The Money Mustache Community
Around the Internet => Antimustachian Wall of Shame and Comedy => Topic started by: Abe on February 03, 2021, 10:20:45 PM
-
Clown-on-clown bickering is erupting in NYC’s most famous clown towers. Tiny violins expected to arrive soon, but how will they get them up there if the elevators are broken?
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/03/realestate/luxury-high-rise-432-park.html
-
That was such an entertaining article. Thank you.
Here are my favorite snippets:
"She was disappointed with her purchase on day one."
“Everybody hates each other here,”
“Everything here was camouflage,” she said. “If I knew then what I know now, I would have never bought.”
-
My dad worked as a carpenter in NYC and would tell me all kinds of stories about the luxury apartments they’d be working on. He said it was absolutely shameful how cheaply it was all done even though it all got covered with a facade of expensive tile and exotic wood.
-
My dad worked as a carpenter in NYC and would tell me all kinds of stories about the luxury apartments they’d be working on. He said it was absolutely shameful how cheaply it was all done even though it all got covered with a facade of expensive tile and exotic wood.
I believe it.
Was visiting some people who had a the Penthouse apartment and on first glance it seemed quite posh. Then when I went to use the restroom, I noticed that the vanity had a marble top on the cheapest ass particle board cabinet.
The mid-fifties, suburban tract house where I grew up had better tiles and fixtures in what was (and remains) a working class neighborhood.
-
I can only imagine Ms. Abramovitch’s horror at being subjected to the following:
“They put me in a freight elevator surrounded by steel plates and plywood, with a hard-hat operator,” she said. “That’s how I went up to my hoity-toity apartment before closing.”
Poor thing.
/s
-
Hmm. McMansion-ization goes high-rise. Who would have thought it? /s
-
This just reinforces my desire to own a modestly-sized, exceptionally-well-built single family home on its own land when I retire. No condo associations, no neighbors in the same building, high quality design and materials, low maintenance and utility costs, no hoity-toity neighborhood, etc.
But it better have a 4+ car garage...
-
Even a hundred million in the sky can’t buy you peace and quiet in NYC.
-
This just reinforces my desire to own a modestly-sized, exceptionally-well-built single family home on its own land when I retire. No condo associations, no neighbors in the same building, high quality design and materials, low maintenance and utility costs, no hoity-toity neighborhood, etc.
But it better have a 4+ car garage...
Funny, reading this makes me grateful for my extremely well built, virtually sound proof high rise with polite but very private neighbours, and a fantastic management team.
-
Crazy. I had to see what was for sale there on Zillow. One apartment for $90MM, and I think the other one I looked at was $48MM.
I'd much rather have a nice apartment in The Dakota building, if they let me in :)
-
I can only imagine Ms. Abramovitch’s horror at being subjected to the following:
“They put me in a freight elevator surrounded by steel plates and plywood, with a hard-hat operator,” she said. “That’s how I went up to my hoity-toity apartment before closing.”
Poor thing.
/s
At least she acknowledges she's speaking from a severe position of privilege, and is using her real name rather than speaking publicly through a lawyer or shell company.
-
I spent some list browsing active listings in the building. Sure, the units are beautiful, but I dunno. I suppose you are paying for the location? The windows and views are beautiful but I feel like the hotels I stayed at in China for work travel were just as nice. And with a hotel you aren't stuck with $4k-7k/month HOA dues.
-
I suppose you are paying for the location?
The location is good (not one I would pick, but if you are some rich asshole who likes very expensive restaurants, spends all their time in midtown/FiDi, and goes to the airport a lot, it's probably great). About a block from Trump Tower so they probably enjoyed a lot of protests and road closures the last four years. ;-) But I think a lot of what you're paying for in a building like that is the prestige/brand/knowledge that you're keeping out the riffraff - there will be heavy security and you know that all your neighbors will be the same sort of rich asshole elite members of high society as you. Plus the service and amenities: there's a valet, a concierge, a swimming pool, a gym, a spa, a sauna, a yoga studio, a private restaurant and private performance venue - plus it comes with parking, and a parking space in that neighborhood can be worth six figures by itself.
There are a lot of people with more money than they could ever hope to spend. This is the sort of place they live. If you have a billion dollars, you hardly notice the difference between this and a normal apartment in NYC.
-
I'm not really sure the people that have the income (more likely family based assets) to afford condos that cost 10s of millions really fall into the "clown" category.
-
A high maintenance building full of high maintenance people who likely have well developed NYC attitudes... sounds delightful! Not that this comment is directly pertinent to this article, but I have always enjoyed the description of Monaco as "a sunny place for shady people".
-
It seems very weird to me that they bought these apartments without checking them out first. If you're going to spend so much money, wouldn't you want to make sure you're not being taken for a ride?
These people have more money than they know what to do with.
-
It seems very weird to me that they bought these apartments without checking them out first. If you're going to spend so much money, wouldn't you want to make sure you're not being taken for a ride?
