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

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.

individual strains within "hipster" culture -- like the local food movement, like the boom in artisanal products, like the (sort of) mainstreaming 19th century kitsch -- could be subjects for discussion. "hipster" as a category is too broad. it refers to everyone by now i think.

also williamsburg is a more diverse neighborhood than articles like that allow. lots of stuff goin' on there, lots of different kinds of people. it doesn't seem interesting to me that many of them dress similarly.

Once you read the author's Twitter feed it all makes sense. Too much sense.

https://twitter.com/henryalford

individual strains within "hipster" culture -- like the local food movement, like the boom in artisanal products, like the (sort of) mainstreaming 19th century kitsch

not sure those are the best examples of different strains - with some variance in the locavore thing, those are all pretty tied in together

hm, well i guess there are aesthetic and political components of the same basic sort of back to basics ethos.

which is itself pretty different than the ironic appropriation movement or w/e that characterized hipsterism earlier in the decade. maybe those were sloppy examples i listed above, but i still think that a broad swatch of contradictory things fall under the banner of "hipsterdom" so it's not really a useful concept.

An article is roundly mocked and trashed. Solution -- retitle it!

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/02/fashion/williamsburg.html?src=me&ref=general

That's not much of an improvement.

What was the previous title?

Will.i.amsburg

Oh my God, that dude's twitter feed is the worst/honestly no worse than most me-me-me-look-at-me twitter feeds.

i'm going to a party in williamsburg today. i plan to make a big fucking deal out of the people there i consider "hipsters," act like some sort of bemused ethnographer, alienate everyone, and write a piece about my experience for the new york times. wish me luck.

a shiny sacagawea dollar says that you'll encounter nothing more than sighs and "this again?" from the mustachio'd hordes

alford did a good job of looking like a narc in that photo

Bedfoprd Avenue, as stated in an earlier correction

individual strains within "hipster" culture -- like the local food movement, like the boom in artisanal products, like the (sort of) mainstreaming 19th century kitsch -- could be subjects for discussion. "hipster" as a category is too broad. it refers to everyone by now i think.

― rock 'em sock 'em (Treeship), Wednesday, May 1, 2013 11:35 PM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Preliminary, not-yet-satisfying steps in this subcategorization: http://www.refinery29.com/hipster-handbook

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/05/magazine/is-avenues-the-best-education-money-can-buy.html?pagewanted=1&ref=general&src=me&_r=0