ny10570

In hindsight there are absolutely holes in this guys story, but in the moment you have to take it at face value. I've been sent out on weirdly specific hoax calls and painfully vague actual emergencies. You take the information and if it sounds credible act on it. Now they can go about tracking him down and hopefully prosecute him to the fullest extent of the law.

The problem with parroting propaganda is that propaganda is often short on facts and long on passion. This combination hinders your ability to participate in intellectual discourse as it takes away from any salient points you might actually make. That being said... If midterm elections are such an accurate assessment of the public's opinion what does that say about Bush's second term. It was the first time Democrats took the house and senate since 1994. More importantly 1994 was the first time in over 60 years that the Republicans held the House with one exception in 1947. In retrospect Republicans and Democrats generally agree that Clinton was a good president nd our nation prospered under him. So even though Clinton was doing a good job the Republicans were able to maintain control of the House and Senate. With a Democratic Congress, maybe things would have been better or maybe they would have been worse; there's no way to tell. What I can tell you is that since the Depression Democrats have been in charge of both the House and Senate more often than not. Obama care is largely the healthcare reform proposed by Gingrich and his fellow "Contract with America" conservatives in response to Clinton's attempt at universal healthcare. Funny, in 1994 heath insurance mandates were the sensible choice yet 18 years later they're socialism. Before you get all up in arms about market socialism, the healthcare mandate is absolutely not socialism. Nothing is being taken from anyone and redistributed. People are being forced to purchase a product. The providers of said product are not government entities and free to offer whatever services set at whatever prices the market will bear as long as they fall within certain guidelines. If you live in NY and drive a car you will be familiar with a nearly identical system call auto insurance. You are required to have it, there are mandatory minimums, and there are certain rules regarding the provision of this insurance that the industry must follow. I disagree with the health insurance mandate in that no one is forced to buy auto insurance. If however you wish to drive a car, you then must buy in. Practically speaking however we as a society will never accept casting people into the street to suffer alone because they chose to opt out of purchasing healthcare. Sadly, I don't disagree that the Supreme Court will likely rule against the mandate. They did a poor job arguing their case. Luckily the past has clearly shown that just because you lost in the supreme court it does not mean you were wrong. Many decisions made by the court then would be inconceivable now. Google Dred Scott for a look at one of our not so great supreme court decisions. The full effects of auto bail out are still yet to be realized. Educated and informed individuals can go back and forth about what might have happened to GM in bankruptcy court. Both sides have salient points and real world examples to demonstrate their arguments. What you are ignoring is Bush started the auto bailouts with his initial injection of cash to stabilize the companies while what eventually became the bailout was crafted. The very same bailout that Bush has since stated he doesn't regret and would in fact repeat if he were to do it all over again today. GM and Chrysler are both doing far better today than they were just before their collapse. Lehman Brothers is the closest in size to GM that has ever gone into Chapter 11 and today is a shell of its former self. Considering that Lehamn benefited from Barclays quickly jumping in and picking off they healthier divisions while no one was interested or able to buy anything that GM had I tend to agree that GM would be in far worse shape. Obama's win was almost as much the result of everything you mentioned as it was the inability of the Republican's to run an effective campaign. The democratic primary was so bruising that election was the Republican's to lose. Absolutely, the wars and financial disaster were bad but they paled in comparison to the damage done by Palin. Obama's election wasn't so different from Bush's. A little known candidate with no real national experience that escaped a bruising primary on hype and squeaked out general election win more because of the failings of their opponent than the strength of their campaign. P.S. the same could be said for Clinton except that was more Perot's success than Bush's failure that opened the door for Bubba. Show me where cutting taxes has been a time tested and proven solution for fiscal crisis?? Bush Sr and Reagan both raised taxes overall and Reagan expanded government in response to fiscal crisis. Cuts for the sake of cutting don't work. When corporations find their bottom line failing they spend money.You stem losses by cutting spending in some areas, but those funds are redirected towards investments designed to stimulate new business. You may disagree with where Obama is spending the money and how he is raising it, but outside of ranting tea party candidates republican and democrat economists agree that more money needs to find its way into the economy. Whether it is better to leave it to the "job creators" to spend our way out of this recession or better for the government to stimulate the economy is up for debate. I can't even go near the Walker stuff. Except for the fact that Walker won, that whole bit is entirely based in fantasy. Ironically our terrible economy has gone a long way towards improving our position in energy production. The dip in the dollar has hurt our buying power and made importing oil relatively more expensive. The flagging economy also resulted in a dip worldwide in energy demands increasing the price gap between fossil fuels and alternative energy. Coal is still taking a beating, and will be for a while. Even under Bush the EPA was harder on coal than they would have liked. Feel free to google any of my reply here. All original, largely opinion, and all developed from careful consideration of the world around me. I wouldn't expect you to suddenly change your mind just because you read a few differing opinions, but it would be really nice to hear an intelligent and coherent reply from you just once. Sorry, one thing I wanted to add... Why do you and the rest of the incensed right insist on using Obama's full name? Clinton was never William Jefferson Clinton and even with two living presidents named George Bush the middle initial sufficed. Are you that bothered by the name Hussein or what it represents?

