1%'ers own real estate. A lot of it.

not to mention the gibberish principle.

ooh, COlumbiaCOunty with the witty correction to Riversider's misuse of "principal".

So, separate topic, any news on when the settlement money is coming in? Who should get most excited - the new car dealer? The decorator and furniture store? The bank? The brokerage firm? The bursar's office? The Ritz or Four Seasons? The possibilities are so exciting!

why don't you worry about yourself?

why can't you stop lying?

ah, the gibberish principle at work again.

you're going to copy my material again?

is that clever?

are you clever?

woah, first a post with 2 questions, then when I don't answer, a post with 3 questions. That's really applying the pressure.

spin and spin and spin again.

how happy were you this afternoon.

the novice takes your seriously.

hilarious.

I'm sweating now.

This most recent back and forth has narrowed the debate down to its essence. I hate to be a pessimist, but I see you caving every time in this scenario.

I'm loosening my collar. I'm dripping bullets.

What was the essence? Someone who doesn't deserve money, taking it. And at the same time, people for whom these programs were intended to help, losing out.

I think this is why the term Welfare Queen was coined.

Democratizing effect falls into the value judgment area. Down the road, Americans may vote in that direction, but I don't see it happening in my lifetime.

You're screwed.

Look, if you want to support stealing from programs intended for the poor and working class, just be clear about your leanings.

I looked at the case. I also pulled up salient code provision on westlaw, and I would say that the problem is with the law to the extent that those who were involved shouldn't probably have been involved in the way that they were involved. I would put these people in the category of being shit out of luck (you know, right SOOL) but what can I say?

I must be missing something because I just don't understand how the law leaves these people out.

you're going to copy NYCNovice's material again?

is that clever?

are you clever?

What charity are you donating to with your share?

If I were receiving monies from this settlement, which I am not, I would probably choose among Coalition for the Homeless, Meals on Wheels, Bowery Mission, Henry Street Settlement, the Police Athletic League.
I'm sure if I were going to receive a $35K to $50K settlement, that I'd do more research into it. But those are the ones that are off the top of my head.

Why aren't you making a donation?

Why are you holding yourself above everyone else?

Shame on you.

Oh, don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting that aboutready donating the undeserved windfall of $35-$50K should supplant her current giving. I'm saying it should be in addition. Since she's not entitled to this money and it was intended for the poor and/or working class, or otherwise should revert to the state.

I certainly hope you weren't thinking that this would be a replacement for normal charitable giving, were you?

So...you're determined to not pay your fair share?

Disgraceful.

I notice that you have a lot of opinions on me, but still have not been able to actually mount a defense of aboutready.

Why is that?

...well no one is happy about it. u r essentially forced to spoon feed everyone with bullshit from the top so that they can feed their bottom line.

This sounds like a quality issue that is terrifying. Aside from the worst fact that you are a complete useless asshole, there could well be added costs from you driving everyone crazy. Makes me now wonder whether you are liable.

What made you a bad person?
Was it your father who set a bad example?
Or was it possibly because he set no example?

Or was it your mother?

its sad about your situation. maybe some day you'll seek help.

Or did you see something bad in your parent's bedroom that started you on this path?

Look your problem is clear.

You've been a victim of the correlation vs causation principle.

And...sorry to tell you....there is no cure.

I get it. Your mother's problems and your father's behavior were not the cause, but rather independent of what you've become.

Maybe it was the assistant coach?

But...no reason to not make a full donation despite your horrible problem

Perhaps you will feel better even if its briefly.

Best I can do for you.

looks like I hit a nerve

Sorry to hear that. You may want to contact a physician. If you're covered.

columbiacounty's assistant coach ... and mommy and daddy were too busy with their own problems to care?

No coverage? Not even for meds? Wait until the end of the year and then you can enjoy the benefits of the new health care plan. Good luck in the meantime.

Well, I'm sure we'll hear soon a definitive answer from aboutready whether her husband is or is not involved with the lawsuit plaintiff in the case.

When will we hear a definitive answer from you about your donation?