These people have more money than they know what to do with.
Aren't most condo building units sold pre-build??
-
It seems very weird to me that they bought these apartments without checking them out first. If you're going to spend so much money, wouldn't you want to make sure you're not being taken for a ride?
These people have more money than they know what to do with.
Aren't most condo building units sold pre-build??
I have no idea. I've only rented, and I live in a house at the moment. But I wouldn't spend millions of dollars without making sure what I was buying was legit.
-
It seems very weird to me that they bought these apartments without checking them out first. If you're going to spend so much money, wouldn't you want to make sure you're not being taken for a ride?
These people have more money than they know what to do with.
Aren't most condo building units sold pre-build??
I have no idea. I've only rented, and I live in a house at the moment. But I wouldn't spend millions of dollars without making sure what I was buying was legit.
Well, where I live, condos are always sold before they're built, and I assume this is the norm in most places. It's often the only way to buy super sought after high-rise apartments, especially the penthouses as many owners will never sell them.
-
....snip...
Aren't most condo building units sold pre-build??
I believe the builders TRY to sell pre-build, but don't always get it done.
Example story: There was a condo being built, at the height of the real estate boom in 2007. Some units were listed for $1-2M, in a town of 40,000, where there is a lot of land outside of town. I was incredulous about the price. Then my future wife noted that the condo was a) right across the busiest street in town from Burger King and other fast food places and b) right next door to a fire/ambulance station. The market crashed, the build proceeded 4 or 5 years later, but as a hotel.
I was pissed at the developer and the city for doing such stupid stuff, but mostly for removing the biggest trees in the area (6ft, 2m diameter at least) along with some low cost housing. Basically around here (The Everbrown section of the Evergreen state) if you don't plant and water and care for a tree, it will not grow. A nearby mountain of 3500ft/1000m has no trees on it whatsoever.
-
Although I would never want to replicate the purchasing or lifestyle choices of the apartment residents, I find the judgmental tone of this thread rather overdone. A few people in this thread are leaping to tar all of the apartment dwellers with the same brush. And at least a few of the apartment residents must be self-made, in which case their financial nous is considerable, at least.
-
Although I would never want to replicate the purchasing or lifestyle choices of the apartment residents, I find the judgmental tone of this thread rather overdone. A few people in this thread are leaping to tar all of the apartment dwellers with the same brush. And at least a few of the apartment residents must be self-made, in which case their financial nous is considerable, at least.
I don’t really associate wealth (even self made) at that level with financial savvy. Actors, sports stars, entrepreneurs, etc, can pay others to think through their finances for them. This will come off a bit as 20-20 hindsight, but someone who really thought through construction practices (corruption) in NYC would hire an investigator to talk to the construction workers at the site before forking over tens of millions for an apartment sight unseen.
-
To me someone who accrues that amount of wealth must have some level of financial acumen, even if he or she lacks it in the spending phase.
My point is we seem to judge these people much more harshly than we'd judge poor people living in tenements, and my practice is to judge everyone the same. Everyone thinks he or she has big problems.
-
To me someone who accrues that amount of wealth must have some level of financial acumen, even if he or she lacks it in the spending phase.
My point is we seem to judge these people much more harshly than we'd judge poor people living in tenements, and my practice is to judge everyone the same. Everyone thinks he or she has big problems.
I might disagree because I personally don’t know anyone that wealthy and only hear about them in the news. The people that make the headlines are the ones who end up in poverty even though they’d made millions in their career. Notably actors, singers, sports stars that have no financial acumen. When you’re that talented in your particular specialty, someone else with the financial know how seeks you out.
As for judging everyone the same, I think it’s just that rich people problems can be much more trivial than the poor. The rich also have the means to make better decisions, so when they fail, it’s more difficult to justify. The poor get judged quite harshly, and even those that try hard to dig themselves out are ostracized.
-
To me someone who accrues that amount of wealth must have some level of financial acumen, even if he or she lacks it in the spending phase.
My point is we seem to judge these people much more harshly than we'd judge poor people living in tenements, and my practice is to judge everyone the same. Everyone thinks he or she has big problems.
Most of the threads in this section tend to be overt schadenfreude for the sake of humour.
-
This just reinforces my desire to own a modestly-sized, exceptionally-well-built single family home on its own land when I retire. No condo associations, no neighbors in the same building, high quality design and materials, low maintenance and utility costs, no hoity-toity neighborhood, etc.
But it better have a 4+ car garage...
DO IT! You know exactly what you want.
We bought a home with good bones, good patch of land (acerage), plenty of garage space too. Just need to upgrade some of the details and it won't be expensive DIY.
-
If they ever do another Occupy Wall Street protest... I think I know where it'll start next time.
-
They'd need to armor the bottom five floors to keep the riffraff out...
-
To me someone who accrues that amount of wealth must have some level of financial acumen, even if he or she lacks it in the spending phase.
