SolitaryMarmot

SolitaryMarmot t1_j2byuur wrote

I don't give a crap if anyone drives. Drive all you want. It's when you start crying about traffic and parking spots and bike lanes and this and that...that's when you should start thinking about giving up your car because obviously it's too much for you to deal with. The fact is they are building more and more bike lanes and taking out car lanes to expand pedestrian space and add space for non car drivers. Cars are a luxury not a need. And we would all rather you give up your car than hear you cry about parking and traffic incessantly.

3

SolitaryMarmot t1_j226wda wrote

I feel like this is just begging the lawyers that do get in to your venue to start doing stuff like measuring the height of your door knobs and grades of your ramps and digging into your employee relations etc etc. Don't forget Jimmy Dolan is the dolt who got on the stand during a trial and testified he fired someone for reporting sexual harassment. The only thing standing between the Dolans and an absolute waterfall of litigation is paying plaintiffs. But now you've just enraged everyone in the guild enough to go hunt down non-paying ones. Just...why? So some of counsel from Jersey who has nothing to do with anything can't take her niece and nephew to the Rockettes? It will never make sense to me.

23

SolitaryMarmot t1_j2247vx wrote

Reply to comment by LiftyJoestar in Bike lanes by SimpatheticNS

I drive, mostly in the outer boroughs. I bought a car about 3 years ago for my non profit volunteer gig. I have NEVER once sat in traffic and said to myself...damn bike lanes are causing this. Literally never once. It's always some double parked car or truck holding up an entire block of too many cars. Or it's just too many cars going to the same chokepoint like a bridge or tunnel not obeying traffic laws and jamming up intersections for people trying to get across it. The worst traffic in the city is on roads without bike lanes...the BQE, the LIE, 11th Ave. A lot of the times I get off the roads with bike lanes and get on roads with bike lanes to avoid traffic. Blaming bike lanes for traffic is kind of like blaming aliens or a zombie hoard. Sure you can...but that doesn't make it real.

2

SolitaryMarmot t1_j2234jw wrote

Bike lanes are excellent we need more and we need to widen the ones we have. As long as it's above 20 degrees or so I commute from Rego Park to Midtown on an eBike. The bike lanes and Queens get quite crowded 8-9 months out of the year. But once you get into Manhattan the bike lanes are JAMMED. Just absolutely choked. On the major avenues it's common to have more bikes waiting at the intersection than cars now. Except cars are using 85% of the space and bikes and other micromobility devices get 15%. There's a reason eDevices in particular have absolutely exploded and its because they are the most efficient way to get around the city, even the outer boroughs. My life and schedule in general has be going crosstown a lot so having an eBike is the biggest time saver. But crosstown travel (even though it's more efficient by bike/eDevice than by public transit or car or walking) is where the bike lane network is most sorely lacking. We need a ton more and better infrastructure for non car transportation. Non drivers have always been the majority, but a huge amount of those non drivers are moving to micromobility. More space has to be given to them and pedestrians to improve transportation as a whole.

1

SolitaryMarmot t1_j1wg1iq wrote

but the trust will get more city and state funding than NYCHA did previously right? and it will also do its own borrowing as a PBC. I mean like a substantial amount, not like 3% of the capital budget like the city and state is used to chipping in. I honestly never noticed any city and state spending on NYCHA in past budgets but I'm sure its there if you say so. I'm still questioning how realistic it is the state chips in with the trust. The most powerful person in Albany has exactly zero NYCHA resident contituents. The city is down to cutting story time at libraries. Like its hard enough to get the damn Medicaid bill paid. I'm 100% willing to be pleasantly surprised. But I think it has suited everyone to point at HUD and make them the bad guy thus far.

but I'm not sure it entirely matters because I'm like 90% confident that in 10 years NYCHA will have to reimburse HUD a gazillion dollars once they figure NYCHA let the section 9 tenants stay in section 8 converted apartments who weren't eligible and that's why they aren't in NYCHA section 8 apartments to begin with. Very few things in life are guaranteed except death, taxes and NYCHA fucking up those conversions.

