MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE
by Michael Wolraich
Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop
MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE by Michael Wolraich Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop |
Comments
This article is very good, does a very good job of explaining the situation.
Your title, however, does not, I think it very inaccurate.
Medallion owners were a monopoly of rentiers protected by the powers that be for decades, they made money off the medallion by paying lessee drivers poorly, too, sometimes charging them so much that if they didn't get enough fares they were in the red for the day. And they were assets that put them in a millionaire business owner class without doing a thing.
I feel for medallion owners as I do for someone who bet on the wrong stock and lost a lot of money.
Most normal working people couldn't afford to take a taxi and they still can't afford regulated yellow medallion cab rates. All the young people love Uber because they can afford it, they're living the life of the wealthy not having to take mass transit but being delivered to the destination door. You see it all the time, all the time, it's very clear when it's a Uber rather than a family or friend dropping someone off in Manhattan. It's still shocking though, we're not used to everyone being dropped off, only people who could afford taxis or limos.
At the same time, it's ruining Manhattan for everyone, the traffic in it and the incoming and outgoing traffic is more horrendous than it's ever been.
Everyone can't have everything is what it boils down to. The old rules are falling apart and the new ones haven't been worked out. So the game's not fair right now. But with the taxi business in big cities like NY and London, it never was.
And it didn't even well serve those who could afford it or those who decided to splurge when they needed to . One could never get one in the rain. Because the number were regulated. One could never get one at shift change time, all refusing rides....etc.
by artappraiser on Sun, 02/11/2018 - 12:23am
Note from CA: $4 for Lyft halfway across SF, while $7/hour for parking if you drive. Driver content with profit. On freeways, amazing how few vehicles qualify as "HOV", I.e. 2 passengers. Doubling up in Lyft or Uber should lower the numbers on the road.
But having it affordable saturates the roads I suppose.
by PeraclesPlease on Sun, 02/11/2018 - 12:27pm
Any New Yorker would find all of this hilarious. It basically costs $4 just to start the meter on a yellow cab without moving an inch. Parking is more like $35 minimum to start. $50 if you stay a couple hours.
I haven't been following it closely, but the latest idea is congestion pricing by zone, like London has done.
Here's what I thought about the article I read. Being a frequent driver to/from and within Manhattan of decades experience now, used to somehow getting around any system that is in effect (yes, back in the old days I even kept a car on the street while living in a tiny rent-stabilized studio on the Upper West Side, did the whole alternative side parking nightmare rigoramole). The congestion will just move north, people will just park above 96th Street and Uber peeps will move in to be there to take them to midtown or downtown. The solution really is: stop building skyscrapers without transport stations right on site. I heard it's called: urban planning. It certainly isn't a solution to steal money from upkeep of the subway system to balance the budget elsewhere until it is about to fall apart, as the case is now.
by artappraiser on Sun, 02/11/2018 - 5:03pm
Recent smart article at NYT: how the increasingly failure of the subway system is threatening to make the home health care "system" fall apart. Uber stepping in to fill a void right now is probably saving lives--give your home health aide a few extra bucks to take an Uber and she'll get there on time to tend to your loved one's breathing tube. Forget a legal cab, though, from the boroughs to Manhattan you are talking over $50 one way, easy.
by artappraiser on Sun, 02/11/2018 - 5:07pm
Link to NYT reader letters on Congestion Pricing Plan.
with link to original article
Governor Puts Price on Driving Into Snarl of Manhattan: $11.52” (front page, Jan. 19):
by artappraiser on Sun, 02/11/2018 - 5:11pm
I heard it's called: urban planning.
Not my area of expertise but that's the answer/question I have. I spent two years in Japan and went to Tokyo most nights. I could get anywhere I wanted to go easily with trains and subways even though I barely spoke the language. The population of Tokyo is slightly greater than NYC and it's one of those cities that never sleeps. I never took a taxi. Why is it that Tokyo can create a great mass transit system and NYC can't?
by ocean-kat on Sun, 02/11/2018 - 5:17pm
My answer: Corruption, the Democratic machine and the lobbyists that feed it, ever with us, electing a mayor or governor of the opposing party has not managed to cleanse it over the decades, they just chill for the duration and then come back with a fury with a friendly in office. I saw some reporter I respect cite this 2010 Village Voice article on twitter yesterday as regards something or the other, it still stands the test of time.