This thinking is what got Donald Trump elected
My point is we seem to judge these people much more harshly than we'd judge poor people living in tenements, and my practice is to judge everyone the same. Everyone thinks he or she has big problems.
It seems as if you want to judge them less harshly because they are rich?
-
Trump got elected on a populist platform that had everything to do with racism and misogyny and nothing to do with whatever you're positing.
And no, I'm not judging the denizens of this tower any 'less harshly'. What is there to judge? They're complaining about living quarters which don't meet the advertiser representations. That is a first world problem, but you see Mustachians complaining about similar-ish things all the time (products that don't work as intended, overpaying for lifestyle gear) - these complaints go up and down the spectrum.
I don't see where you're coming from, at all.
-
Trump got elected on a populist platform that had everything to do with racism and misogyny and nothing to do with whatever you're positing.
A large percentage of people believed Trump was a successful businessman and voted for that. I don't think the racism and misogyny was as obvious as you think until after he had been elected. Just because someone is wealthy doesn't mean they are or have ever been successful in any endeavor. Yet, many people who watched "The Apprentice" and believed the illusion thought his wealth indicated that he knew how to run a company or even the country.
-
Some people just tend to believe in people don't they?
The believers believed in him. A fair percentage of that group still believe in him. Too bad there is so little substance to the guy.
Hopefully we can get more leadership that elicits the same enthusiasm AND has the ability to deliver substance to everyone in our country.
-
Wow, well thank you OP. This led me down the rabbit hole into NYC real estate for the past few hours. I am shocked at some of the price tags on the real estate in NYC. Unless you have like 10 kids, why do you need 10,000 sq ft of living space?
-
Wow, well thank you OP. This led me down the rabbit hole into NYC real estate for the past few hours. I am shocked at some of the price tags on the real estate in NYC. Unless you have like 10 kids, why do you need 10,000 sq ft of living space?
Uhhh, most people, even MMM himself have far more house than they need because they can easily afford to.
Very few people who can afford it will only buy as much house as they absolutely need.
Asking why these people buy 10K sqft houses when they don't need them is like asking why they buy Bentleys when a Toyota Camry would do the job perfectly well.
-
"73 percent of mechanical, electrical and plumbing components observed failed to conform with the developers’ drawings"
So how did that all pass the numerous inspections that would have been required? I realize inspections don't catch everything. But 73%? And observable after construction was complete when inspection is more difficult??
-
I can only imagine Ms. Abramovitch’s horror at being subjected to the following:
“They put me in a freight elevator surrounded by steel plates and plywood, with a hard-hat operator,” she said. “That’s how I went up to my hoity-toity apartment before closing.”
Poor thing.
/s
If this lady had to stand in a freight elevator of an unfinished building, she should perhaps have worn a hard hat herself, as a visitor of a building site.
-
"73 percent of mechanical, electrical and plumbing components observed failed to conform with the developers’ drawings"
So how did that all pass the numerous inspections that would have been required? I realize inspections don't catch everything. But 73%? And observable after construction was complete when inspection is more difficult??
You’re assuming the inspectors are actually scrutinizing the work performed. My dad shared all the most ridiculous stories of NYC construction work with me when I was a kid.
-
Wow, well thank you OP. This led me down the rabbit hole into NYC real estate for the past few hours. I am shocked at some of the price tags on the real estate in NYC. Unless you have like 10 kids, why do you need 10,000 sq ft of living space?
Uhhh, most people, even MMM himself have far more house than they need because they can easily afford to.
Very few people who can afford it will only buy as much house as they absolutely need.
Asking why these people buy 10K sqft houses when they don't need them is like asking why they buy Bentleys when a Toyota Camry would do the job perfectly well.
I read a comment on a thread recently (not here), by someone who insisted that 500 sf per person is really the minimum needed to live a decent life. Anything less is substandard.
Please don't tell my kids that.
-
Wow, well thank you OP. This led me down the rabbit hole into NYC real estate for the past few hours. I am shocked at some of the price tags on the real estate in NYC. Unless you have like 10 kids, why do you need 10,000 sq ft of living space?
This may or may not be the time to tell you that for most, this apartment is not the only residence for these owners. They quite possibly also have one or more of the following:
A place in the Hamptons.
A ski house in Colorado
Something warm and tropical, possible on a Caribbean island or a swanky part of Florida
A townhouse in London
A viila in the South of France or Italy
-
Wow, well thank you OP. This led me down the rabbit hole into NYC real estate for the past few hours. I am shocked at some of the price tags on the real estate in NYC. Unless you have like 10 kids, why do you need 10,000 sq ft of living space?
This may or may not be the time to tell you that for most, this apartment is not the only residence for these owners. They quite possibly also have one or more of the following:
A place in the Hamptons.
