(((Max))) 리트윗함
(((Max)))
23.6K posts
(((Max)))
@MaxSpikeAl
this wretched bag of worms called my earthly body
Brooklyn, NY 가입일 Şubat 2019
2.4K 팔로잉557 팔로워
(((Max))) 리트윗함
Suspending transit fares during the World Cup for five weeks in NYC would convince even more riders that they don't need to pay to ride, and permanently elevate evasion rates.
I half suspect Mamani knows that, and his proposal is intended to force the MTA's hand on free transit.
English
(((Max))) 리트윗함
Here’s an idea: build a second Rikers. If the jails are overcrowded, you build more jails, you don’t let career criminals out on the street. Or you’ll get more innocent New Yorkers killed, like Richard Williams, who you apparently failed to keep in your thoughts.
English
(((Max))) 리트윗함
Elizabeth Warren’s entire political project essentially amounts to whipping up outrage about how expensive everything is and how scarce essential goods are—then proposing policies that make those things more expensive and reduce their supply.
English
@jesserbnwtz The racism is only coming from you and your racialized assumptions
English
The idea that homeless people are more dangerous than anybody else is just racist garbage.
English
(((Max))) 리트윗함
Come for the evidence-free claims about police brutality… Stay for the chutzpah it takes to call for sidelining a counterterrorism unit from responding to large gatherings just weeks after terrorists tried to kill a bunch of people with homemade bombs at just such a gathering.
English
(((Max))) 리트윗함
This race is bigger than any one person.
It's about my unique ability to achieve peace in the Middle East.
English
(((Max))) 리트윗함
Everyone roasts the McKinsey report on trash cans in NYC but consider that for the entire history of the greatest city in the world before this report, they did not have trash cans.
The function of a consultancy is to gather prestige so it can give incredibly simple advice to large organizations that are so old and brittle their internal status systems no longer let obvious ideas rise to the top. By being a high-prestige external org, the consultancy can send in people with zero expertise who still give great advice because the simple obvious things any normal person would say aren't getting through otherwise. An incredibly valuable service to brittle aging city and state governments. "Maybe trash cans would make the city less stinky" was something no one seemed to have considered.
More Perfect Union@MorePerfectUS
Zohran is cancelling the NYC Department of Social Services' $9 million contract with McKinsey. Starting in 2022 under Eric Adams the City of New York paid McKinsey $1.6 million to research trash cans.
English
(((Max))) 리트윗함
The hypocrisy is mind blowing.
The same people that are 100% for buffer zones around abortion clinics, are AGAINST buffer zones around places of worship.
English
neoliberals will tell you that it was worth 22 million dollars to have mckinsey tell you that in order to solve the trash situation in new york you need trash bins
Bryan Cheong@bryancsk
Before McKinsey and co, versus after McKinsey and co. You can be a hater all you want, but McKinsey WORKS
English
(((Max))) 리트윗함
Do you want to know why rent is so expensive in LA? Why the application process takes so long? Why landlords want so much info from you? Here is a recent story:
A family was referred to me for their eviction case. They were heading to a jury trial in one month and didn't have a lawyer, yet.
They did all the paperwork and filing themselves, in-house to save on legal fees. And surprisingly, they did a great job. They filed the paperwork with LAHD. Gave proper notice to the tenants.
I reviewed their paperwork and it was better quality than 90% of other eviction lawyers. I didn't see any viable way to dismiss the case on a technicality.
As long as they were properly represented in trial, the family was going to win the eviction. They did everything by the book. Followed all the local rules. Gave all the necessary notices.
The family told me the judge ordered the parties to mediate at the first court appearance. The family attended the mediation in court without a lawyer. The tenant was provided a lawyer by the city, for free. At the mediation the lawyer for the tenants offered this settlement:
1. 4 months to vacate the property
2. Cash to leave, paid upfront
3. Waiver of all owed rent
4. Sealed record
They rejected the offer, of course. Why would they accept this?
The family then asked me a great question. "What is our best case scenario with you in trial?"
Based on my review, I gave them my most realistic estimate of the best case scenario in trial:
1. Both parties announce ready at the next trial date (1 month away) and trial takes 3 days. We win the trial.
2. Sheriff locks out the tenant 75 days after the trial.
3. about 110 days to possession.
4. Gave them an estimate cost for fees/prep time.
5. No viable collection of back rent, tenants had no assets.
Obviously, this was the best case scenario. It could be worse. Trial can be delayed. While I was confident we are going to win, juries are unpredictable.
This is where we had a surreal moment of collective clarity. The settlement offer they rejected is basically their best case scenario if they win the trial.
This was not a coincidence. The attorney for the tenants asked for pretty much the same amount I quoted them for my fees.
The lawyer for the tenants knew the family had to hire a lawyer for a jury trial. The lawyer knows it takes the sheriff 2-3 months to lockout after a judgment. The lawyer knows it's hard (and expensive) to collect against tenants with no assets.
State and local government created a system in which cases take forever to litigate, eviction laws are extremely complex and technical, easy to dismiss cases, only one side has to pay a lawyer, and worst of all, possession enforcement takes 60-90 days instead of 5. And it's all getting worse.
