"Class Doorfare"

     http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/class_doorfare_ZIEobiEylc8G1uQAcLZn1O

Credit must first of all go to the New York Post both for the title of this blog and the above graphic.  (Almost needless to add, no such coverage could be found in our alleged newspaper of record.)  Readers may find the complete article at the above link. 

It would be hilarious if it were not so outrageous a sign of what has happened to our society.  A developer of luxury housing, itself the beneficiary of socialism for the rich*, is given the obligation to put aside a number of apartments for those qualifying for so-called affordable housing.  The decision is thus made that one way to ameliorate the impact of having his toney clientele forced to rub shoulders with the poor, is to segregate the two groups.  Perhaps as well as "poor door" and "rich door," the developer could carve in stone above the respective thresholds, "Haves" and "Have Nots" or "One Percenters" and "Ninety-nine Percenters."  We might then further compel the have-nots to wear arm bands emblazoned with a yellow "P" for Poor.

A diseased system generates fractals of its basic pattern.  This is just one such fractal, but we are surrounded by countless examples here in New York City.  After years of Bloombergian rule, it is no surprise that the developer Extell might feel it could get away with its scheme to shield worthier tenants from the unwashed (whose presence granted the company air rights and tax breaks).  Twelve years of rule by the current mayor, (who, with an estimated 27 billion dollars in net worth, is said to be the seventh richest man in America), have once and for all proven the homespun theory that putting a rich man in office guarantees that he will be incorruptible.  Yes, because it is he and others of his class who do the corrupting, brothers and sisters.  Many New York City residents, like most Americans, raised to dream of unheard of riches for themselves, are now actually dreading the prospect of losing Michael Bloomberg with a trepidation only comparable to that which a nervous child fears the loss of a parent. 

The internet version of the Sunday New York Times published an interactive graphic chronicling the enormous number of buildings erected during the mayor's tenure.  Not just in Manhattan, but in Downtown Brooklyn, Williamsburgh and Long Island City, we see evidence of the building boom the city has experienced, or, depending on one's point of view, endured.  The richest city in the world was largely sheltered from what hundreds of other American cities experienced in the aftermath of the 2008 crash, and there are no doubt those who will argue that this was in no small measure due to the sweetheart deals the mayor made with his cronies.  There can be equally little doubt that the boom brought millions of dollars into the city.  Some may even argue that given what the mayor has done in this regard, his essentially destructive redesigning of the city's streets and thoroughfares, largely out of a vendetta against drivers from the outer boroughs who refused to give him his congestion pricing, was a small price to pay. 

With regard to the vast majority of New Yorkers, its working class and its poor, the picture is quite different.  His attempt to give the city a world class school system, albeit a noble goal, has proven a disaster.  Not only has he made it more difficult and expensive to drive a car in the city, he has made almost no efforts to improve the public transportation that would induce citizens to leave their cars at home.  In fact, we have seen only cutbacks and increased fares, a virtual tax on the poor and working classes. Hospitals have been closed, money diverted from education for (no more effective) charter schools, decaying infrastructure largely ignored while the patrician in City Hall wages campaigns for more trees, smaller sodas and (for his purposes)conveniently street-crowding blue bicycle rental locations.  Like his brethren on the Republican right, the very word public is anathema.  After all, if he could amass a private fortune, what is your excuse?

The one consolation in all this is that, with the exception of Republican candidate Castimatidis, most of the candidates for mayor have not been blessed with assets in the billions.  Unless, of course, Mike decides that he can't let go and forces through the end of term limits in the City Council.  Certainly, Christine Quinn could take time off from her campaign to shepherd the measure through.

*Extell is also seeking a controversial 421a exemption — a tax break given to developers who include affordable housing in their market-rate buildings.

In October, The Post reported that five of the luxury firm’s towers cost the city $21.8 million in tax revenue in their first year alone.

Together, the buildings paid just $567,337 in annual taxes. Without the 421a program, they would have paid the city $22 million, according to appraisal firm Miller Samuel Inc.

---"Upper West Side condo has separate entrances for the rich and the poor."  by Kate Briquelet.  New York Post,    August 18, 2013.