There was never a time when Goldman Sachs was not concerned with money. That's why they make so much of it. The Times article was so wide-eyed and dumb.
"In Goldman parlance, anyone who is not extremely "commercial" is also known as "fired." In Goldman parlance, "the inexorable creep of the power of money" is also known as "the passage of chronological time."
The kind of tools who work for Goldman are even more self-deluded than evangelical "Christians". They actually believe that they are doing good work and deserve what they get paid to do it.
@BettyCrocker: I sold loans to the street firms in 2007-2008. These banks all had something called a "Reputational Risk Committee." My favorite conversation was with a 30 year old assistant general counsel guy who sat on such committee. One day he looked at me with righteous indignation and demanded "why are you originating loans that may not be in the best interest of the borrower????" I responded (all just-fell-off-the-beet-truck) "ummm, because you're buying them????"
@BettyCrocker: A brain surgeon makes around $2.5 million per year, the POTUS makes around $300,000, but somehow these idiots have convinced themselves that it's just not worth getting out of bed for less than a hundred million a year. What pisses me off the most is that Republicans have convinced the idiots (mostly Southerners and/or evangelical "Christians") that they shouldn't have to pay more than 35% in taxes on the loot that they plunder. Prior to Reagan, they would have been taxed at a rate of 70%, which means they'd be forced to scrape by on only $30 million per year. Man, I sure am glad I don't face the same hardships these poor downtrodden souls are forced to live with.
@ParahSalin: The Gospel of Greed is very popular. You can go over to World Nut Daily to crack the code: "Smaller government" = less taxes for me and fewer programs to benefit the poor.
@BettyCrocker: My personal definition of smaller goverment = massive deficits run up to relieve insanely wealthy people of the burden of living in a society that allows them to be obscenely wealthy at the expense of everyone else. In other words, smaller government = bigger government + a few people with all the money + everyone else is a poor.
Ok, this will be unpopular, but one solution to this is graduated fares. Seriously, the NYC subway is unique as far as I know in that it lets you pay the same to ride 1 stop as it does to ride 26 miles. I don't really see how you justify that.
The people that use the subway the most - and especially the people that actually use it from and to far-flung stations that aren't heavily trafficked and aren't therefore very cost-effective to keep open - should be the ones bearing the brunt of the costs. That seems only fair to me.
Yes, cue the progressive argument that this will mostly impact the disadvantaged, and etc. etc. The problem with that argument is that you're basically arguing that the subway is an entitlement program, which it isn't. And it's not treated that way in any other advanced nation that I know of.
Yes, the NYC subway is underfunded compared to other nations, but those same other nations require their riders to actually pay for the distance they travel. And you can't pick and choose which arguments you make when comparing different systems around the world (as the original post does).
@badasscat: As an ardent fan of subway systems in general, whenever in a world city that has one I make it a point to check theirs out -- but the one thing of note is, while a lot of them do charge for distance, with a huge matrix chart of zone-to-zone costs posted, a lot of those appear to be on the honor system. There are no conductors that come check your tickets if you happen to transfer 14 times and chill out for 3 hours in the Ikebukuro station, for example. This would obviously be abused in NYC, so the only way to enforce that would be to install some sort of elaborate system of checkpoints at every station with multiple transfer lines, which would probably cost billions more to integrate and be a big pain in the ass if you just got off the 3 and have to rush down four levels of ramps to the Q, encountering some sort of checkpoint along the way.
What they should do is raise the rate and to help offset it, offer a tax incentive for those who buy metrocards -- it'd help satisfy the mayor's bullshit green initiative and perhaps make a rate hike easier to stomach...
Anyone know which lower Broadway stations are going to be closed overnight? As someone who not infrequently actually has to rely on the subway after 2 a.m. because it would be prohibitively expensive to take a cab home several nights a week, this could be a real problem. Even if I were willing to walk in the middle of Broadway with a crazy look on my face, which I am not, I could never make it with all the stuff I have to carry.
Even now if I miss the train, I can end up waiting 15 to 30 minutes. There's often some additional delay, stretching what in the day is a 30-minute ride into an hour.
And I'm one of the lucky ones; I know many people who are traveling to the Bronx, and far-flung Brooklyn and Queens. It takes them two to three hours to get home.
What I really like is the 11.5% wage hike for TWU employees over the next three years. Because everyone in NYC (outside of Goldman, that is) is getting raises on that scale these days...
@the_marquee_de_lafayette: To be fair to the MTA that pay-raise was court ordered. I just try to remember that MTA workers are not comprised solely of lazy station agents but that there are also maintenance workers in the tunnels (who probably aren't as lazy and risk their lives to attempt to keep the system in working order).
Then again ask me on a weekend when the F train in running on the A line (again) and there's no way to transfer to the J because the J doesn't run past Chambers on the weekend...
