even more quiddities and agonies of the ruling class - a new rolling new york times thread

buzza!! :O

Do you guys seriously never let your kid pee on a tree in the park in an emergency situation? What about your dog, do you find an open coffeeshop so it can piss in a toilet?

HUMAN SHIT EVERYWHERE

emergencies? sure.

this article was about yuppies who let their kids shit and piss in public and in their sinks in lieu of as part of their potty training, which is totally different.

its not any different than what dogs do

is prospect park even in the same borough as williasmburgs. im very unsure of what the terrain is like on the other side of the bridge

― 乒乓, Friday, 19 April 2013 23:07 (22 minutes ago) Permalink

i can't decide whether I like your new Tuomas of Brooklyn schtick.

reminder that pet owners let their pets shit and pee in public and also at home in the case of cats and these same pet owners let these same pets sit and rub their shit encrusted butts all over the bed, sofa, floor, carpet, rug

pet owners: is it gross that your pet poops and doesn't wipe

What's that in your pants ahhh human feces!
Throw your shitty drawers in the hamper
Next time come strapped with a fuckin Pamper

I have totally taken my kid behind a tree to pee when necessary, that's just standard op procedure in an emergency. but as a matter of habit gtfo

dogs eat their own vomit in public I don't see why you'd have any problem training your kid to do the same

we're the only animal that doesn't eat our own poop, that's not natural

dogs eat their own poop and you peopel still let them into your hous and kiss them on the mouth smh

dogs eat their own poop and you peopel still let them into your hous and kiss them on the mouth smh

this is probably why some cultures consider dogs to be unclean.

i've never kissed a dog -- or any other non-human animal -- on the mouth, and never will.

Tuomas of Brooklyn

Please let this become some sort of bizarro world Tom of Finland

http://memegenerator.net/instance/31108329

I have literally never even been to Brooklyn

brooklyn isn't a place it is a state of mind

never forget

http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/7/2006/10/medium_frank%20the%20shitter.jpg

the thing that gets me about that every time is that he really does look like a dude who might shit in your kitchen

Was "peaced" slang for "departed" in October 2006?

course yeah it's like "peaced out"

lol olden timez

I've heard "peace out" said by people departing, obviously, I just never saw "peaced" used as an intransitive verb. My vague memory is that I might at that time have said "and then booked," but who can say what year was the year of booking-as-departing.

"Booked" is pretty old, much older than "peaceful."

*jaymc signal*

PEACED

thanks, obamacorrect

We see a sensible shoe with a $480 price tag or an oatmeal cookie for $4 and sometimes don't register that these are luxury versions of normal items available from Payless or Entenmann's.

http://nyti.ms/Y2G3dS

that pretty much always registers with me tbh

aargh that article, aarrgh it ruined my subway ride this morning

I think they were trying to say something like "those $480 shoes seem expensive but they're totally worth it so if you think about it they're not actually expensive DO YOU SEE?"

You're actually getting a better deal on Gucci shoes than you would in other cities, doesn't that make your $3000 shoebox apartment seem better?

most people don't live in 3000 apartments

or $3000 ones

I think nyc is on the whole a better place to live for poor people

"Yet those higher rents all but ensure that tenants will appreciate an amazing bakery or a fancy shoe store — and that retailers will have to lower prices to compete for their business." what!?

most people don't live in 3000 apartments

― iatee, Tuesday, April 23, 2013 10:35 PM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

the average Manhattan apartment is now $3000, and the article is pretty clearly talking about Manhattan. I never said that "most people" live in $3000 apartments in New York (I sure as hell do not).

and of course the punchline: "But places like Houston are cheap — and staying cheap, even as they grow — because the local governments have realized their comparative advantage is in deregulation, not in fancy cookies."

something this weird could only be a leadup to some free market nonsense.

more insight from this author
-- the glass ceiling in the u.s. isn't all that bad: http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/02/comparing-the-worlds-glass-ceilings/
-- marrying fellow ivy-leaguers is the now thing: http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/01/women-and-marriage-at-princeton/
-- young college graduates have low unemployment: http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/03/05/yes-even-young-college-graduates-have-low-unemployment/

there are definitely some advantages of being poor in NYC versus in a suburb or sprawling city. cost of housing is not one of them, and of late that concern is trumping the others, hence fewer poor in NYC.

yeah this guys full of shit

ya I agree w/ all of that xp

anyway the real star of the economix blog is this guy, who is incredibly dumb even for a chicago economist:
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/author/casey-b-mulligan/

According to a recent study by Jessie Handbury, an economist at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, people in different income classes do indeed have markedly different purchasing habits.

wow, thanks professor science

do i really have to keep reading this?

Real estate is most crushing for all but those lucky enough to get into subsidized housing.

LUCKY DUCKY!!!

"subsidized" is the wrong word, but there actually is a legit "lucky ducky" phenomenon in NYC wrt rent-control/rent-stabilization, because it's not based on income at all, so there really are a lot of mid or high income people who have lucked into rent-controlled or rent-stabilized housing.

but if that guy means section 8 or public housing projects, then yeah he's a fucking moron, but that's apparent anyway

anyway it seems like the biggest problem with this reasoning is that the price of dalfour fruit spread or whatever bullshit (does anyone actually really buy that?) is not really a major factor in your cost of living, whereas your housing is. So even if you can get a handful of luxury goods cheaper in NYC (which I don't even really believe since there are so many other factors driving UP prices of goods here), your major costs would be much higher, and the difference between housing in NYC and, idk Little Rock, is going to overwhelm any savings on organic chicken.

And you couldn't think the NYT could somehow top itself when it comes to Brooklyn and Williamsburg.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/02/fashion/williamsburg.html

Do note the headline.

Billyburg, trucker cap, skinny jeans,The Strokes, PBR, Union Pool, Sparks, vegan, free-range tofu, "originally from Boston", Vassar, SVA, Pratt, Barnard, Oberlin, Sarah Lawrence, Greenpoint, Bushwick, and the "other" other hoods, X of the word "iron", "art loft", X = the ,urg, ther hoothStrts (non-Western), booth" otcap, skinny jeans,The Strokes, PBR, Union Pookes, = the new Williamsburg (aka Billyburg), offensol, Sparks, dively incorrect usePirBR, Union Poarks, diveat shoes Billybs, X = the nrucker vegtofu Greenpoint, Bushwick, w L train, trust funds, track bikest use, plaid shol, Sp, "origand ew Williamsburg (aka sively incorrec of the worad n", "art loft", X = tneinally from Boston", Vassar, SVA, Pratt, Barnarde "other" Billyburg), offenotcaerp, skinny jeans,The an, "irofree-rnge , Oberlin, Sarah Lawrencehe new L train, trust funds, track bikes, plaid shirts (non-Western), boat shoes

-- burt_stanton, Sunday, March 16, 2008

RIP Sparks

I sort of wish Joan Didion, but like young Joan Didion, had just come in and written the definitive essay about Williamsburg several years ago. There's probably a good essay to be written about it, or was, but no one seems to be able to avoid being captain obvious about it

like, somebody say something interesting about brooklyn by now, please, somebody make an observation that goes beyond facial hair, or that connects the trends to something other than buzzwords of the moment. It's like it's 1974 and the Times is still going "I observed that they seem to have long hair and wear peace signs and protest things"

i think it's too late for a thing like that to be written. nobody is unfamiliar with hipsters now. they're just people. i'm not sure there are observations to be made about "hipsters" per se.