(Just fixed link, it wasn't working in my first version of comment.)
by artappraiser on Sun, 02/11/2018 - 5:31pm
I'd like to add that your comment, oceankat, strikes me as apropos on a certain micro-level. From my ancedotals, Uber is exceptionally popular with young people on a budget going out at night in groups for entertainment. If the subway was clean and efficient, they would have no qualms about taking it. Right now many of the most popular areas don't even has operational service, as explained in the Health Aide piece, they are off line for repairs because maintenance was put off too long, it takes many buses and subways and hours for the alternate while repairs are going on. I've seen pieces on the local news where they do whole segments about citizens angry over whether they are charged another fare for a shuttle bus when a station is shut down, an extra $5.00 a day means a lot to a lot of people. I am not exaggerating about $5. The fare for a ride one way is $2.75 undiscounted, most get it for less buying larger amounts on their cards. Everyone is used to free transfers one-way but this is not working out as people figure alternatives when repairs are going on. And repairs take forever here, years, not months. For whatever reason, but most people just accept it that Tony Soprano and a bunch of no show employees is involved somehow. The whole acceptance of dysfunction and then rebellion against it is why a notoriously blue city often votes red for mayor.
by artappraiser on Sun, 02/11/2018 - 5:46pm
You're talking my language AA.
by HSG on Sun, 02/11/2018 - 5:57pm
Specifics as to the subway system:
The Most Expensive Mile of Subway Track on Earth
How excessive staffing, little competition, generous contracts and archaic rules dramatically inflate capital costs for transit in New York.
By Brian M. Rosenthal @ NYTimes.com, Dec. 28, 2017
Which was blogged on further @ Jalopnik.com:
Here's The Most Damning Report Yet On Why The New York City Subway Is Terrible
by Raphael Orlove, Dec. 29, 2017
by artappraiser on Sun, 02/11/2018 - 11:58pm
Giving an idea of the problem of where did the money go they were supposed to be using to fix the problems and where's new money going to come from .
Congestion Pricing Train Already Running Late in Albany
February 09, 2018 | by Jim Brennan @ GothamGazette.com
by artappraiser on Mon, 02/12/2018 - 12:05am
All that said, I would like to point out: it's difficult for a city like London to do urban planning at this stage of the game. Chicago has a much more gracious downtown, with things like requirements for tall buildings to be set back from the street to let in light and air, precisely because they had this big fire in 1871 right around the time people were starting to think about these things. You can actually learn useful things in architectural history class.
by artappraiser on Sun, 02/11/2018 - 5:53pm
NYC's mass transit system is pretty damn good. I go to New York all the time and never take a cab or uber (never have) and it's not like I never take the subway. In recent years, I've gone from the North Bronx to the theater district by subway and down to the Barclays Center in Brooklyn from Westchester all by public transportation including subway. That said, San Francisco's is probably even better. I've never been to Asia so I can't comment on Tokyo.
by HSG on Sun, 02/11/2018 - 5:58pm
I'll let the NYT counter your opinion, summing up recent history
How Politics and Bad Decisions Starved New York’s Subways
Disruptions and delays have roiled the system this year. But the crisis was
long in the making, fueled by a litany of errors, a Times investigation shows.
By BRIAN M. ROSENTHAL, EMMA G. FITZSIMMONS and MICHAEL LaFORGIA NOV. 18, 2017
And throw in my own short opinion: there's been a massive human toll in the lives of the working class with the dysfunction of the subway system over the last year. It's falling apart and the problem is massive. Massive. When you go to an appointment anywhere for anything, it's already factored in that it's highly likely you'll be late.
by artappraiser on Sun, 02/11/2018 - 6:43pm
NYTimes Editorial, Feb. 4:
Cuomo and de Blasio: Subway Chaos Is Your Shared Foe
by artappraiser on Sun, 02/11/2018 - 11:51pm
The medallion system had its faults and you certainly describe them with gusto. But ultimately it had an essential purpose - to keep the number of cabs plying the streets of Manhattan at a number that allowed cabbies to charge a sufficient fare to make a decent living but ensured a sufficient number to satisfy the public even at high-demand times. Obviously, there's a tension between the two goals but the TLC did a decent job. Uber and Lyft have flooded Manhattan (and London and Paris) with much cheaper transport. The end result is many more drivers who can't make a living and destroyed lives.
The claim that individual medallion holders were monopolists is not supportable. There were 12,000 licensed yellow cabs operating in Manhattan in 2007. No monopolist faces 11,999 cutthroat competitors. The obvious solution is to ban non-medallion car operators from operating as virtual cabbies. Uber and Lyft drivers should absolutely be allowed to operate in Manhattan but only if they are driving medallioned taxis.
by HSG on Sun, 02/11/2018 - 4:24pm
Yes there is ample support for regulation of traffic in urban areas among all and sundry throughout history.
No need to make it all about neo-liberalism. That is a bridge too far and is another example of how you often try to make everything an ideological argument. It's difficult to trust anything someone who does that writes. It attracts other ideologues of counter persuasions. The discussion becomes Manichean when it needn't have been.
