Today’s Headlines

More headlines at Streetsblog Capitol Hill

  • Moocow

    Is that piece on JSK real? I wonder when we bikers will feel the heat from the NYPD for this. Does the Post and Marty and these other reporters bent on slamming safety inprovments, realize how dangerous their invective is? That this inspires motorists to treat cyclists and peds even more inhumanly?

  • Larry Littlefield

    Well if she really publicly blamed another agency, she shouldn’t have.

    As for the effect of demonization, it appears that no one had the balls to prohibit drivers from driving with the Mayor and Deputy Mayor out of town. Something Giuliani did despite having no authority to do so under the non-sensical “snow emergency” rules now in effect.

  • Bolwerk

    JSK maybe shouldn’t have blamed another agency, but the Post is missing one crucial piece of information: was she right? Oh, and how about a comment from Kelly?

  • Bolwerk

    Ah, nevermind, I didn’t read the editorial before commenting. I suppose they say it’s not right.

  • Jeffrey Hymen

    Ben, what do you suggest is the solution at Fulton Ferry Landing, since the way you wrote the teaser clearly implies additional structured parking isn’t? Thanks.

  • Regarding Shocker: Post Editors Have It in for JSK Over Blizzard Response; Vacca Also Takes a Swipe at Commish
    — Jane Mayer, “Covert Operations,” The New Yorker, Aug 30, 2010, Pages 44-55

    Fox News readily admits to not really being a news operation in that it overtly promotes a right wing political agenda of considerable value to special interests including the fossil fuel industry valued at many millions of dollars.

    And, to put things in perspective, try to understand that there are one thousand $ONE MILLIONs in $ONE BILLION.

    Wonder why it is so difficult to get car-free Central and Prospect Parks or much better control of New York City’s streets and much more sensible local transportation; well, Jane Mayer’s “Covert Operations” New Yorker Aug 30, 2010 (pages 44-55) is worth a good read regarding Koch brothers David and Charles Koch recently booed at the ballet performed at the Brooklyn Academy of Music Dec 2010. (You might wonder if local politician Marty Markowitz and Iris Weinshall were there.)

    $2.5 million to the American Ballet Theatre (David H. Koch)

    $100 million to modernize Lincoln Center’s New York State Theatre

    $20 million to the American Museum of Natural History

    $10 million to renovate fountains outside the Metropolitan Museum of Art & is a trustee

    $40 million to the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center with an endowed chair and a research center in his name

    Koch Industries annual revenues are estimated to be $100 billion dollars and operate oil refineries in Alaska, Texas, and Minnesota, and control some four thousand miles of pipeline. David and Charles Koch have a combined fortune of $35 billion dollars exceeded only by Bill Gates and Warren Buffet.

    Greenpeace issued a report identifying the company as a “kingpin of climate science denial.”

    Net-zero and near net-zero human mobility — cycling is a primitive but very effective form — pretty much eliminates emissions.

  • Khon

    The “public-private” parks are a disaster. Making the parks for the rich or the tourist. The city does not do this kind of work on a park in a poor or working class neighborhood. The whole plan was to get housing for the rich in the first place.

    A few ball parks soccer fields and grass would not need that much of an investment. Not a glass carousel house that will cost a fortune to maintain.

    Make tourists take the train. More revenue for the city.

    Plus as a cyclist it is really dangerous now under the BQE in Brooklyn Heights with these idling buses and clueless tourists.

  • #6 gecko continued,

    Excerpt of Covert Operations New Yorker article:

    The report showed that, from 2005 to 2008, the Kochs vastly outdid ExxonMobil in giving money to organizations fighting legislation related to climate change, underwriting a huge network of foundations, think tanks, and political front groups. Indeed, the brothers have funded opposition campaigns against so many Obama Administration policies — from health-care reform to the economic-stimulus program — that, in political circles, their ideological network is known as the Kochtopus.

    . . . Charles Lewis, the founder of the Center for Public Integrity, a nonpartisan watchdog group, said, ‘The Kochs are on a whole different level. There’s no one else who has spent this much money. The sheer dimension of it is what sets them apart. They have a pattern of lawbreaking, political manipulation, and obfuscation. I’ve been in Washington since Watergate, and I’ve never seen anything like it. They are the Standard Oil of our times.

    . . . Lee Fang, of the liberal blog ThinkProgress, has called the Kochs “the billionaires behind the hate,” [of the Tea Party which they were instrumental in starting].

    (Fossil fuel industry subversion of American governance is even more profound than Big Tobacco with essentially the same methods.)

  • #8 gecko continued,

    And the comparison to Big Tobacco is more than chance (more from Covert Operations)

    James Huff, an associate director at the National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences, a division of the N.I.H., told me that it was “disgusting” for Koch to be serving on the National Cancer Advisory Board: “It’s just not good for public health. Vested interests should not be on the board.” He went on, “Those boards are very important. They’re very influential as to whether N.C.I. goes into formaldehyde or not. Billions of dollars are involved in formaldehyde.”

    Harold Varmus, the director of the National Cancer Institute, knows David Koch from Memorial Sloan-Kettering, which he used to run. He said that, at Sloan-Kettering, “a lot of people who gave to us had large business interests. The one thing we wouldn’t tolerate in our board members is tobacco.” When told of Koch Industries’ stance on formaldehyde, Varmus said that he was “surprised.”

    Read more

  • J:Lai

    I take all the articles about GenY not caring for large suburban houses, or cars, with a grain of salt.
    These are people in their 20s, mostly without children. As they get older, settle down, and have families there is no reason to expect their preferences for where and how to live to be much different from the previous generation.

    They may not be able to afford their parents’ lifestyles, but that is a different story.

  • Larry Littlefield

    “There is no reason to expect their preferences for where and how to live to be much different from the previous generation. They may not be able to afford their parents’ lifestyles, but that is a different story.”

    One alternate scenario is that due to the shortage of economically viable urban neighborhoods, they may be forced to the suburbs by affordability. And one difference might be the collapse of public education all over the country, rather than just in central cities as in the 1970s.

    All you have to do is compare the size of 1890s Victorian homes and houses built later to realize that trends go both ways. Otherwise, we’d all be driving motor vehicles he size of transit buses and living in houses the size of motels.