I can palpably touch the irony

Something being tied =/= something being mutually exclusive.

Your statement is objectively wrong, I don't know how else to say this.

Have a modicum of self-respect.

Yes but it's disingenuous at best to relate the interest rates the fed sets to what a consumer's mortgage interest rate actively is.

Your comment was that [mortgage] rates have been near zero for years now, which is objectively wrong. Show me any consumers who have a near zero mortgage interest rate.

Honestly, you kind of come off as someone with a mental disorder or some level of autism so I'm not continue to make fun of you.

How brittle you are makes it too easy.

> Mortgage interest is deductible and also how would they get fucked by interest in the first place? We've had rates at near zero for years now.

English is hard for you, huh?

In a conversation where everyone is speaking about mortgage interest rates, and following the very sentence when you call out mortgage interest rates. Colloquially, and properly in the English language, there is a correlation between sentences in one paragraph.

If that wasn't your intention, then you should work on your grammar.

Does all this thinking hurt your whittle brain?

Explain to me why you think the central bank's rate is the same as what a mortgage rate is

You continue to show how uneducated you are, as you post a wikipedia article about Japan's interest-rate policy with a note about what the Fed's position was after The Great Recession. Moreover, you're comparing the fed's rate vs mortgage interest that a consumer exposed to which are not mutually exclusive.

Why don't you speak to any of your successful friends, or anyone who has worked in finance/accounting, if they think a 2% difference in mortgage interest is significant or not :]

Not only a pussy, but also showing signs of a brittle ego. Keep it up!

>how dare you hold me accountable for the misinformation I spread & the words that I use

• you

grow up, pussy.

Okay, how about since 1971, my guy.

The lowest they've ever been in recorded history was during an unprecedented pandemic, and even then the lowest average for 30 year was mid 2s.

Absolutely no one worth their word would categorize this as "near zero for years."

> We've had rates at near zero for years now

What? Avg interest rates for 30 yr right now are 7%. In what world is that "near zero"?

/u/Ilanaspax likes to be edgy just to be edgy. being grounded reality is too much for them

Nice, another comment where you don't provide a substantive argument while also mischaracterizing my comments as "opinion" even though everything I've asserted is easily provable.

Enjoy your bubble.

> Or are you counting every single student in the city, each in different institutions with different privatized security companies?

You objectively think that every single institution within one city limit all have different privatized security companies? Dude, come on..... at least try to be objective in this conversation.

>Universities being used as a comparison point was as I said before- apples and oranges

Okay, thanks for your opinion. IXP, the private company in discovery for this solution, also does work with college campuses

So weird how the same private security company provides the same, or similar solution, to different entities but because it doesn't fit your narrative you like to just gloss over it entirely.

>believe that CITY SERVICES should be privatized. My opinion.

Okay, and I agree in the case when city services are being handled effectively. But we can both agree that it is objectively not being handled effectively right now, and I would encourage you to do any semblance of research of what the lift would be (money, time, & personnel) to build and/or revitalize an in-house solution as compared to contracting it out.

The solution needs to happen NOW. Not in 3-4 years by the time they can get an in-house solution running effectively.

If JC had the wherewithal they could contract this out to IXP, spend those years gathering insights and then concurrently build their in-house solution.

>there's a lot of corruption in JC government and money isn't being properly allocated

This can be true AND it be true that JC doesn't have the wherewithal to handle this internally. This has been an ongoing problem for decades. This isn't going to be handled in-house overnight effectively, for the same reason you list.

But an accredited private organization that has independent case studies of its efficacy can and has worked in the past. Hard stop.

Boston has 346k students, Philly has 342k students. Almost every college institution in America has privatized security. Ergo, all of these students are covered by privatized security.

edit-- mind you, this privatized security isn't EXCLUSIVELY for students but staff and others are covered as well

Do you work in the real world?

When there is an issue with ADP, Workday, Paychex, etc. that are all privatized SAAS payroll systems the control failure is on the company itself and how they instituted the software.