A ski house in Colorado
Something warm and tropical, possible on a Caribbean island or a swanky part of Florida
A townhouse in London
A viila in the South of France or Italy
Thank you, I got a little laugh out of this response. The lady interviewed in the article noted that this would be her second home, her first being in London. If I had that amount of money, I would be living somewhere warm and beautiful year round, definitely not NYC (no offense to the NYC crowd). I could go on about how I feel about accumulators of this amount of wealth, but I will not, but I also have zero sympathy for them.
-
I could go on about how I feel about accumulators of this amount of wealth, but I will not, but I also have zero sympathy for them.
Why not?
-
I could go on about how I feel about accumulators of this amount of wealth, but I will not, but I also have zero sympathy for them.
Why not?
Curious: do you want to know why BB won't go on about their feelings? Or why they have no sympathy for accumulators of wealth?
-
If they ever do another Occupy Wall Street protest... I think I know where it'll start next time.
There's nothing truly unique about this building though. The whole of Manhattan Island is like this. My company is headquartered in NYC and honestly every single one of our executives has that better-than-you-peons attitude in every townhall and meeting they hold for the company. They literally brag about how much better they are at running the company than the old management before the company moved the HQ to NYC. Like one specifically said they're just so much more business oriented in NYC and don't waste time trying to be nice to people, and he's announcing this to the whole company as one of the big benefits of NYC management. It's an evil city driven by nothing but money. Until they outlaw capitalism though, it's simply always going to be that way. The ultra-rich will always have cities to go to, even if NYC gets shut down some day.
-
The whole of Manhattan Island is like this.
Is it safe to assume you've never been here?
-
If they ever do another Occupy Wall Street protest... I think I know where it'll start next time.
There's nothing truly unique about this building though. The whole of Manhattan Island is like this. My company is headquartered in NYC and honestly every single one of our executives has that better-than-you-peons attitude in every townhall and meeting they hold for the company. They literally brag about how much better they are at running the company than the old management before the company moved the HQ to NYC. Like one specifically said they're just so much more business oriented in NYC and don't waste time trying to be nice to people, and he's announcing this to the whole company as one of the big benefits of NYC management. It's an evil city driven by nothing but money. Until they outlaw capitalism though, it's simply always going to be that way. The ultra-rich will always have cities to go to, even if NYC gets shut down some day.
Sorry you've had some crappy experiences with New Yorkers. Maybe pump the brakes on painting a city of 8M+ with that brush, though. There are both jerks and lovely people everywhere.
-
Born and raised in Manhattan for decades before I left, the departure afforded some parallax. A lot of that borough is like an outdoor mall now, Seinfeld and his op-ed notwithstanding (that he wrote from Montauk. Where he still resides as he waits out this pesky virus thing.)
Good to meet ex-manhattanites out in the real world, the myopia is a bit much. The ra-ra pro-nyc thing is aesthetically gauche; we get it, District 1 is the bestest district.
Except for like tianjin or vancouver or barcelona or seoul or shenzen or...
But yeah anyway a quick perusal show that most billies reside in NYC, HK second. They own on average (median?) 9 homes internationally, 19 cars. Yeah so they're bound to buy dumb shit like this, why not. There's a greater fool/billionaire on the other end of that trade eventually.
-
I could go on about how I feel about accumulators of this amount of wealth, but I will not, but I also have zero sympathy for them.
Why not?
Curious: do you want to know why BB won't go on about their feelings? Or why they have no sympathy for accumulators of wealth?
I will assume they are questioning why I have zero sympathy? I will explain that...When someone is ultra rich and has millions of dollars of water damage to their property, its not a big deal. They can move to one of their other homes (with their butler, maids, nannies and servants) while the renovations, which cost less than .01% of their net worth, are completed. The average person who has significant water damage to their house, not including the mental impact, would be homeless or in severe debt. Yes, there is insurance, but most water damage is not covered at 100% replacement cost, if at all, and would significantly impact an average persons life. This is one little example of why I have no sympathy.
-
Fairness doesn't depend on whether the aggrieved party can easily wear the loss.
If I steal an apple from a multinational corporation it's still stealing.
-
Fairness doesn't depend on whether the aggrieved party can easily wear the loss.
If I steal an apple from a multinational corporation it's still stealing.
You're assuming that feeling bad for someone is predicated on fairness and not the degree of impact on that person, or even moreso, how well the sympathizer relates to that person.
It's not unusual that people with wealth who like to spend on certain luxuries will be more sympathetic to other people with wealth who like to spend.
It's also not unusual that people who have never been wealthy will be more sympathetic to those who have never been wealthy.
Basic human nature, you can't possibly be surprised by this.
-
Not surprised at all - just disappointed.
-
Not surprised at all - just disappointed.
Eh, no point in being disappointed in basic, fundamental human behaviours.
I know you put a lot of effort into advocating against judging high earning, high spenders, but you're just asking for it by coming into a schadenfreude humour section of the forum and getting bent out of shape about people having their schadenfreude fun.
