Case study: Aboutready

Tools, it said, not tolls.

Why does your daughter get to go to acting classes, while your new son only gets art classes? Why can't you treat them equally, instead of being totally sexist?

>Tools, it said, not tolls.

Yes, I made the mistake of tools vs. tolls last week, and so I wanted to be consistent. Don't you appreciate consistency?

consistency, or a foolish consistency?

i like to think i have a fairly flexible mind, to partially compensate for my supremely inflexible body. (split infinitive alert)

>consistency, or a foolish consistency?

Better question would be
consistency or foolishness?

And yes, both are possible, even for me.

so...

you're a troll on an internet site.

which part is interesting or surprising?

because i'm racist, obviously.

interestingly the classes cost exactly the same, to the penny. actually, his after school classes are more expensive than her classes, because for fitness she's happy with the local yoga and kickboxing place, and he wants martial arts. they are both taking a guitar class that allows unlimited drop in classes.

his schooling, assuming I can get ACS to fucking move on this, will be significantly more expensive.

what??

hb, i guess you don't recognize the reference. consistency can be good, or it can be foolish. i'm not a perma anything.

woman?

I don't think you're 12, I think you're 15.

Not permanently.

What is really funny here at is that you , I, and Barbara Walters are probably the only women in NY who don't drive - I actually have the NYS non-drivers ID - got too cumbersome carrying a passport to get on domestic flights .
And what makes it worse is that I could have a very wide choice of vehicles to drive

>And what makes it worse is that I could have a very wide choice of vehicles to drive

What does that mean? You also drive stick?

ar - find some people who will come in to maintain it for you. You've had it for 8 years, bought it with the parameters you describe, and were happy so don't quite understand the change in your need parameters
.
But must say it sounds like you are now in a place in NY you like, so don't need to flee to upstate to be happy. You must have a w/d in the new place - don't need to take your laundry to the country. It's always the little things in life that make a difference.

NO - Hunter - WIDE choice of brands, makes and models

No, actually there are a ton of people in NYC who don't drive. but getting the NYS non-drivers ID isn't simple.

My first car was a '69 mustang. my dad (asshole otherwise, btw) retrofitted this baby. and i never got a license.

ar - non-drivers id is very simple. If I did it you can. Just go do the paperwork, show up for the picture. What was even better was that, when I went to renew it, they actually asked me if I wanted to use the original picture!! For the NEXT 10 YEARS!!! As in, of course!!!

too bad you don't have the Mustang - worth a lot now

Hunter - as in BMW convertible - the summer car

ar - do what do you use for US flights? You carry your passport for domestic travel?

Yes, I use my passport. Getting another ID is on a very long list of things to do.

I have a w/d now, but I kind of miss the industrial-sized ones. The place upstate is just not used. Believe me, I have very mixed emotions, particularly as I've just fixed the place up. But I really want something about an hour closer, 1000 sf smaller, and with a pool. I'm thinking new paltz. Or rhinebeck. I want a place the kids can get to by themselves without a car. I never was fleeing PCV to be happy. I had a younger child who had little homework who was happy to make the trip, as were her friends. Things change.

And yes, I wouldn't mind still owning my first car.

PH and AR, if you don't want to bring the book-format passport with you on airplane flights, look into getting a passport card:

http://travel.state.gov/passport/ppt_card/ppt_card_3926.html

(You can use it for international land crossings, too.)

I don't mind using my real passport so I don't have the card version, but it could be handy. I will never, ever obtain a non-driver ID, which is basically a card that offers proof that you're *forbidden from* doing something. Get the passport card!

Attaining a non-drivers license is not a big feat. Taking and passing the road test upstate NY is easier than in NYC.

Not driving is a point of pride for New Yorkers, so why get the passport card?

There's an "enhanced driver's license" issued by states that allows border crossings as well ... I assume it's available in a no-drive version.

You need a couple of forms of ID to get the non-drivers card. Yes, I know I just need to submit some form to get a replacement social security card, but I haven't done it yet. I should, because it would be a total PITA if I ever lost my passport, although I do have it in a PDF as well.

I'm used to using my passport, my carry on has a specific spot for it so it's not such a big deal.

I despise driving, and I'm near-sighted and unwilling (yet) to correct my vision, my reflexes are awful. I'm certain the world is a better place without my operating a motor vehicle. It does limit where I would feel comfortable retiring to, however. There are precisely three cities I think I could manage.