The leverage for the tenants is systemic. It's by design. Why would the tenants make any other offer? The landlords are left with no real options but a shitty settlement.
There are no real choice. Even when you do everything right, you still lose.
Tenants don't pay rent during evictions. They had no viable way to win the trial. There were no habitability issues. The landlords posted all the notices. Never raised the rent. Didn't retaliate. The landlords did everything right. And the tenants still win.
The mother looked at me and asked "our base case in trial is the same as the shitty settlement offer? Are you telling me we should have taken the offer we rejected?"
I didn't know how to respond.
English
@nychange @GovKathyHochul The government gives this organization non profit status and collects no tax from them. In return, this is how they behave.
English
More than 50 people have BARRICADED the doors to @GovKathyHochul’s office to defend New York’s Climate law and lower our utility bills.
Now is not the time to cave to TRUMP and his WAR FOR OIL.
English
(((Max))) 리트윗함
People were outraged at the $500k couple, but the underappreciated aspect of the story is that the woman making $36k lives in the same neighborhood and leads a similar lifestyle, minus saving $10k per month, because she is a beneficiary of various subsidies, including a rent
English
The purpose of providing eviction defendants free attorneys isn't to win trials. They rarely do.
The purpose is to make it so expensive and time-consuming for the landlord to win that they back down. They'll give up all the back rent, pay the defendant to leave, seal their record, and sometimes even sign a false reference so the defendant can scam a new landlord.
Your tax dollars at work.
Real Estate Lawyer@SinaiLawFirm
Do you want to know why rent is so expensive in LA? Why the application process takes so long? Why landlords want so much info from you? Here is a recent story: A family was referred to me for their eviction case. They were heading to a jury trial in one month and didn't have a lawyer, yet. They did all the paperwork and filing themselves, in-house to save on legal fees. And surprisingly, they did a great job. They filed the paperwork with LAHD. Gave proper notice to the tenants. I reviewed their paperwork and it was better quality than 90% of other eviction lawyers. I didn't see any viable way to dismiss the case on a technicality. As long as they were properly represented in trial, the family was going to win the eviction. They did everything by the book. Followed all the local rules. Gave all the necessary notices. The family told me the judge ordered the parties to mediate at the first court appearance. The family attended the mediation in court without a lawyer. The tenant was provided a lawyer by the city, for free. At the mediation the lawyer for the tenants offered this settlement: 1. 4 months to vacate the property 2. Cash to leave, paid upfront 3. Waiver of all owed rent 4. Sealed record They rejected the offer, of course. Why would they accept this? The family then asked me a great question. "What is our best case scenario with you in trial?" Based on my review, I gave them my most realistic estimate of the best case scenario in trial: 1. Both parties announce ready at the next trial date (1 month away) and trial takes 3 days. We win the trial. 2. Sheriff locks out the tenant 75 days after the trial. 3. about 110 days to possession. 4. Gave them an estimate cost for fees/prep time. 5. No viable collection of back rent, tenants had no assets. Obviously, this was the best case scenario. It could be worse. Trial can be delayed. While I was confident we are going to win, juries are unpredictable. This is where we had a surreal moment of collective clarity. The settlement offer they rejected is basically their best case scenario if they win the trial. This was not a coincidence. The attorney for the tenants asked for pretty much the same amount I quoted them for my fees. The lawyer for the tenants knew the family had to hire a lawyer for a jury trial. The lawyer knows it takes the sheriff 2-3 months to lockout after a judgment. The lawyer knows it's hard (and expensive) to collect against tenants with no assets. State and local government created a system in which cases take forever to litigate, eviction laws are extremely complex and technical, easy to dismiss cases, only one side has to pay a lawyer, and worst of all, possession enforcement takes 60-90 days instead of 5. And it's all getting worse. The leverage for the tenants is systemic. It's by design. Why would the tenants make any other offer? The landlords are left with no real options but a shitty settlement. There are no real choice. Even when you do everything right, you still lose. Tenants don't pay rent during evictions. They had no viable way to win the trial. There were no habitability issues. The landlords posted all the notices. Never raised the rent. Didn't retaliate. The landlords did everything right. And the tenants still win. The mother looked at me and asked "our base case in trial is the same as the shitty settlement offer? Are you telling me we should have taken the offer we rejected?" I didn't know how to respond.
English
@realitybasedlaw @MoisaQuasi It’s pervasive here in NYC as well. Both tenants and landlords would be far better served by the city just giving this money to landlords to pay for those in arrears.
English
(((Max))) 리트윗함
The Attorney General is the Chief Law Enforcement of New York and can prosecute any crime a DA can. When District Attorney’s like Alvin Bragg fail to keep New Yorkers safe, I’ll step in and prosecute those crimes.
English
RT @Rafa_Mangual: Troubled though you may be, an heretofore unexplained death is not a sufficient reason to close the only jail facility th…
English
(((Max))) 리트윗함
@ebottcher @Chrislejohnyc @CityAndStateNY @JCColtin This is all so lame and pathetic. You are supposed to be politicians, not celebrities.
English