Also, I personally think you're just frankly wrong on the front that it doesn't matter how it affects the person.
If someone steals my lunch at work and I can easily buy one from the restaurant downstairs, that is objectively less tragic than if someone steals the lunch of a single mom who can barely afford food.
The crime is the same, but NO ONE should feel as bad for me, who is mildly inconvenienced, as they should for someone who's wellbeing is significantly affected by the same crime.
If that's genuinely your morality, I seriously question your humanity.
-
If someone steals my lunch at work and I can easily buy one from the restaurant downstairs, that is objectively less tragic than if someone steals the lunch of a single mom who can barely afford food.
The crime is the same, but NO ONE should feel as bad for me, who is mildly inconvenienced, as they should for someone who's wellbeing is significantly affected by the same crime.
Right, but you're comparing two different degrees of sympathy. I'd still feel sympathy for both people.
In this thread people are saying that because someone stole the lunch of a rich billionaire, it's somehow worth no sympathy at all - and in fact worth judgment. It's victim blaming.
I find the whole concept of schadenfreude (ie this sub forum) puzzling and tragic actually. You shouldn't have to specifically point out others' misfortune in order to be happy with your worldview.
-
The poster who had no sympathy pointed out the reasoning - a situation that can be easily remedied by virtue of one's great wealth does not require or lend itself to sympathy. Yes, anyone who is taken advantage of should not stand for it and I hope they don't, as I wouldn't in their shoes. But are they sympathetic characters? No.
I've noticed that you frequently try to point out in this forum that someone criticizing another's financial decisions is done to feel happy with one's own worldview or different financial decisions. Why/how do you think that is the case?
-
That's like saying if someone scratches my car it should not engender any sympathy because, honestly, it's not that hard to fix up a scratch or, if it's a bad one, to get insurance to fix it up. But I'd still feel sympathy for someone whose car was scratched by a bad parker. Even if I knew the person whose car it was could fix it up with negligible financial impact.
Also, even if I grant that something is worth literally no sympathy at all, that doesn't mean that the person to whom it happens is an unsympathetic character worthy of derision. If someone driving a Rolls Royce has her car scratched does that prima facie mean she is an unsympathetic character?
I am fine with judging others' financial decisions (to an extent, where justified), but I don't see the point of the "ha ha" personalised pointing and laughing that predominates in this sub-forum - to me it seems to serve only one purpose and that is to create an "other". It's de-humanizing, and while we all do things that de-humanize others from time to time, to relish in it is rather strange.
-
If someone steals my lunch at work and I can easily buy one from the restaurant downstairs, that is objectively less tragic than if someone steals the lunch of a single mom who can barely afford food.
The crime is the same, but NO ONE should feel as bad for me, who is mildly inconvenienced, as they should for someone who's wellbeing is significantly affected by the same crime.
Right, but you're comparing two different degrees of sympathy. I'd still feel sympathy for both people.
In this thread people are saying that because someone stole the lunch of a rich billionaire, it's somehow worth no sympathy at all - and in fact worth judgment. It's victim blaming.
I find the whole concept of schadenfreude (ie this sub forum) puzzling and tragic actually. You shouldn't have to specifically point out others' misfortune in order to be happy with your worldview.
Then petition to have the section removed.
Or, just keep on being bothered by it, up to you I suppose.
-
Also, even if I grant that something is worth literally no sympathy at all, that doesn't mean that the person to whom it happens is an unsympathetic character worthy of derision. If someone driving a Rolls Royce has her car scratched does that prima facie mean she is an unsympathetic character?
Yes, if based on that criteria. If she has cancer or her spouse just ran off with neighbor, I'm sympathetic. But that's not what we are doing here. I don't have sympathy for anyone getting a scratch on their car, as it happens, it's a hunk of metal upon which scratches are inevitable. The fact that one spent a lot for the car doesn't change the equation.
I have friends with stupidly expensive cars and I still value their worth as people even though I think the purchase was silly. This thought has no bearing on my happiness with my own choices.
-
I could go on about how I feel about accumulators of this amount of wealth, but I will not, but I also have zero sympathy for them.
Why not?
Curious: do you want to know why BB won't go on about their feelings? Or why they have no sympathy for accumulators of wealth?
I will assume they are questioning why I have zero sympathy? I will explain that...When someone is ultra rich and has millions of dollars of water damage to their property, its not a big deal. They can move to one of their other homes (with their butler, maids, nannies and servants) while the renovations, which cost less than .01% of their net worth, are completed. The average person who has significant water damage to their house, not including the mental impact, would be homeless or in severe debt. Yes, there is insurance, but most water damage is not covered at 100% replacement cost, if at all, and would significantly impact an average persons life. This is one little example of why I have no sympathy.
I didn't actually care to know why you have no sympathy. I just asked you to clarify your statement. I'll explain why...when someone has an abundance of opinions and judges others, what they think is not a big deal. But when someone reserves judgement for things that really matter, then their opinion is all the more important to me.
