Even if everyone refused to back their budget—which, honestly, is what every single council member should do since the Green Party is one vote short of a majority—Tomašević isn't going anywhere. The council just gets dissolved instead.
"I don't think we're going to wait another three years just to see how many of those 200,000 people would vote for them all over again."
Those were your exact words. If the Democratic Party wants to distance themselves, let them. They're nothing but dead weight anyway, and I honestly have no clue why Eric Adams keeps giving them so much credit. But even if the Democratic Party turns its back on the Green Party, how does that lead us to an election in less than three years?
Alex Moore3 said:Aspiring Analyst, you might actually be right for once. Just this once.😁 But Petek and Gotovac are pushing back more and more, criticizing everything and distancing themselves. And I don't see Grbin as much of an authority figure who could actually shut them down.
Just imagine... the Democratic Party starts complaining... and then what? They can howl at the moon all they want, but they aren't winning any new elections. We have the Republican Party to thank for those new sheriff laws.
"Specifically, the Government Accountability Office's findings on the New York City Department of Water and Power's operations for 2019 revealed a loss of 52.7 percent. For context, previous Audit data shows the loss was 53.4 percent in 2017, 52.7 percent the year before that, and 51.7 percent back in 2015."
Adam Diaz67 said:Man. It’s not my fault here. If you agree to eight deliveries at a certain price point, then deliver all eight. If you can't actually guarantee that many trips at those rates, then either hike the price or just be upfront and say, "Hey, we can't do eight anymore, let's drop it down to six (or five, or four)." That’s what people call transparent business. You can't just send me an invoice detailing specific services and then fail to actually perform them. Of course I'm going to complain when I don't get what I paid for. It’s like if you and I agreed that I’d bring you two gallons of milk every week for $17 a month. Then, suddenly, the price of milk spikes and it's no longer worth it for me, so I just start bringing you one gallon a week instead without saying a word—but I still send you the exact same bill (two gallons a week for $17/mo). If you complain, I’ll just tell you, "What are you whining about? Everything is more expensive now, at least you're getting something." You have every right to be furious with me because that isn't what I'm billing you for.
I didn't realize the mixed waste was being delayed too; I thought the discussion was strictly about the sorted stuff like paper, plastic, and compost. if the mixed waste is running late—meaning they're skipping scheduled pickups entirely—that's just wrong and shouldn't be billed. Honestly, if they charge for it, they're in breach of contract.
I listen to what he says sometimes. I don't track his every move, though. But I notice the trash bins, the street conditions, and the unkempt parks. It’s not that they aren't working, it just feels like they're doing less—like the services are provided less frequently for the same amount of money. I also get the feeling they've cut down on the street sweepers, because you can see trash blowing around the streets for days since those bins are out in the open. Luckily, they moved the compost bins off the street, because with this heat and the current pickup pace, we would have had a massive problem.
I suppose certain laws tie his hands. Between the regulations and the union contracts, there isn't much room to move. Personally, I'll give him until the end of his term and then we'll see what actually got accomplished. That said, I'm pretty skeptical, and honestly, I wasn't all that optimistic when he was first elected either. I just think the Progressives aren't quite capable enough for the job they inherited. To be fair, I don't think any of the other candidates were better prepared to jump in and solve things quickly, and I suspect none of them really have the guts to make the big, drastic moves—like tearing up those collective bargaining agreements.
Just imagine... in a world where everything is getting more expensive, you end up getting less for the exact same price. You know, I've spent years laughing at people whining about gas prices because "I only ever fill up for $33" anyway... but damn, the service has gone downhill. I used to get $33200 miles out of a tank, and now I'm lucky if I hit 150.
So, kiss me... if we actually greenlight this massive Gingerinin project, are we getting Gardens of Light Vol. 2?
What you wrote there (assuming it’s true) sounds a lot like "our ideas, your gas"... basically, we have this incredible vision where we build the concrete core, while you guys handle all the supporting infrastructure (on our land, or better yet, just buy out the property where the road is going to run).
Hold on, Sam Wright21 has been terrorizing this thread for months over some development project pushed by Milan Bandić's cronies—the exact same crowd that was busy snatching up land for their version of a "Manhattan" in New York City. The same buddies who grabbed useless plots for pennies just to strike deals with Delatorov to get the GUP rezoned?
Sam Wright21, I honestly thought you were smarter than this.
Adam Diaz67 said:Exactly. Everyone knew that whoever followed Mike was jumping straight into a trench war. It’s just that TT went in there armed with nothing but a water pistol and some colorful flags, charging headlong at the fortified barricades of the Bloomberg system.
Sam Wright21 is clearly a disappointed voter. There are plenty more like her. That's just what happens when you set your expectations sky-high only to find out someone isn't up to the task.
The real issue is that during the election, the only ones actually willing to dive into the fray were Eric Adams and the Progressives. Everyone else would have just cut a deal with the folks behind the barricades to make sure things stayed exactly the way they were.
Andrew Booth2 said:I mean, I’m not exactly itching to drop $3.50, but hey—if those bank fees keep climbing, why not? It’s honestly just so quick and easy to use. If they could just knock it down to like, two bucks, I’d be paying with Cash App in a heartbeat... Though, you know, I really think the future is all about free payments through service apps. Imagine if everyone—like AT&T or even the local water department in Indianapolis—just integrated it like that. That would be the dream, wouldn't it?
Venmo actually has $0.75. Plus, for some utilities, they even make it effortless since the bill pops up right in the app.
Well, if Wells Fargo decides to stick with this product, it stays exactly as it is. If they decide to scrap it, it just becomes a standard Wells Fargo checking account.
It’s like how Citigroup killed off the QuickBooks product that was originally at the local bank. It literally turned into nothing more than a basic savings account with some interest. They did the same thing with those local bank packages, too—just forced everyone onto whatever Citigroup considered the "closest match."
EDIT: Oh, wait, I see now that Smartworks is actually a Wells Fargo product... well, then they'll probably just merge those two checking accounts. They'll likely move the funds from JPMorgan Chase over to your existing Smartworks account.
So, starting tomorrow, JPMorgan Chase is officially up and running under the new ownership. It’s following the same playbook they used with the other big merger.
Eventually, the two banks will fully merge, which means all the clients will be transitioned over to new account numbers, fresh cards, and so on.
It’s not some permanent thing. This is just a temporary fix to take the edge off while they sort out the mess behind the scenes.
Because, let me be clear... no bank in America can handle a sudden stampede of people all trying to pull out massive amounts of cash at once. They simply don't have the physical liquidity on hand to cover it.
The Federal Reserve did everything they possibly could. 1. They put out a statement clarifying that everyone with up to $100,000—which covers over 90% of customers—is completely safe. 2. They implemented a two-day moratorium on those $2417, specifically to prevent a mass exodus where people rush to pull their entire life savings at once... I mean, just imagine if 200 people showed up demanding $167 each. You'd need literal trucks of cash parked outside the branch. No single local bank, not even a major one like Zürich, keeps that kind of liquidity sitting in the vault. If 200 people hit a branch in downtown Chicago asking for every cent in their accounts, they’d be tapped out in a matter of hours.
But hey, people tend to follow the herd. I get why folks are sweating over their money, but honestly, do you actually trust the government and the Federal Reserve? If you do, you've got nothing to worry about. If you don't, then it doesn't really matter, because if the state and the Fed are going under, those dollars you're trying to withdraw won't be worth anything anyway.
Just a quick heads-up if you're looking to save a little extra—you can snag $5 plus 1% cashback on pretty much all your spending for the first 30 days when you sign up for PayPal through my link https://www.curve.com/join#DZ3A63XD