>"The report, prepared by a consulting firm that helped governments design more racially equitable systems, was based on conversations with those who chose to participate rather than on a quantitative survey."

Ah yes, so it is a grift.

We're like a year away from a proposal for parking tickets to be based on year/make/model of car.

Independent businesses who don't shovel snow will still get fined the same $100-$350 it has been, though the sanitation commissioner argued that was also too low.

Presumably, the proposal for chain stores to eat bigger fines is because they have more resources to hire contractors or employees to shovel snow.

It would be interesting to see what data (if any) was used by the council to propose these increased fees, because as another comment noted it does seem larger chain businesses are usually on-top of snow removal because they want the foot traffic.

This ceased to be a serious article when the author began downplaying how disastrous policies allowed Christina Lee's murderer to be walking free before he killed her, in addition to obscuring his criminal history.

The guy had, just a few months prior, randomly assaulted a subway commuter. The author claims it was "not clear what he did", even though his violent criminal history was widely reported in the aftermath of Lee's brutal slaying.

Ask yourself why this author is going out of her way to obscure the nature of Nash's violent criminal history.

Either she is a shitty journalist blogger who doesn't know how to use Google, or she is intentionally hiding details to fit her narrative. Going by her byline, it seems to be the latter as she appears to prefer innuendo over facts when writing advocacy pieces (which is all she does).

Assamad Nash assaulting a random subway commuter should have been enough to remand him into custody + mandate psychiatric evaluation, if we had a sensible justice system.

​

On top of that, she then goes into how Nash had committed another crime shortly before murdering Ms. Lee. Again, she intentionally does not include what the actual crime was (damaging dozens of MetroCard machines in multiple subway stations) and instead speculates it could have been for squatting or accidentally damaging property.

And then there is this gem:

>Looked at from another perspective, if judges remanded suspects or set prohibitively high bail in the pettiest of crimes—damaged property worth a quarter of the cost of an iPhone, in this case—literally everyone arrested for anything would get sent to Rikers. How’s that tenable?

She specifies a specific crime, in this case property damage, but then shifts to "everyone arrested for anything" as a justification for why psychos who go around fucking up public property shouldn't be held pre-trial. Classic slippery slope fallacy.

No, detaining someone who goes around fucking up MetroCard machines doesn't mean every single misdemeanor offense leads to a Rikers stay. FFS.

Bringing back cash bail for more offenses isn't the answer. There needs to be a complete overhaul of the pretrial detention system so that psychos like the piece of shit who killed Ms. Lee are not allowed to just roam the city streets after assaulting people.

When people like this author obscure facts and misrepresent cases in order to push their talking points, it comes across as bad-faith hackery. It may be enough to fool gullible, low-information readers, which is probably the point given that is her audience, but she comes across as disingenuous to anyone who is even remotely researched on the cases mentioned.

Yeah all these "disrupter" gig businesses survived off of VC money, sidestepping regulations, and suckering marks into going all-in.

The people who took out mortgages to finance entire homes to list on Airbnb have been finding out what a house of cards the entire business was, just like the goofs who spent all their money on luxury SUVs to try and be full-time Uber drivers.

I tend to agree with you.

Between various reward perks and just the general convenience, I am a hotel guy.

That said, what you wrote about groups was one of the things that made Airbnb surge in popularity. There have always been other services available for short-term property rentals, but Airbnb made it easier than ever, and often cheaper, to rent a party house for a weekend (before they banned parties which didn't actually stop parties).

LOL Bragg's office is so incompetent.

They tried to downgrade the charge to manslaughter by citing her being a DV victim, but somehow forgot to include voluminous evidence, spanning back over a decade, supporting this assertion.

Also, as another comment noted, why is it that Bragg's whole "criminal justice reform" shtick seems to not apply to seemingly valid claims of self-defense?

How so?

The "pumpkin spice" quip was a harmless jab at the thieves who look like the typical PSL aficionados.

How do you get emotionally engaged over such a throwaway line?

So the city now refers to monkeypox as "MPV", even though that is already a commonly-used medical acronym for mean platelet volume (blood testing).

I wasn't surprised at all to hear that Corden was acting like a twat, considering every single "Asshole celeb encounters" Reddit thread for the past half decade included stories about him.

>There's loads of federal funding that goes to Texas states and localities as well, such as: https://cuellar.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=407420

The link you provided is specifically in regards to border security and LEO operations to tackle issues like fentanyl smuggling, which is separate from the humanitarian aid big-brained Redditors insist gets "stripped" from Texas.

​

>Maybe that funding

You want federal funding for border security to be diverted to NYC, which shares no land border with Central America?

You do realize funding for border security is wholly separate from the funds used for economic migrants claiming asylum, right?

​

>and a portion of the funding going to Texas NGOs should instead go to NYC and NYC NGOs.

The NGOs which receive multi-million dollar federal grants are large national organizations that all have operations in NYC, so a charity such as United Way should be able to take the millions in taxpayer money they get and disperse it efficiently across their networks.

NYC has gotten around 17,000 migrants in the past five months. Texas gets that many every week.

>who have no choice but attempt reentry by sneaking across the boarder.

Who says they have no choice? Deported illegal immigrants have the choice to stay home and stop trying to enter a country they have no legal right to be in.

The majority of federal aid is in the form of grants which are given to national charities like United Way.

That aid is used by charities to process the literally thousands of economic migrants who enter into the state literally every week.

If you want the federal government to tell charities they can't use grants in TX, go for it. All that would mean is migrants entering the state won't get any assistance whatsoever.