I'm sure we will hear soon a definitive answer from aboutready whether her husband is or is not involved with the lawsuit plaintiff in the case. It's been 24 hours or so since the question was posed and she avoided an answer. Maybe it's an extra long shift at the soup kitchen.

What about you?

When will we hear?

Maybe her answer will be yes. Maybe it will be know.
All we want is a true answer.

And of course from you.

Hopefully we won't have to wait another 24 hours for an answer from aboutready on this.

what about you? how long will we wait? seems like forever.

In the mean time, we'll give her the benefit of the doubt.

Certainly her lower income neighbors would generously offer that to her.

not to you though

I just checked, it wasn't yet 24 hours that aboutready hasn't answered the question about her husband being or not being involved:

huntersburg

about 23 hours ago

Posts: 10165

Member since: Nov 2010

ignore this person

report abuse

>HB, your tax dollars were going to Tischman under the j-51 program, which they didn't deserve because they were illegally destabilizing apartments. Get it? Tischman received huge amounts of tax benefits at taxpayers expense. But I guess that doesn't disturb your overwhelmingly rigid sense of morality?

Despite the fact that the vast majority of the money doesn't even come from Tishman, I don't object to Tishman paying. I'm saying that YOU don't deserve it. YOU should donate it.

What am I missing? Is your husband a partner in one of the firms that is serving as plaintiff attorney?

aboutready

about 23 hours ago

Posts: 15162

Member since: Oct 2007

ignore this person

report abuse

What you are missing is any basic understanding of the law. No surprise there. It's been fairly constant in your discussions. The various courts disagree with you. And I frankly don't give a rat's ass what you think or your attempts at making a moral issue out of one that's based in the results of a law suit. We are happy to pay the increase in taxes, how about you and your libertarian friends?

huntersburg

about 23 hours ago

Posts: 10165

Member since: Nov 2010

ignore this person

report abuse

>We are happy to pay the increase in taxes,

And as a result, you are decreasing charity?
You are taking money intended for the poor and working class because of some phantom harm that you encounted in the apartmeht that you happily lived in for 8 years?

huntersburg

about 23 hours ago

Posts: 10165

Member since: Nov 2010

ignore this person

report abuse

You didn't answer about your husband though. Is he or his firm involved in this lawsuit?

aboutready

about 23 hours ago

Posts: 15162

Member since: Oct 2007

ignore this person

report abuse

Why don't you just read the decision if you're too dense to understand the damages involved? And I have no interest or need in answering your childish and inflammatory questions, but if you were to pause and consider you'd realize that a a member of the class of course my husband is involved. Sigh.

Enough. You have a need to distort this. I, frankly, don't care what you or anyone else thinks. Some people should just choke on their own bile.

huntersburg

about 23 hours ago

Posts: 10165

Member since: Nov 2010

ignore this person

report abuse

>but if you were to pause and consider you'd realize that a a member of the class of course my husband is involved.

Nice try. The question was, "Is your husband a partner in one of the firms that is serving as plaintiff attorney?"

It remains unanswered. Not sure why a definitive 'no' isn't forthcoming if that would be a correct answer.

huntersburg

about 22 hours ago

Posts: 10165

Member since: Nov 2010

ignore this person

report abuse

I continue to find this all disappointing.

Money is going from one undeserved party (Tishman) to another (aboutready) and bypassing the poor and working class.

This is after the taxpayers of the State of New York offered tax breaks to fund this program.

No.

Sorry. Busy.

aboutready
6 minutes ago
Posts: 15164
Member since: Oct 2007
ignore this person
report abuse
No.

great, so we are only talking about the $35-$50K, not something substantially larger.

aboutready
5 minutes ago
Posts: 15164
Member since: Oct 2007
ignore this person
report abuse
Sorry. Busy.

No need to apologize to me. I have no claim on this money intended to benefit the poor and/or working class.

Who is the OP suggesting would otherwise own residential real estate if the wealthy didn't own their own residences? The government?

Agreed with others; this is a good example of correlation != causation

Fred: I took a statistics class in college. I now know all about causation and correlation, which has been very useful over the years.
Joe: Cool. Sounds like you learned a lot in that class.
Fred: Hah. Well, not necessarily...