Just kidding! Thought I'd have a little fun here.
-
Fairness doesn't depend on whether the aggrieved party can easily wear the loss.
If I steal an apple from a multinational corporation it's still stealing.
Well, that depends on the jurisdiction and how hungry you are:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36190557
-
Also, even if I grant that something is worth literally no sympathy at all, that doesn't mean that the person to whom it happens is an unsympathetic character worthy of derision. If someone driving a Rolls Royce has her car scratched does that prima facie mean she is an unsympathetic character?
Yes, if based on that criteria. If she has cancer or her spouse just ran off with neighbor, I'm sympathetic. But that's not what we are doing here. I don't have sympathy for anyone getting a scratch on their car, as it happens, it's a hunk of metal upon which scratches are inevitable. The fact that one spent a lot for the car doesn't change the equation.
I have friends with stupidly expensive cars and I still value their worth as people even though I think the purchase was silly. This thought has no bearing on my happiness with my own choices.
I think if you have no sympathy for people's cars getting scratched at all (like as a general proposition) then I don't have an issue with that. You just don't care about cars! Or scratches.
But the analogy would be someone saying to a poor person "Eh, so your apartment has a few cracks in the walls - as long as it's not a safety defect then who cares." And I don't think the latter approach would be very common in this forum.
-
If someone steals my lunch at work and I can easily buy one from the restaurant downstairs, that is objectively less tragic than if someone steals the lunch of a single mom who can barely afford food.
The crime is the same, but NO ONE should feel as bad for me, who is mildly inconvenienced, as they should for someone who's wellbeing is significantly affected by the same crime.
Right, but you're comparing two different degrees of sympathy. I'd still feel sympathy for both people.
In this thread people are saying that because someone stole the lunch of a rich billionaire, it's somehow worth no sympathy at all - and in fact worth judgment. It's victim blaming.
I find the whole concept of schadenfreude (ie this sub forum) puzzling and tragic actually. You shouldn't have to specifically point out others' misfortune in order to be happy with your worldview.
Then petition to have the section removed.
Or, just keep on being bothered by it, up to you I suppose.
Or I could just say where I think it is appropriate that "othering" for its own sake is not very gracious. The whole point of a forum is to create discussion.
Some threads in this forum I quite like. Looking at genuinely bad financial choices which create no value for the purchaser and which are wilful or made from unjustifiable ignorance - well, it's kind of hard to resist criticising "clowns" in that context. So I don't think the sub-forum is entirely misguided.
-
That's like saying if someone scratches my car it should not engender any sympathy because, honestly, it's not that hard to fix up a scratch or, if it's a bad one, to get insurance to fix it up. But I'd still feel sympathy for someone whose car was scratched by a bad parker. Even if I knew the person whose car it was could fix it up with negligible financial impact.
Also, even if I grant that something is worth literally no sympathy at all, that doesn't mean that the person to whom it happens is an unsympathetic character worthy of derision. If someone driving a Rolls Royce has her car scratched does that prima facie mean she is an unsympathetic character?
I am fine with judging others' financial decisions (to an extent, where justified), but I don't see the point of the "ha ha" personalised pointing and laughing that predominates in this sub-forum - to me it seems to serve only one purpose and that is to create an "other". It's de-humanizing, and while we all do things that de-humanize others from time to time, to relish in it is rather strange.
Bloop- I don't feel that any part of my comment was "ha ha", it was a realistic view of how things in the world work. We differ vastly in opinion about the items you noted in this thread and I value that, I think that it is good to see the "other side" of the spectrum at times. It may not change my opinion, but it shows me how others see the same situation.
Quoting another part of your replies:
Looking at genuinely bad financial choices which create no value for the purchaser and which are wilful or made from unjustifiable ignorance - well, it's kind of hard to resist criticising "clowns" in that context.
I feel that this lady in the article made a bad financial decision. Do you feel that the wealthy cannot make poor decisions which are willful or made from unjustifiable ignorance?
-
Anyone can make a bad financial decision, and the wealthy are not more immune than the poor.
If the sole criticism was along the lines of "who would buy a 7 figure apartment without having a lawyer look over the contract very carefully and/or without independent guidance about the integrity of the building" then I could probably stomach that...although we don't know all the facts, and it may be that there were misrepresentations or omissions by the builders.
-
@Bloop Bloop Reloaded
I don't agree that your example is analogous in equating a car with one's home. I do have more sympathy for someone who is poor and unable to pay their way out of unfortunate circumstances. I think this is a fairly universal sentiment. A wealthy buyer can hire a lawyer and sue a contractor. A poor tenant has many fewer options.
-
I wish I could read this article but I’m not gonna jump through the hoops to do it. The title of this thread is hilarious anyway and it makes me laugh every time I read it.