Not owning a car in NYC is a relief: you don't have to worry about parking and tickets. I don't remember the point system for attaining an DMV i.d., but once you gather all requirements, you can go to the DMV express on 34th st & 8th ave and you will be done in no time!

I had to get a replacement SS card several years ago. I went to the Harlem office -- quick and painless. I didn't get mugged or anything.

Dan O'Connor, Harlemites know you're a poor provincial lout. LMAO. Why would they rob you, and they know you have less than them. LMAO. Maybe aboutready should adopt you, it'd be a family portrait without differences in tans. LMAO.

@Alan - I guess if you take pride in not needing to drive, you might want a non-driver ID. But if you're not permitted to drive (because of inferior eyesight, or epilepsy, or whatever), having such a card is like carrying legal proof that you're a second-class citizen. Carrying a card that says you *can* do something (license to operate something; proof that you work for a company or got into a university) is more often the thing that fills people with pride.

"There are precisely three cities I think I could manage."

New York, SF, ...Boston? Chicago?

There are a lot more if you're willing to live outside the US. But *inside* the US, seemingly everything is designed for the exclusive convenience of automobile drivers. I can't think of another minority which is as discriminated against *and* gets no attention from government or the PC-crowd or even the general public.

While aboutready does not drive, it does not mean her husband does not drive.

NY, SF and Seattle. Boston's doable, I couldn't live in Chicago.

There are any number of foreign cities I could manage, and we may very well split our time between one of those three cities and foreign locations.

Yes, my husband drives, but it would be foolish to select a retirement city where I needed to rely on him for my transportation.

If you can drive in NYC, you can drive anywhere. What I dislike about suburban and rural driving is that drivers share roads and the like with four legged animals.

"There are any number of foreign cities I could manage, and we may very well split our time between one of those three cities and foreign locations."

You should give it a shot. I've spent time in Tokyo (where few people own cars, the streets are narow enough that cars can't go very fast, and, best of all, parking always costs a ton of money), Vienna (in District 1, the old center of the city, cars are forbidden), and Kyoto (same as Tokyo, but the streets have numbers and go in straight lines so you never get lost). All are excellent.

The "Walk Score" just doesn't get the job done -- it still presupposes that everyone can drive a car on occasion, so a place where everything except the supermarket is within walking distance will get a high-ish score even though shopping is practically impossible. I'd like to see a rating system where places are ranked based on how much of a hassle automobile ownership is. (Simply counting up what percentage of residents don't have cars won't do the job, because people who are too poor or have DUIs will go in the plus column.)

I'm planning (well, very early planning) to make NYC my retirement home. I can't get over how car-centric Florida is, despite the large number of 80-year-olds who really shouldn't be behind the wheel.

I lived in Tokyo for a couple of years. The trains stopping at midnight was a bit of a hassle, but I can't even imagine owning a car there. We didn't personally know a single person who did.

Even Seattle and SF are only doable in certain neighborhoods. Georgetown in dc might work, but I think you'd still want a car.

I lived in Chicago for about 4 years - great city, very good public transportation, and in many areas not difficult to get a taxi.

"I lived in Tokyo for a couple of years. The trains stopping at midnight was a bit of a hassle, but I can't even imagine owning a car there. We didn't personally know a single person who did. "

Where in Tokyo did you live? I'm in eastern Shinjuku now, and it's a great neighborhood; rented in academic Bunkyo-ku before that and slumlike-but-pleasant Adachi before that.

Places that "might work" without a car are, for me and my future wife (who also cannot drive) out of the question. The last thing you want is all your kid's friends' parents having cars -- they will *not* be understanding when they ask you to pick someone up and you can't, and you really don't want your kid asking why our family doesn't have a car but everyone else does.

This is why NYC is the best place to live in the USA.

It's not the transportation in Chicago, the city doesn't work for me on a number of levels.

Triple, you're right. Retirement is different than raising children. I could only envision NYC and SF for raising kids without a car, and SF would have to involve private school.

Our rent was paid for by an investment bank. We started in roppongi, moved to nogizaka, then akasaka. I got tired of the gaijin ghettos and we moved to mita.

NYC's transportation is 24 hours, minus the LIRR and Metronorth. The LIRR and Metronorth operates great for commuters who want to enjoy the city during the weekend. People, who live in NYC are spoiled by the the convenience of commuting, and when they relocate to locales that's agility is lower fueled to that of NYC, they have to premeditate the change-of-pace to the new locale. As far as the high energy level, NYC is a rare jewel; while That City, USA low-to-mid energy level is commonplace.