@happymisanthrope: I do understand the weight the court order brings to bear - but this raise still is a large source of the shortfall.
My grief was not with the type or quality of work of the MTA workforce or the jobs they perform; I do not envy those that work on the tracks through the wee hours of the night every night. I was simply making the point that raises in any industry, from construction to clerical, from sanitation to services, are pretty much totally nonexistent given the current deflationary environment. To that end, it does seem a bit much to ask those of us who are earning the same, or even less, these days to share in the burden of a substantial compensation increase granted in isolation to a protected monopoly.
I seriously can't believe how cheap subway trips are or how awesome that it's a flat rate and not the graduated rates in DC. Anyway, this sucks especially since I'm planning to move there soon. Why is everything sucking the second I want to take advantage of it?
@Helio: Well, we once had variable pricing for mail, and it turned out to be less efficient than a single fee. As I can barely balance a checkbook, I leave it to actual econo-wonks to tell me if that's utter bullshit.
Awesome pic.. love me some City Hall Loop.. haven't done it in a while but if you avoid the conductor and stay on the 6 passed the southern terminus, you can catch a glimpse out the winders..
When I was a teenager I used to ride a bike from one of the outer boroughs into Manhattan. It was scary: Malicious drivers, oil slicks, leering car passengers. Besides, what do you do in the rain? The snow? Late at night? If you have a lot of equipment? In college, my bike was stolen. I can't imagine that a nice bike would do better on a NYC street today.
I'm pro-bike, but it's not a realistic solution for an adult (especially an adult woman) who has to travel in all weathers and all hours.
NYC transit should be a city-run agency paid for largely by tax dollars, esp. by the rich who don't use public transit but depend on it as much as anyone or more. It benefits everyone for this this city to run as efficiently as possible. The MTA is a poorly run monopoly accountable to no one. Remember however many years ago when they won a fare increase and were found to have cooked their books after? Why did that story vanish? Do you know how many MTA workers it takes to change a light bulb? I witnessed this. The answer is five (give or take): one new hire to stand on the ladder and change the light bulb, and four vets to stand around idly holding the ladder while telling the newbie how great his benefits are. Also, the stop-by-stop announcement one weekend, I swear, wasn't "due to necessary trackwork," etc., it was "due to unnecessary trackwork," etc. And often there's simply no one working on those stretches of bypassed track.
@BoKnowsMagic: So you're simultaneously arguing that bureaucracies are inefficient and we need to make the MTA more bureaucratic?
To answer your question, the fare-increase story obviously vanished because Rupert Murdoch and his fat cat pals said so.
To address the issue seriously:
The NYC subways suck because fares are too low and their legacy infrastructure is inefficient and outdated. Sure, waste, fraud and abuse are all issues, like with any major public agency. However, far more significant is the structural problem of old, slow track that was built by once-competing private corporations that were taken over by Mayor La Guardia for exactly the reason you describe: to stick it to the fat cats and increase the people power. By the way, that's really worked out great, hasn't it? This problem isn't going away since it would take many billions of dollars to rebuild and rationalize the track system.
Even more problematically, fares can't increase to a sustainable level because people like you complain too much and are opposed to sensible, variable pricing.
In short, New York gets exactly the subway system it pays for thanks to retard bleeding hearts like you and Fiorello LaGuardia.
The world would be a much better place if liberals were actually as smart as you think you are.
[/Hops onto the Kubrick-on-acid-radical-moon-monorail-inspired DC Metro and zooms off, only to die in a collision because yet another engineer was sleeping or texting at the switch.]
@Dare To No: ARGH mass transit is a public service provided by the government. fares should not be "increased to a sustainable level."
the subways failed as a profit-making venture, which is why the damn city took them over to begin with, and it was all very popular and successful back when it was HEAVILY SUBSIDIZED in the '50s and '60s.
the decline happened because of Reagan and Pataki, not because of fucking LAGUARDIA.
@Pareene: I didn't say profit-making, I said sustainable. And of course everyone loved the subway when it was heavily subsidized, the same way old people--even conservatives--love their Medicare.
Are you sure you don't want to add Giuliani to that rogue's gallery?
...Yet New Yorkers continue to show up in LA and tout "public transportation" and "I can get anywhere I want without a car" as a point of superiority. Ha!
Our bus lines (and the busses themselves) are clean, reliable, and frequent, and my car only stops running when I'm too lazy to put gas in it.
@taco-flavored-kisses: i've spent many a time late to work because of a bus breakdown in the busiest part of your town. that's dependable to you? and frequent? yes, in hollywood and the west side, but in even the southernmost sections in the valley (burbank, studio city, valley village, etc.), the buses run every hour or so IN THE MIDDLE OF THE DAY.
At least we still have it better than Londoners, who have to take out a second mortgage to ride the damn "tube" (seriously, it's well north of $6 for oneride over there) AND it closes at midnight, just when drunk hooligans need it the most.