Somehow I’ve gotten into brief YouTube videos from a guy who shows apartments for rent in New York City. Prices are dropping precipitously. There are spaces that actually attract me at current prices. There was a time where I couldn’t imagine ever at any time paying New York City rental prices. Now, you can get a cute place for around $2000 a month. Granted it’s tiny,But he shows that the neighborhoods are lively or at least they were once lively pre-Covid. It will be interesting to see what comes back.
What surprises me about these videos is when our tour guide is out on the street there are hardly any people. That doesn’t seem normal to me for New York City? Is it?
-
What surprises me about these videos is when our tour guide is out on the street there are hardly any people. That doesn’t seem normal to me for New York City? Is it?
It really depends where and when they're filming. Residential neighborhood at 11AM on a Tuesday? Most people are doing work/school (whether at home or in person) and not on the street, there will be some people but not a ton. Residential area on a weekend or at 6PM will be fairly busy - people are living outside as much as possible with outdoor dining, parks, etc. to avoid COVIDy situations indoors, and they're not going out and taking the subway to other parts of the city as much.
Touristy neighborhoods, business/hotel districts, and nightlife areas - much of midtown/downtown Manhattan - are going to be much quieter than usual because there are few tourists, most offices are WFH, and nightlife is mostly shut down. Maybe some very wealthy neighborhoods are also quiet because half the people are in their vacation homes until the pandemic is over.
-
If they ever do another Occupy Wall Street protest... I think I know where it'll start next time.
There's nothing truly unique about this building though. The whole of Manhattan Island is like this. My company is headquartered in NYC and honestly every single one of our executives has that better-than-you-peons attitude in every townhall and meeting they hold for the company. They literally brag about how much better they are at running the company than the old management before the company moved the HQ to NYC. Like one specifically said they're just so much more business oriented in NYC and don't waste time trying to be nice to people, and he's announcing this to the whole company as one of the big benefits of NYC management. It's an evil city driven by nothing but money. Until they outlaw capitalism though, it's simply always going to be that way. The ultra-rich will always have cities to go to, even if NYC gets shut down some day.
What the absolute fuck? This dude apparently advocates outlawing capitalism and nobody raises an eyebrow?
-
If they ever do another Occupy Wall Street protest... I think I know where it'll start next time.
There's nothing truly unique about this building though. The whole of Manhattan Island is like this. My company is headquartered in NYC and honestly every single one of our executives has that better-than-you-peons attitude in every townhall and meeting they hold for the company. They literally brag about how much better they are at running the company than the old management before the company moved the HQ to NYC. Like one specifically said they're just so much more business oriented in NYC and don't waste time trying to be nice to people, and he's announcing this to the whole company as one of the big benefits of NYC management. It's an evil city driven by nothing but money. Until they outlaw capitalism though, it's simply always going to be that way. The ultra-rich will always have cities to go to, even if NYC gets shut down some day.
What the absolute fuck? This dude apparently advocates outlawing capitalism and nobody raises an eyebrow?
Because as a statement it's literal nonsense.
-
What surprises me about these videos is when our tour guide is out on the street there are hardly any people. That doesn’t seem normal to me for New York City? Is it?
It really depends where and when they're filming. Residential neighborhood at 11AM on a Tuesday? Most people are doing work/school (whether at home or in person) and not on the street, there will be some people but not a ton. Residential area on a weekend or at 6PM will be fairly busy - people are living outside as much as possible with outdoor dining, parks, etc. to avoid COVIDy situations indoors, and they're not going out and taking the subway to other parts of the city as much.
Touristy neighborhoods, business/hotel districts, and nightlife areas - much of midtown/downtown Manhattan - are going to be much quieter than usual because there are few tourists, most offices are WFH, and nightlife is mostly shut down. Maybe some very wealthy neighborhoods are also quiet because half the people are in their vacation homes until the pandemic is over.
The last one he filmed was at 34th and Park Avenue. It looks like the Empire State building was very close. I was surprised to see a boarded up something in the background and I didn’t know what that board up was, but man that did not look good in that neighborhood.
I think the apartment he was showing that day was a hair under $3000 a month and it was a large studio with two balconies, in an old building that interested me. doorman building with a lovely lobby. I would not live permanently in New York City but I think it might be fun to spend a year there at $2000 a month. But of course it wouldn’t be any fun if the city is shut down so never mind.
-
The last one he filmed was at 34th and Park Avenue. It looks like the Empire State building was very close. I was surprised to see a boarded up something in the background and I didn’t know what that board up was, but man that did not look good in that neighborhood.
That explains it. 34th Street is the heart of the business district, and is generally heavy on the hotel/business/office traffic - it's emptied out a lot during the pandemic. To give you an idea, about 700,000 people live in midtown and downtown Manhattan (where the bulk of business/tourism happens). During normal times there are about 65 million tourists annually, almost all of which are spending the bulk of their time in midtown and downtown. Plus, 1.6 million people commute into Manhattan (again - during normal times) every day for work. So the actual number of people who live there are dwarfed by commuters and tourists, which have been decimated by the pandemic. Hence: 34th Street is relatively empty, and a lot of businesses are struggling, because they catered almost exclusively to high volumes of tourists or office workers.
