Gang of Four

[Cyrus Afzali]

On Thu, 02 Apr 2009 06:23:26 -0500, Peter Schleifer
<pschleif@speakeasy.org> wrote:

>On Wed, 01 Apr 2009 22:52:15 -0400, Ruben <ruben@www2.mrbrklyn.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 01 Apr 2009 12:50:03 -0400, Bolwerk wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Connect: If they don't spend it, they lose it, and will be just as broke
>>> or even more broke.
>>
>>aside which I don't want it anyway
>
>Why should anyone care what you want when you show no apparent
>interest in what anyone else wants?

Point well taken. However, this kind of thinking is very common and
perfectly explains why nothing on a grand scale gets done anymore.
Everybody wants to tell you that they consume very few government
services and that their taxes are paying for things everybody else
uses. Obviously this isn't true, but when you boil things right down,
this thinking guides almost every budget debate Congress has.

[grammatim]

On Apr 3, 12:53*am, Ruben <ru...@www2.mrbrklyn.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Apr 2009 14:25:33 -0400, Cyrus Afzali wrote:
>
> > Point well taken. However, this kind of thinking is very common and
> > perfectly explains why nothing on a grand scale gets done anymore.
>
> Yeah - especially when everything you plan on a grand sceme means stealing
> money and resources from Brooklyn which is part of NYC and giving them to
> Westchester, which is NOT part of NYC.

It doesn't matter that both are part of NYS?

[Cyrus Afzali]

On Fri, 03 Apr 2009 00:53:40 -0400, Ruben <ruben@www2.mrbrklyn.com>
wrote:

>On Thu, 02 Apr 2009 14:25:33 -0400, Cyrus Afzali wrote:
>
>>
>> Point well taken. However, this kind of thinking is very common and
>> perfectly explains why nothing on a grand scale gets done anymore.
>
>Yeah - especially when everything you plan on a grand sceme means stealing
>money and resources from Brooklyn which is part of NYC and giving them to
>Westchester, which is NOT part of NYC.

By this logic, any taxes you pay that don't go for services you're
DIRECTLY USING TODAY is theft. You can theoretically have that view if
you want, but that kind of logic doesn't get us very far these days.

You might be better off buying property in a tax haven and just living
your days out there.

I'm all for forcing government to use the money they take from me
efficiently. My main arguments in this forum are against waste and I
think there's a TON of that in our area of the country. But this
notion that something you don't use directly has no intrinsic value to
you is baloney.

[Peter Schleifer]

On Fri, 03 Apr 2009 00:51:53 -0400, Ruben <ruben@www2.mrbrklyn.com>
wrote:

>On Thu, 02 Apr 2009 06:23:26 -0500, Peter Schleifer wrote:
>
>>
>> Why should anyone care what you want when you show no apparent
>> interest in what anyone else wants?
>
>Good
>
>So you can not care what I want in West Babylon and stay out of NYC.

I don't care what you want in West Babylon, wherever that is. Do you
assume that everyone who disagrees with you is a suburbanite?

--
Peter Schleifer
"Save me from the people who would save me from myself"

[Bolwerk]

Peter Schleifer wrote:
> On Sat, 04 Apr 2009 03:50:02 -0400, Ruben <ruben@www2.mrbrklyn.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 03 Apr 2009 05:26:32 -0700, grammatim wrote:
>>
>>>> Yeah - especially when everything you plan on a grand sceme means stealing
>>>> money and resources from Brooklyn which is part of NYC and giving them to
>>>> Westchester, which is NOT part of NYC.
>>> It doesn't matter that both are part of NYS?
>> Not even a little bit.
>
> Although you and I are both apparently in Brooklyn, why should I care
> about your part of Brooklyn? Boro lines are just as arbitrary as city
> or state lines.
>
> We should run the trains I need for my life and shut down everything
> else.
>

I wonder how he feels about what must be large transfers of wealth from
Manhattan to Brooklyn, a relatively poor borough.