Here's the 2012 Medal Day book detailing the awards and exploits of all of this years honorees. http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CFEQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nyc.gov%2Fhtml%2Ffdny%2Fpdf%2Fpublications%2Fmedal_day%2F2012%2FMedal_Day_Book_2012_FINAL.pdf&ei=bajTT_mRDoaa9gT05sHRAw&usg=AFQjCNG2xcnaLvDdJubb90pNQmvUQAPjog&sig2=6jDY2z3bQ-6AUVSRjM_QGQ

You're education on this topic is so one sided its almost comical. Unions absolutely have flaws. No one that has ever taken on the pro labor argument on this board has ever trued to say that unions are a perfect solution. The contention is organized labor provides a better environment for the working class. The Walker recall did fail. But as others pointed out he spent a massive amount of money and barely won. Its no secret that money equals influence in an election. Obama is hammering California and NYC fundraisers just for that reason. He spent nearly 10x as much (yes that doesn't include all of the campaigners pumped into the state by the unions) and won by a much smaller margin than his original election against a much stronger candidate. This recall sent a powerful message heeded by tea party governors in other states like Indiana. Yes, higher wages and better compensation has to come from somewhere. Paying workers more drives prices up. I have NEVER heard management suggest a reduction in their compensation or a reduction in dividends for the shareholders to prevent reductions in pay or layoffs. I do however constantly hear about reductions and layoffs to preserve corporate profits. It has been shown time and time again that increased compensation leads to increased spending which spurrs economic growth. Economies do not grow when people save money. Henry Ford ensured a market for his car by paying his employees enough to buy them. WWII dragged our economy out of the depression because we were forced to dump massive amounts of money into farming and manufacturing. To pay for it the government drove the effective taxrates to levels not seen before or since and the economy chugged along just fine with largest expansion of the middle class and smallest wealth disparity in our nations history. You say unions are preventing American corporations from being competitive yet Germany has managed to maintain a dominant manufacturing sector and one of the strongest economies in the world despite being saddled with healthcare obligations and national labor organization. There is no doubt our economy is broken. However any ashole that insists all of the blame rests with any one side is just that, an ashole and should be discounted as such.

Absolutely, old vs new old holds up much better. Old timber is substantially heavier and denser than anything sold today. Not to go off topic, but its the same reason instrument craftsmen go nuts for old reclaimed lumber. The old growth wood used to have a much denser and stronger structure. I'm simply comparing new to new. Modern solid timber vs laminated engineered lumber.

A lot of people seem to forget, even in NYC PD and FD are rarely first on scene to a distress call. The first responders to flight 1549 were the NY Waterways ferries.

http://media.zenfs.com/en_US/News/SPACE.com/Space_Shuttle_Enterprise_Damaged_at-c7a4814d6870449981ccb97d42b7bafc Some foam was knocked off the wing tip when a sudden 35 knot gust of wind pushed the Enterprise into a wooden pier as it was towed under a bridge. It was painted to protect the exposed metal and will be repaired at a later date.