The vast majority of New Yorkers live in more residential areas. Very few people want to live in midtown, it's not very pleasant and doesn't really cater to people who live there (it's all fast food and souvenir shops, but you'll struggle to find a decent grocery store). I live uptown, where there are tree-lined boulevards and big parks and cute neighborhood restaurants and stuff. Tourists never come here, except for the people who book airbnbs without understanding the concept of night and weekend subway schedules.
-
The last one he filmed was at 34th and Park Avenue. It looks like the Empire State building was very close. I was surprised to see a boarded up something in the background and I didn’t know what that board up was, but man that did not look good in that neighborhood.
That explains it. 34th Street is the heart of the business district, and is generally heavy on the hotel/business/office traffic - it's emptied out a lot during the pandemic. To give you an idea, about 700,000 people live in midtown and downtown Manhattan (where the bulk of business/tourism happens). During normal times there are about 65 million tourists annually, almost all of which are spending the bulk of their time in midtown and downtown. Plus, 1.6 million people commute into Manhattan (again - during normal times) every day for work. So the actual number of people who live there are dwarfed by commuters and tourists, which have been decimated by the pandemic. Hence: 34th Street is relatively empty, and a lot of businesses are struggling, because they catered almost exclusively to high volumes of tourists or office workers.
The vast majority of New Yorkers live in more residential areas. Very few people want to live in midtown, it's not very pleasant and doesn't really cater to people who live there (it's all fast food and souvenir shops, but you'll struggle to find a decent grocery store). I live uptown, where there are tree-lined boulevards and big parks and cute neighborhood restaurants and stuff. Tourists never come here, except for the people who book airbnbs without understanding the concept of night and weekend subway schedules.
Aha! Thanks.
-
If they ever do another Occupy Wall Street protest... I think I know where it'll start next time.
There's nothing truly unique about this building though. The whole of Manhattan Island is like this. My company is headquartered in NYC and honestly every single one of our executives has that better-than-you-peons attitude in every townhall and meeting they hold for the company. They literally brag about how much better they are at running the company than the old management before the company moved the HQ to NYC. Like one specifically said they're just so much more business oriented in NYC and don't waste time trying to be nice to people, and he's announcing this to the whole company as one of the big benefits of NYC management. It's an evil city driven by nothing but money. Until they outlaw capitalism though, it's simply always going to be that way. The ultra-rich will always have cities to go to, even if NYC gets shut down some day.
Sorry you've had some crappy experiences with New Yorkers. Maybe pump the brakes on painting a city of 8M+ with that brush, though. There are both jerks and lovely people everywhere.
Nyc seems to have more than thier fair share though, I will be happy to generalize that
-
Nyc seems to have more than thier fair share though, I will be happy to generalize that
It's supported by data too.
https://www.businessinsider.com/rudest-cities-in-the-united-states-2019-12
"The rudest city in America, according to the survey, is New York City. It was rated rude by 34.3% of respondents, which was almost twice as much as the next highest city on the list."
-
Nyc seems to have more than thier fair share though, I will be happy to generalize that
It's supported by data too.
https://www.businessinsider.com/rudest-cities-in-the-united-states-2019-12
"The rudest city in America, according to the survey, is New York City. It was rated rude by 34.3% of respondents, which was almost twice as much as the next highest city on the list."
Well if you don't like NYC fine -dont go there. I grew up in the city so it's my hometown and i love it. Plenty of other people do too for some strange reason.
-
Clown-on-clown bickering is erupting in NYC’s most famous clown towers. Tiny violins expected to arrive soon, but how will they get them up there if the elevators are broken?
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/03/realestate/luxury-high-rise-432-park.html
This is now my new favorite phrase!
-
Nyc seems to have more than thier fair share though, I will be happy to generalize that
It's supported by data too.
https://www.businessinsider.com/rudest-cities-in-the-united-states-2019-12
"The rudest city in America, according to the survey, is New York City. It was rated rude by 34.3% of respondents, which was almost twice as much as the next highest city on the list."
Meh. I agree with the east-coast/west-coast comparison I’ve heard a lot recently: the east coast is kind but not nice. The west coast is nice but not kind.
I’d argue that definitely applies to NYC, anyway. I prefer kind to nice.
If we weren’t living in a comfortable and paid-off house right now, I’d consider taking advantage of the current NYC prices to move there.
-
HAHA, isn't that just a list of the 50 largest metro areas in the country?
https://www.businessinsider.com/rudest-cities-in-the-united-states-2019-12
-
Well if you don't like NYC fine -dont go there. I grew up in the city so it's my hometown and i love it. Plenty of other people do too for some strange reason.
I'm from New York too, though Long Island in my case. There's no "strange reason," it's just money. People take jobs there for money.