"We started in roppongi, moved to nogizaka, then akasaka. I got tired of the gaijin ghettos and we moved to mita."

That's a crazy coincidence; every day bicycling to work I pass through Nogizaka and Roppongi, then southeast to Mita. I go right past the Australian embassy and Keio University's Mita campus.

If you have occasion to come back, live in Kagurazaka. Lots of Westerners around, but without the expense and pretentiousness of Roppongi, Akasaka, and Azabu. You will be spoken to in French on occasion, though.

"People, who live in NYC are spoiled by the the convenience of commuting"

I'd rather say that people who live in car-worshipping suburbs are spoiled by having everything designed for their cars. Unlike non-drivers who can't always choose to be drivers, all drivers *can* choose to be non-drivers and live in the big city.

I like driving under certain conditions - fast, highways with views on a nice day. Yes, yes, cars are bad, bad things.

we have a car. it's a handy piece of machinery. it would just never be wise for me to rely upon it as a primary form of transportation.

triple, it is kind of crazy. nogizaka isn't that frequented an area, really. nor, obviously, is mita (by foreigners, at least). of course, i lived there decades ago. i didn't have any real interest in going back, there being so many other places i haven't seen, but it is the number one place our new kid would like to visit, so we'll likely get there in a year or two. i'll have to brush up on my japanese.

It would be good to update this analysis to reflect her Williamsburg purchase last year.

greensdale:

She claims in her own words, posted in above comments:
"I despise driving, and I'm near-sighted and unwilling(yet)to correct my vision, my reflexes are awful."
So, the mere action of getting glasses is problematic to her.
Her "reflexes are awful" because she's an untreated alkie.

She's limited in the selection of places to retire, because:
"Yes, my husband drives, but it would be foolish to select a retirement city where I needed to rely on him for my transportation."

"We have a car, it's a handy piece of machinery, it would just never be wise for me to rely upon it as a primary form of transportation."

"triple..: "...but it is the number one place our new kid would like to visit."

Clearly, she's unable to learn new skills (of any kind), especially driving (for which she would need to get sober and remain sober).
She can't even drive herself up to her property near Albany, nor get around there to shop for the needed requirements of living there,(even for a few days or one week) so it remains "un-used".

Her "new kid" is of age to get his driving permit.
She's transferring her lack of her ability to learn new skills onto her "new kid" and limiting him, in his life with her in Williamsburg and his life in general.

Sorry Truth, but what I think this thread calls for is a financial analysis.

O.K., greensdale.
Don't forget to include the money that "Peter Cooper owes" her.

trUth has been overruled. greenberg says, in effect, "shut the fuck up, you insane-o crazy lunatic with a weird lezbo fixation on about ready. Stifle."

how soon will we get a time check?

What time zone is C0lumbia C0unty in?

alan, you too, please stay on topic, this thread is intended as a case study on AR, not on your fascination on lezbos.

How true, greensdale.
trollalanhart was on here, posting his alkie comments within minutes of my one and only se post, on this discussion thread: 10:15pm EST.

tick tock.

C0C0, is C0lumbia C0unty a minute or two behind us here in NYC

?

It was your eleventh SE post on this discussion thread, in fact, you mental crackpot Creedmore cretin.

What time is it now? What time zone? Are you sure it's not Daylight Saving Time? Cuando cuando cuando cuando cuando?

greensdale: Obviously, I was pointing out my recent post of today, yet alkiealanhart refers to my comments posted 16 months ago.
That's how it is for alkies: every day the same as yesterday, the same as last week, last month and over a year-and-a half ago.

It's 11:30pm on Sunday, 6/16/13.
This is alkiealanhart's highlight of his day.

Your watch is slow, like your wit and your metabolism.

^^within a minute, another drunken comment posted by the alkiealanhart^^
11:44pm, EST Sunday 6/16/13

Good one, ah.

Yes, I am owed money from a settlement in a litigation. And I never even had to meet with an attorney, nor get hit by a car. I didn't have to file a lawsuit alleging damages because light bulbs weren't changed quickly enough, or expressing the emotional pain caused by having to get my delivered food in the lobby. Somebody's clearly jealous.

Can we get back on topic?

Given that the topic is me, I'd say that I can write whatever the hell I want.

You can always write what you want, as can Truth, alan, and C0C0. Doesn't mean it is on topic.

The litigation is definitely on topic. The award directly affects the rent calculation. Think, hb, before you type.