With this type of structural building material you can easily engineer the building to transfer loads in the event of failure. Its no different than using precast concrete or steel. I'm worried about the glue used to build these pieces. Large diameter timber is great because it is a solid contiguous material. This stuff is laminated. Is the glue flammable? Does the glue fail when exposed to heat? If the glue fails under heat then as you heat the material it will separate and no longer be a single solid member (bundle of sticks vs solid log). If the glue is flammable then you have a bundle of sticks coated in gasoline. Since this is the problem plaguing all current engineered lumber products I'm going to assume this stuff is another disaster waiting to happen. These structures are going to need serious sprinkler systems and multiple exits.

There were a lot of problems moving water immediately after 9/11. By buying 2000gpm pumps any engine can be a source or relay pumper. Its relatively cheap compared to adding more satellite engines.

Exactly. As far as what a hospital is legally allowed to disseminate basic info such as severity (critical, stable, etc), discharged, or deceased are all allowed. Details such as diagnosis, procedures, and test results are the protected information.

Drug companies have to turn a profit. That profit funds research and keeps investors coming back. Annual production is intended to meet annual supply plus mandated surpluses. With a thin profit margin on these generic drugs there isn't a lot of room for competition. This has resulted in a single manufacturer for many components and products. With one place making just enough to supply demand, a small interruption in production has far reaching affects. Its not like the demand for Atropine, Morphine, and many other essential meds changes much year to year. So why would a company make more? It will just expire on the shelf and cost them more money. This is why there's the mandated surpluses.

The argument is then that anyone meeting the education requirements has already demonstrated their capability to learn the material being taught. If minorities are still failing at a disproportional rate then the test must be discriminatory. The judge absolutely dropped the ball when he ignored the substantial improvements the dept had achieved with the pervious test. I think this is where he crossed the line from impartial jurist to buffoon with an axe to grind. Hopefully the appeals process agrees.

Most people see EMS as a luxury rather than necessity. Everyone thinks they can control their own medical emergencies. No one is under the illusion that they can control their own house fire. The best example of the average person's priorities is personal finance. People time and again chose to give up their health insurance before forgoing the annual vacation when money gets tight.

You can do it without running hydrants through your entire district or without buying a fleet of tankers. Simple things like automatic mutual aid and equipment standardization can get you the water flow you need to improve your rating.

Its ridiculously easy. If you fail the EMS physical you should be loaded into an ambulance and taken to the ER immediately.

As a potential beneficiary of this action I still disagree with it. It taints every minority that gets hired. Whether you were given the job by a judge or earned it through the test you will be painted with the same brush. (Before anyone assumes I'm another bottom of the barrel scum that's hoping for a free boost, I was called for the first class of the last list but had to defer pending surgery.) It all depends on the settlement. In class action suits they'll usually take a sample of plaintiffs determine their compensation and extrapolate it over all plaintiffs. Don't forget, they can ask for whatever they want. There are specific rules and precedents that dictate penalty limits. I do not believe there is means for damages associated with not being able to enjoy being a firefighter. There is also a limit to how many years back any damages can go. It has nothing to do with the questions on the test. Even if they actually used a GED exam, if the results demonstrated a racial bias and the test cannot be proved to be necessary to select the best candidates then the test can be considered discriminatory. The department has a history of hiring within a very small range of scores. This has resulted in similar careers no matter where they scored because no one with an 86 was getting hired. First class off a list was just as successful as the last class. Essentially the extremely competitive score required to get hired in the past prevented an accurate assessment of the validity of the test. SATs and other academic standardized tests have similar racial disparities but they can be proven to be accurate predictors of academic success. Thousands of hours and dozens of papers have been devoted to eliminating racial imbalance from these standardized tests, so its not like they have been immune from similar criticism. Recently some universities have gotten away from or at least de-emphasized the importance of standardized testing because of these issues. The fact of the matter is money = education = opportunity. The majority of inner city youth are minorities and their schools suck. The reasons are many and cover everything from the home to the way this country spends education dollars. Until the education system is fixed this will continue to be a problem. Thats an equal protection clause violation. From what I caught with your case I was truly shocked with the decision handed down. This has long been debated amongst lawyers and fought in the courts. Where does disparate impact end and equal protection begin? As more of these cases progress through the courts an eventual line will be drawn and then moved and moved some more. These laws were enacted as part of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. his sweeping and critical legislation has done far more good than harm. The Jim Crow south had bullshit laws on the books requiring things like property ownership to vote in a premeditated effort to prevent blacks from integrating into society. The disparate impact clause was written to fight that. The current application is an unintended consequence seized upon by a few opportunistic scum bags and enabled by a lot of guilty self conscious white people. It is being addressed but as it is such a land mine of a subject it will take time to get right. The most objective judge in the world would still have to rule against the dept's exams. The city couldn't prove their case, it was that simple. Where a reasonable and intelligent judge would have made a difference is in the remediation. Garaufis dropped the ball by pandering to the Vulcans rather than recognizing the real issues.