You've previously ask members here for help in getting readers to having a better reaction to your arguments. I think this is a prime example of what you do wrong: you try to make every little policy thing about ideology.
Local governing is about getting the trash picked up on time and the snow cleared. I.E., just because the trains run on time in a locality does not mean a fascist regime has come into being.
by artappraiser on Sun, 02/11/2018 - 4:39pm
The rise and success of Uber and Lyft are examples of neoliberalism writ large. Sorry if you don't like that fact. Basically your advice is stop confronting us with the truth. We can't handle it. Well, I can't handle not telling the truth.
by HSG on Sun, 02/11/2018 - 5:51pm
Deregulation = "neoliberalism"??? Surely there's more to it than that.
by PeraclesPlease on Sun, 02/11/2018 - 7:07pm
I am realizing why Hal's way of writing strikes me as so retro to the point of almost like parody sometimes: he not only tries to fit every news item into a single ideological box. He doesn't see the trend is ground up. We are in a place where everything is moving towards seeking to find a niche where the government isn't doing it's traditional job. Wherever there's a opening where government isn't doing it's job, that's seen as opportunity, including to innovate. What he calls "neo-liberalism" just happens, no pols are pushing it. It's the internet, where people even feel empowered to change other people's minds with fake news. What they won't buy if they've had a decent high school education: agitprop rhetoric they recognize from science fiction as totalitarian.
by artappraiser on Sun, 02/11/2018 - 7:38pm
Hal alone determines the truth.
Could the chicken farmers be close behind..?
The main Islamist group in Algeria, the GIA, ended up being led by a Mr. Zouabri, a chicken farmer, who killed everyone who disagreed with him. He issued a final communiqué, declaring that the whole of Algerian society should be killed, with the exception of his tiny remaining band of Islamists. They were the only ones who understood the truth.
by NCD on Sun, 02/11/2018 - 10:32pm
Got to admit that jihad is often a description that comes to mind....
by artappraiser on Sun, 02/11/2018 - 11:15pm
Hal, using the unfortunate dead again as props for his most fulfilling pastime, endless obsession with his anti-Clinton creed...while many still hope and wait for one post, one ounce if empathy, one blog by Hal on a person, a family or a victim of Republican budget cuts, Republican bigotry, the Republican administration's militant incompetency.
by NCD on Sun, 02/11/2018 - 12:47am
NCD - if you wish me to write on topics of your choosing, I will be happy to do so . . . as long as you pay me. Otherwise, you will have to make do with topics of my choosing. Feel free of course to point out any factual errors or flaws in my arguments - I know you are constantly on the look out for them - those I take very seriously. Finally, if you truly were concerned with the victims of Republicanism, you wouldn't be so reflexively critical of those who recognize that failed Democratic policies and corrupt Democratic politicians are the reason that Republicans are in the ascendancy.
by HSG on Sun, 02/11/2018 - 4:28pm
Hal, you have written you are in a "war for the party’s soul.... to the great benefit of Republicans".
You sanctimoniously use the tragic deaths of people to feign you care about them. You come across as a self righteous blowhard, where suffering people are props, where the quest for ideological purity takes precedence over uniting the opposition to alleviate real damage to people and the nation.
I wouldn't pay you to write criticism of Trump because you have given no evidence you oppose him and the GOP. Your heart is in hating Clintons.
by NCD on Sun, 02/11/2018 - 5:51pm
You are wrong. That is not what I wrote. What I wrote was that Clinton and Sanders supporters are in a war for the party's soul and that as long as it continues Republicans will benefit.
You are also wrong when you write that I don't care about the cab drivers who committed suicide or the innocent victims of Obama's decision to escalate drone attacks or the blacks being sold as slaves in Libya because Hillary and Obama chose to overthrow Gaddafi or the garment workers in Haiti whom Hillary denied a wage increase to 61 cents. You claim that I don't care because doing so allows you to avoid acknowledging the fact that you are somewhat complicit in these human tragedies because you have chosen to support neoliberal/militarist Democrats and their destructive policies uncritically. Did you know that?
by HSG on Sun, 02/11/2018 - 6:06pm
Sometimes, doncha just wish we could have George Orwell commenting on rhetoric on Dagblog for a day or two? I'd settle for a lowly survivor of The Peoples' Cultural Revolution, as I do need corrective lenses from my elitist habit of reading too much.
by artappraiser on Sun, 02/11/2018 - 6:24pm
But should the "people" pay for your lenses when you're not fighting their battles and priorities? off to Place de la Concorde with you...
by PeraclesPlease on Sun, 02/11/2018 - 7:09pm