[Vince]

"Peter Schleifer" <pschleif@speakeasy.org> wrote in message
news:l1met4p17jb52ekbn7l24c380b84nffeel@********...
> On Fri, 03 Apr 2009 00:51:53 -0400, Ruben <ruben@www2.mrbrklyn.com>
> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 02 Apr 2009 06:23:26 -0500, Peter Schleifer wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Why should anyone care what you want when you show no apparent
>>> interest in what anyone else wants?
>>
>>Good
>>
>>So you can not care what I want in West Babylon and stay out of NYC.
>
> I don't care what you want in West Babylon, wherever that is. Do you
> assume that everyone who disagrees with you is a suburbanite?
>
> --
> Peter Schleifer
> "Save me from the people who would save me from myself"

[Vince]

"Peter Schleifer" <pschleif@speakeasy.org> wrote in message
news:l1met4p17jb52ekbn7l24c380b84nffeel@********...
> On Fri, 03 Apr 2009 00:51:53 -0400, Ruben <ruben@www2.mrbrklyn.com>
> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 02 Apr 2009 06:23:26 -0500, Peter Schleifer wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Why should anyone care what you want when you show no apparent
>>> interest in what anyone else wants?
>>
>>Good
>>
>>So you can not care what I want in West Babylon and stay out of NYC.
>
> I don't care what you want in West Babylon, wherever that is. Do you
> assume that everyone who disagrees with you is a suburbanite?
>

You ever wonder why BABY is said BA BE
and yet BABYLON is said BAB A Lon?

[Peter Schleifer]

On Sat, 4 Apr 2009 23:40:16 -0500, "Vince" <vpilutis@**************>
wrote:

>You ever wonder why BABY is said BA BE
>and yet BABYLON is said BAB A Lon?

No, that's just one of those things that's not worth wasting
neurotransmitters on.

--
Peter Schleifer
"Save me from the people who would save me from myself"

[Vince]

"Peter Schleifer" <pschleif@speakeasy.org> wrote in message
news:2lugt45rpse2s8q51v9se30juqushb38kr@********...
> On Sat, 4 Apr 2009 23:40:16 -0500, "Vince" <vpilutis@**************>
> wrote:
>
>>You ever wonder why BABY is said BA BE
>>and yet BABYLON is said BAB A Lon?
>
> No, that's just one of those things that's not worth wasting
> neurotransmitters on.
>
INDEED?

[Cyrus Afzali]

On Mon, 6 Apr 2009 16:37:44 +0000 (UTC), danny burstein
<dannyb@panix.com> wrote:

>You zoomed right past my detailed comment... I wrote "there's
>a huge freight operation..." In addition to the air cargo folk
>at teh airport itself, there are many, make that MANY, shippers
>based just outside.

Freight is important in the overall scheme to carriers that handle it.
But remember that airports get compensated based on the overall
volume. IOW, carriers paying varying fees for gates, ATC facilities,
etc. Passenger airlines generate more of those than cargo operators
because passenger carriers will have many more operations in a given
day than cargo operators will at most airports. There are exceptions
to this rule, obviously, such as Memphis, the UPS facility in
Louisville and, until recently, the DHL facility in Ohio.
>
>As we're both well aware, the purpose of an airplane is
>to move freight from here to there. People are secondary...

Long hauls are where the money is really made. Obviously a regional
jet can't be much of a cargo workhorse and they are an increasing part
of the passenger carrier landscape.
>
>Oh, as an aside, if you want to get a painful headache, look
>at how much money the Feds (i.e. national taxpayers) kick
>in to support Port Newark. How much is that latest round
>of harbor scraping/deepening cosing everyone?
>
>It would be far more sensible to build some piers in Brooklyn
>and SI, and have freight trains running to them. But that
>ain't going to happen in our lifetimes.

Right, but Brooklyn and SI would have to compete harder because of
highway accessibility issues. That's one thing that allowed Jersey to
gain the place it did in the region. Since cargo is really an
intermodal operation, you need better highway accessibility than
you'll find in Brooklyn and SI.