Auto manufacturers began using seatbelt airbags a few years ago as well. In this day you don't cut ANYTHING until you've looked it over.

It is all about the disparate impact clause from Title VII. If the results show a racial bias and the questions cannot be proven to be pertinent to selecting the best candidate the test is assumed to be discriminatory. Here's probably the best summary I've found, courtesy of "American University Law Review" When one thinks about discrimination, blatant acts or bad motives usually come to mind. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (―Title VII‖) protects against this type of intentional discrimination in the workplace through its disparate treatment provision. Title VII also, however, imposes liability even in situations where the employer acts without bad intentions. An employer may be liable simply because one group passes a neutral promotion test or meets a hiring qualification at a substantially higher rate than other groups, even when the selection criterion applies to everyone and is not devised to disadvantage one group over another. Nevertheless, if an employer‘s neutral employment practice causes a disproportionate impact on a racial group or other protected class, it is a prima facie violation of Title VII‘s disparate impact provision. The employer must defend the charge by showing that the employment practice is job related and a business necessity. Even after an employer validates a business practice, the employer may still be liable if there are other equally effective alternatives that have less adverse effect.

In reality it shouldn't matter, but it doesn't look good. Would you be bothered if he were on yelp looking up a place to grab something for dinner? Facebook has evolved into more than just social site for keeping up with friends. Does his dept use it for recruiting or some other official purpose? Personally I wouldn't want the dept knowing what websites I'm looking at so I'm staying off their computer. Otherwise as long as he is doing his job to the standards required does it matter if he takes a few minutes to catch up with his wall posts?

If I understand the NYS penal code, the difference is a class A vs a class B or C felony. Thats life imprisonment vs a term not to exceed 25 or 15 years. Then there are the other charges. Illegal use of a firearm is very different than obtaining a firearm for the commission of a crime. In her case that's not much of a difference, but in you or me sentenced to 15, but out in 7 is a bit better than life without.

Actually the reason is extremely important. As a society we've long established mitigating circumstances and intent are pertinent. Clearly the act of dealing drugs is not justification for shooting someone. Its a big difference if she bought that gun to kill him and was lying in wait or if she had the gun, reached her wits end and snapped. The result is the same but the penalty is going to be much different.

Or the kid dealing drugs out of her house. Not saying that justifies the shooting, but she managed to raise 5 kids without shooting them. I'm willing to bet it was a lot more than homework.

How are the tip up lights going to save money?

State wide would be entirely too many numbers. NYC alone has over 200 engines. Even if they did the old exemption to cities with1,000,000 residents I'm sure there's enough apparatus to overwhelm a statewide system.

True, but we're not exactly doing great. How many area depts have already been cut to the bone? Once you've reduced staffing and eliminated units, what's left?