@katastic: I dunno if this has changed, but last time I was there it was pretty much overrun with graffiti. It looked like the NYC subway of the 1970's in a lot of places.
12/16/09
Pretty sure this is the goal of most for-profit companies.
12/16/09
12/16/09
Priceless.
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/14/09
The people that use the subway the most - and especially the people that actually use it from and to far-flung stations that aren't heavily trafficked and aren't therefore very cost-effective to keep open - should be the ones bearing the brunt of the costs. That seems only fair to me.
Yes, cue the progressive argument that this will mostly impact the disadvantaged, and etc. etc. The problem with that argument is that you're basically arguing that the subway is an entitlement program, which it isn't. And it's not treated that way in any other advanced nation that I know of.
Yes, the NYC subway is underfunded compared to other nations, but those same other nations require their riders to actually pay for the distance they travel. And you can't pick and choose which arguments you make when comparing different systems around the world (as the original post does).
12/15/09
What they should do is raise the rate and to help offset it, offer a tax incentive for those who buy metrocards -- it'd help satisfy the mayor's bullshit green initiative and perhaps make a rate hike easier to stomach...
12/14/09
Even now if I miss the train, I can end up waiting 15 to 30 minutes. There's often some additional delay, stretching what in the day is a 30-minute ride into an hour.
And I'm one of the lucky ones; I know many people who are traveling to the Bronx, and far-flung Brooklyn and Queens. It takes them two to three hours to get home.
What happened to the non-peak discount plan?
12/14/09
12/15/09
12/14/09
12/14/09
It's the City Hall Station. It opened in 1904.
[www.forgotten-ny.com]
[images.google.com]
12/14/09
12/15/09
12/14/09
12/14/09
12/15/09
Then again ask me on a weekend when the F train in running on the A line (again) and there's no way to transfer to the J because the J doesn't run past Chambers on the weekend...
12/15/09
My grief was not with the type or quality of work of the MTA workforce or the jobs they perform; I do not envy those that work on the tracks through the wee hours of the night every night. I was simply making the point that raises in any industry, from construction to clerical, from sanitation to services, are pretty much totally nonexistent given the current deflationary environment. To that end, it does seem a bit much to ask those of us who are earning the same, or even less, these days to share in the burden of a substantial compensation increase granted in isolation to a protected monopoly.
12/14/09
12/14/09
12/14/09
12/14/09
12/15/09
12/15/09
C'mon, MTA.
12/14/09
Oh wait, don't do that. Unless you're willing to risk death. Who needs bike lanes, those are for pansies and commuters. Lame!
Good work, NYC.
12/14/09
When I was a teenager I used to ride a bike from one of the outer boroughs into Manhattan. It was scary: Malicious drivers, oil slicks, leering car passengers. Besides, what do you do in the rain? The snow? Late at night? If you have a lot of equipment? In college, my bike was stolen. I can't imagine that a nice bike would do better on a NYC street today.
I'm pro-bike, but it's not a realistic solution for an adult (especially an adult woman) who has to travel in all weathers and all hours.
12/14/09
Etc.
12/14/09
To answer your question, the fare-increase story obviously vanished because Rupert Murdoch and his fat cat pals said so.
To address the issue seriously:
The NYC subways suck because fares are too low and their legacy infrastructure is inefficient and outdated. Sure, waste, fraud and abuse are all issues, like with any major public agency. However, far more significant is the structural problem of old, slow track that was built by once-competing private corporations that were taken over by Mayor La Guardia for exactly the reason you describe: to stick it to the fat cats and increase the people power. By the way, that's really worked out great, hasn't it? This problem isn't going away since it would take many billions of dollars to rebuild and rationalize the track system.
Even more problematically, fares can't increase to a sustainable level because people like you complain too much and are opposed to sensible, variable pricing.
In short, New York gets exactly the subway system it pays for thanks to retard bleeding hearts like you and Fiorello LaGuardia.
The world would be a much better place if liberals were actually as smart as you think you are.
[/Hops onto the Kubrick-on-acid-radical-moon-monorail-inspired DC Metro and zooms off, only to die in a collision because yet another engineer was sleeping or texting at the switch.]
#trainnerd
12/14/09
Bye!
12/14/09
the subways failed as a profit-making venture, which is why the damn city took them over to begin with, and it was all very popular and successful back when it was HEAVILY SUBSIDIZED in the '50s and '60s.
the decline happened because of Reagan and Pataki, not because of fucking LAGUARDIA.
12/15/09
Are you sure you don't want to add Giuliani to that rogue's gallery?
12/14/09
Our bus lines (and the busses themselves) are clean, reliable, and frequent, and my car only stops running when I'm too lazy to put gas in it.
12/14/09
so let's not.
12/14/09
12/14/09
12/14/09
12/15/09