You are right. I was thinking it was net neutral. Your retroactive rent went down, real working class people today are paying more to find your benefit.

But to complete the story, we need to factor in your purchase in Williamsburg. Be sure to include an adjustment for the costs to the condo of your fellow owner who is being foreclosed upon.

Find -> Fund your benefit.

Just keep ignoring the truth, hb. You're so good at doing so.

Your claim is that you don't ignore the Truth?

Either way, your windfall is hurting others. There's no such thing as a free lunch - your windfall is coming out of other people's pockets, pockets that are stretched to pay the rent. You can still choose to do the right thing and I hope you do.

when will you do the right thing?

No, actually it's not. But you were too dense to understand my explanation earlier. The lawsuit was a tremendous win for the tenants. Some didn't get as much as others, but the net effect for all was win/win. Prior to the ruling they were jacking up rents 20% a year and they didn't care a bit about retention.

You're being simple, hb, very.

Rents are going up mid lease. But you ... Take the money and run. Blame others.

Ask Fannie. You're so uninformed you're embarrassing yourself. You know nothing about the numbers, what they were, are and would have been. Idiot.

And no, rents are not generally going up mid-tem. But even if they we, they went down because of the suit, so the tenants got almost $200 million in interim savings. You just don't have any knowledge of this situation.

But you know precisely, right down to the last penny.

I know a lot more than you do. And I don't tend to opine on matters where I am ignorant, unlike you.

That's funny.

No. It's not. You've been acting the fool for ages about this topic. Seriously, you're so wrong you reek.

But if it makes you happy to extrapolate some unwritten meaning from some curbed article that has no analysis, go right ahead.

You are embarrassing yourself with your lack of information.

No embarrassment here. What I have managed to do is draw out your proud sense of entitlement.

Bullshit. That's your perceived sense of my sense of entitlement. It's not entitlement, it's justice against a highly sleazy landlord. And I hope it will aid others in similar cases, and more importantly, prevent such cases in the future.

But feel free to discuss the numbers. You obviously know so much.

The money didn't come from the landlord at the time you rented.

And if you are so concerned about justice and deterrence, why are you keeping the windfall instead of putting it in the hands of people for whom the rent regs in that working class development were intended to benefit?

Hb, for the umpteenth time, you don't have a clue. There were no income restrictions at PCV/ST for RS apartments. You have NO idea what you are talking about, none.

You repeating that I don't have a clue does little to support your case.

Money is in your pocket.
Money is not there to help the people who taxpayers intended.

You feel you are owed the money.
Because you are into justice. Or just getting away with whatever you can.

Your repeating, without evidence, that I'm taking from others does little to support your case.

What proof do you have that the money was intended to help the taxpayers? Do you have ANY clue how the various rent stabilization plans work? Of which there are many?

Oh just shut the fuck up. Your ignorance is monumental.

>Oh just shut the fuck up. Your ignorance is monumental.

Of course, this is not a topic you want to discuss, right?

No, this is a topic I've discussed to death. It's one you just don't, or shoose not to, understand.

Choose.

>No, this is a topic I've discussed to death. It's one you just don't, or shoose not to, understand.

I get it, you got your money, so who cares about the rest?

Who's winning?

Not hb.

AR has the money that belongs to others. So she is winning.

Liar. Your moral compass is broken.

You didn't receive the money yet? When are you getting it? Rents have already increased.

Here aboutready: http://streeteasy.com/nyc/talk/discussion/35173-compass-rock-decides-to-raise-rents-midlease , rents are already up because of the settlement, shouldn't you receive your cash windfall by now?

Idiot. For the fucking umpteenth time, with the interim agreement rents were lowered. During the settlement the parties decided to allow certain increases, so for about TWENTY PERCENT of the market rate tenants, rents increased above the interim agreement level but rarely above what would have been allowed but for the suit. although those tenants saved about $175 million during that time period.

Liar, and ignorant. Pedantic, too.

So your, what, $50,000? $100,000? just comes from thin air? No implications?

You're too dumb to respond to. But here. It's coming out of the net worth of the complex, from those who still hold debt.. If you want to excoriate someone, try those who still have monetary interests in the building.

Try Fannie, who is certain they will not lose money on their investment.

So you are just f'ing over the debt holders? That's your justice, your deterrent from future problems with laundry machines and your other gripes of the horrible past management? Meanwhile others are paying more, and the original intention of the stabilization program subsidized by the taxpayers of the State of New York ends up in your pocket.