http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/01/nyregion/older-workers-are-increasingly-entering-fast-food-industry.html?ref=nyregion
Man in his 50s works 80 hour week at 2 jobs to make his mortgage payments because he bought 500k house in 2003 before losing his 22/h unionized job in 2008.
I have every sympathy for fast food workers who have to live at minimum wage in an expensive city but does the NYT not fact check anymore?
ACRIS tells a different story.
He buys a house in Ridgewood (nice-looking bstone in now landmarked area) in '04, then doubles up in '07 by buying another house in Middle Village, bringing his debt level close to a million.
Then he sells the Ridgewood house at close to the bottom in 2011 (though not a short sale).
His financial troubles are partly due to the loss of union job but just as much due to the lending practices which allowed him to borrow close to a million dollars.
[less]
Response by Flutistic
over 12 years ago
Posts: 516
Member since: Apr 2007
Great research. The reporter probably doesn't know ACRIS exists.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by Aaron2
over 12 years ago
Posts: 1716
Member since: Mar 2012
When has the Times ever been interested in accuracy when it might get in the way of a story designed to whip up a little "Aren't I glad I got a college education so I don't have to have a union job" Schadenfreude amongst their rich liberal readership?
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by nyc10023
over 12 years ago
Posts: 7614
Member since: Nov 2008
This is serious enough that I might bring it to the attention of the editorial board. Of the millions of people stuck in this vicious low-wage environment, that was the best they could come up with?
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by alanhart
over 12 years ago
Posts: 12397
Member since: Feb 2007
Public editor, not editorial board.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by pier45
over 12 years ago
Posts: 379
Member since: May 2009
I've heard the real estate section is considered an advertising section, like automotive, so journalistic standards do not apply. Sort of frustrating for someone interested in the subject.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by columbiacounty
over 12 years ago
Posts: 12708
Member since: Jan 2009
of course this article wasn't in the real estate section. but lets pile on.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by fieldschester
over 12 years ago
Posts: 3525
Member since: Jul 2013
C0C0 to the rescue of the NY Times.
C0C0 Times are tough if you have to count on C0C0 to support you.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by ab_11218
over 12 years ago
Posts: 2017
Member since: May 2009
i've sent a few comments on some of the stupidity that has been written in NYT over the years. when i saw the same idiots write more of the same garbage, i realized that it's pointless. it's not about facts, but about the illusion of facts.
Great research. The reporter probably doesn't know ACRIS exists.
When has the Times ever been interested in accuracy when it might get in the way of a story designed to whip up a little "Aren't I glad I got a college education so I don't have to have a union job" Schadenfreude amongst their rich liberal readership?
This is serious enough that I might bring it to the attention of the editorial board. Of the millions of people stuck in this vicious low-wage environment, that was the best they could come up with?
Public editor, not editorial board.
I've heard the real estate section is considered an advertising section, like automotive, so journalistic standards do not apply. Sort of frustrating for someone interested in the subject.
of course this article wasn't in the real estate section. but lets pile on.
C0C0 to the rescue of the NY Times.
C0C0 Times are tough if you have to count on C0C0 to support you.
i've sent a few comments on some of the stupidity that has been written in NYT over the years. when i saw the same idiots write more of the same garbage, i realized that it's pointless. it's not about facts, but about the illusion of facts.