vote on that would have given them a voice.

8

objectimpermanence t1_jc0m14i wrote

NIMBY progressives tend to think that things like rent control will protect the current resident in that situation.

Which is true, but it’s very short-term oriented. NIMBY policies tend to benefit incumbents at the expense for future generations.

Living in Manhattan or San Francisco can be surprisingly affordable if you happen to still live in the rent controlled or rent-stabilized apartment you moved into in 1992. But all the young artists and professionals who come after you get screwed because rent control and various other NIMBY policies make new construction less abundant and thus more expensive.

6