>He said the police had a number of special units that made use of a finger punch system, confusing the software since many officers were punching in from places other than those anticipated.

Source

This isn't an issue with the software, but how it was set up by Jersey City officials.

edit:

I further think you lack the wherewithal of reality to boast that something isn't working because of a handful of cases amongst tens of thousands of instances of it working properly, while all of these exceptions of it not working occurred at the onset of this software being implemented.

>small/private institutions as a comparison point for a 911 dispatch system

Virtually every university in America uses privatized security, including ones that have a larger footprint than most cities in America. Not sure if srs.

Which corroborates my note that we should explore privatization because of how poorly JC handles both employee assets but also their own systems.

400 complaints over 18 months, 5 years ago vs 284 calls to 911 in 50 minutes, many of which went unresolved

idk, seems like some pretty easy math to me lol

Here's more on that company: https://www.ixpcorp.com/who-we-do-it-for/

>Seen here, the company was sued in 2018 for an incident that took place in Danbury, CT, one of their privatized 911 centers.

This is an important note from the article; "A police officer later sued the company after he was beaten for more than a minute while IXP dispatchers struggled to get the information to nearby officers — but the lawsuit was withdrawn this past year."

Yes, I agree that it shouldn't be broken but, unfortunately, this is not the issue that we're actively dealing with.

Something being fixable =/= the best approach forward. They would effectively have to recreate the wheel here, hire new people, allocate new resources, administer a robust training mechanism, provide routine audits to ensure everything is working correctly, engage on a software solution that speaks to the systems of the city, etc.

If you're talking about raising taxes, I would wager building an in-house solution is probably going to cost more and would raise our taxes, particularly because in-house solutions often have major pitfalls and may end up failing in the end.

For what it's worth- the company they were exploring, IXP, also handles it for other places in NJ and across the country.

Much of what you're saying is conjecture & assumptions, you may be right, but you may also be very wrong considering this isn't a company they're exploring that is brand new, built by Mayor Fulop's cousin. They have efficacy case studies that prove their effectiveness.

See here

>Privatizing public safety just seems gross to me.

Also, to this point, have you ever been on a college campus, a mall, or even a campus like corporate office? Privatized public safety isn't a new phenomenon. It's been around for decades.

If it works better (& it likely does) than what JC can provide, why shouldn't we explore this option?

if the city has been this bad at managing this, effectively training operators, etc. and there's an option of a private company coming in to provide all of this I don't see an issue with it.

Pragmatically, it's going to take way longer to clean this situation up internally than it is to hire a private company.

Handling 911 calls is not something that has the luxury of time.

not trying to be a dick but, this seems sexist

>I have to snark for a moment, every time I see this woman I am shocked at how old she looks for her age.

would you bring this up if it were a man?

I effectively lived with my ex in BK in bushwick & then Bensonhurst, it was fun for a bit but i really do love the space and freedom you get in JC

Any location I've gone to from JC to Manhattan vs Bensonhurst was significantly closer and easier than Bensonhurst

People talk about concert venues in this thread but I would argue that several of the concert venues in Bk are in random ass locations (Brooklyn Mirage for example) and a public trans trip from JC to Manhattan for a concert is much closer than some of those living in Bk and going to a venue in Bk

Also the L train is one of the worst trains with reliability and weekend service. I would take the Path over that any day

disclaimer: i also own my place in JC so I'm likely biased!

Lol. Ok let me change my comment

>don't they know /u/Miringanes only eats at places that caters to their whim and massages their entitlement?

I've literally never had an issue with getting reservations, or even just walk ups. & I've gone more frequently than 2 times in the past 5 years.

how dare they become successful. dont they know /u/Miringanes only eats at places that aren't popular?

Awwwwww, looks like I hit a nerve. Thankfully me wanting casual sex isn't an indication of mental illness, but your erratic response further corroborates how desperately you need to be treated