3

SolitaryMarmot t1_j1w1t9v wrote

Reuters has a story tracker up for a while but now I can't find it. But Google the individual stories they all link back to earlier ones. In the end the company pled guiltily to fraud and paid some restitution in early 2022. Some individual maintenance supervisors were arrested but the C-suite mostly paid their way out. The base housing is still falling apart though.

0

SolitaryMarmot t1_j1w0ki5 wrote

NYCHA has always been federally funded. The state and city just reached a deal in the last budget to create a new PBC that would allow state, city and private funds to be raised for the new capital plan...the Public Housing Trust or some such name. But I don't think that money has been appropriated, only authorized so far. The dream is to shift NYCHA away from federal funding TO more state and city funding but that is not a politically popular move.

4

SolitaryMarmot t1_j1ofjvq wrote

Oh please. These idiots rented out an illegal shitty apartment to an illegal shitty tenant who knew exactly how to get over on them. Happens every day to people who rent their illegal shitty basements to people send a letter telling them to get a C of O and they stop paying rent knowing they will NEVER get a legal C of O for their shitty basement.

When you do something illegal as a slumlord and someone throws it back in your face....you get ZERO sympathy from me.

−1

SolitaryMarmot t1_j1dli4z wrote

They can't find a SNF willing to take a Medicaid patient so they end up sitting in the hospital (years no...a couple months is normal, seriously LOS data is public information. ) Hospitals do the exact same thing. They find ways to prioritize non Medicaid patients, particularly private insurance patients the same way SNFs do. They aren't supposed to turn away Medicaid patients because they are on Medicaid but the massive disparities in payer mix mean that they find a way to do it. This is literally the system that has been created and allowed to perpetuate. The SNFs are doing the exact same thing the hospitals are doing and vice versa because they are rational actors.

And Payment Topology is also public information. You can look at the public all payer dataset on line. EMTALA isn't treatment, it's just stabilization. And outside women in labor, it's pretty rare. It's actually pretty rare for women in labor too. Because NY actually has a very low uninsured population. Our Medicaid program is pretty expansive here. But it only gets you access to 3rd class or maybe 2nd class treatment.

1

SolitaryMarmot t1_j1dk1nh wrote

That's not how hospitals work. All hospitals...including the publics run on net patient service revenue. They send the bill for services off to Medicaid, Medicare or private insurance and get reimbursement. All the hospitals that treat mostly Medicaid patients, including the privates, get some type of "extra" funding but usually not a lot. It's usually through the Disproportionate Share program and the Indigent Care Pool. In the years we have a mayor that chooses to support NYC Health and Hospitals (which so far has been deBlasio) - there is also a city subsidy. A lot of that is for outpatient services which runs at massive losses because its servicing the undocumented population of NYC as well.

But no outside funding stabilizes losses which are structural and built into the payer mix. Hospitals that don't have enough private insurance patients run at a loss. And while they aren't supposed to turn away Medicaid patients - they obviously do. NYU and Bellevue are literally right next to each other. NYU has 15% Medicaid and Bellevue has 81% Medicaid. All things being equal.. Why wouldn't Medicaid patients choose the "better" hospital if they actually could?

That isn't because of some freak of statistics. It's because NYU gives privileges to doctors who keep very few Medicaid patient appointments a month and have a long waiting list for new Medicaid patients. And when Medicaid patients come through the ED they tell them the wait is shorter at Bellevue or they don't have the right kind of physician for them on, or they don't have beds in case of an admit...in the case of psych patients they literally wheel them over to the Bellevue ED even though NYU does have psych beds (Bellevue is larger because it has more psych beds but otherwise they are both in the 800-900 bed range.) Bellevue would never say or do these things because it's contrary to their mission.

Your socioeconomic class...including the type of insurance you have, determines the quality of health care you get in NYC and around the country. But NYC happens to be particularly stratified. If you ever need to use Medicaid (or even Medicare to a lesser degree) be prepared to only be allowed to use the shitty hospitals and providers.

2