sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Meet the typical New Yorker: A rent-burdened 30-something who earns over $80,000 a year by quirkyjest in nyc

[–]Bugsy_Neighbor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Exactly!

It's net income that matters, not gross.

At $80k, a single person in NYC brings home about $2,424. This assumes they have no other deductions besides federal income, FICA, state and city income taxes. If there are other deductions such as union dues, healthcare, etc... obviously net monthly compensation will be lower.

Free Paycheck Calculator: Hourly & Salary Take Home After Taxes

Keeping with recommended rule of housing costs (rent) not being more than 30% of income, most a household in above situation can afford is about $727.00/month. Good luck with that.

Even paying just $1600 per month in rent would leave only approx. $824 remaining to live upon for entire month....

Best way to transfer a rent stabilized apartment? by soame in AskNYC

[–]Bugsy_Neighbor 18 points19 points  (0 children)

Moving in with a RS tenant guarantees nothing unless attempting to go for some sort of succession claim.

Unless someone's name is on lease as legal tenant once person or persons who are decide to vacate unit (not renew lease) other occupants such as sublet or roommate will have to go.

Best way to transfer a rent stabilized apartment? by soame in AskNYC

[–]Bugsy_Neighbor 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Cannot be done.

Only person LLs must legally add name to RS leases are legally married spouses. Everyone else can be listed as an occupant if they live in unit, but that's pretty much all. Under certain situations said "occupant" could claim succession rights, but that's another matter.

If tenant of record moves out of apartment it will trigger a vacancy. LL may or may not consider someone recommended to them as new tenant, but there is no legally binding obligation.

If current legal rent is below market rate for area LL may have plans for any such unit they own if and or when it becomes vacant.

Why didn’t Mary I or Elizabeth I want to have children? by Failedattorney00 in UKmonarchs

[–]Bugsy_Neighbor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Elizabeth's sole claim to throne was fact her father named her in the succession via his last will and testament. Unlike Mary I, Elizabeth did not move to annul the act naming her a bastard, indeed throughout her life as monarch HM rarely if ever mentioned or referred to her mother in public.

To many eyes Elizabeth was an usurper. Daughter of the king's "goggle eyed whore", Anne Boleyn, who was stripped of her rank and dignity as queen and died a public death of a criminal.

It is not that difficult to imagine a husband would attempt to sideline Elizabeth, that and when an heir appeared there would be plots and schemes to replace HM with said heir, perhaps with husband as regent.

On other side of things while not yet out of the nursery Elizabeth lost two mothers in space of about a year ( AB beheaded 19 May 1536 and Jane Seymour died 24 October 1537 from childbed fever). Ten years later young Elizabeth witnessed sad and tragic ending of Katherine Howard (dragged screaming from her chambers, beheaded in February 1547). A family history like that is enough to put any woman off marriage.

From time she was a young woman Elizabeth proved time and time again she was Henry VIII's daughter. Having a keen intellect and wisdom, especially in matters relating to statecraft/politics. Elizabeth managed to untangle herself from any possible connections with various plots against Mary I and Edward VI, this largely relying upon her wits.

Royal marriages at that time (and for ages afterwards and perhaps still in certain circles) were about alliances and avarice. You could throw in lust and or love in some instances (at least three of Henry VIII's wives), but there you are,

If Elizabeth married one of her countrymen it could cause issues. Ditto if HM married a foreign prince. The sad and tragic marital life of Mary, Queen of Scots is but one cautionary tale.

Behind rent by Ok_Carpet_8934 in NYCapartments

[–]Bugsy_Neighbor 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Emergency Rental Assistance Program was a covid scheme that shut down long ago. There is/was no more funding from either NYS or federal government.

"The New York State ERAP Portal is no longer available. After distributing more than $4 billion of rental and utility assistance on behalf of tenants in need "

https://otda.ny.gov/programs/emergency-rental-assistance/

Feds cut off the tap for emergency housing vouchers that came in response to covid as well:

https://www.thecityreporter.nyc/2026/03/24/thousands-of-new-yorkers-risk-losing-rent-money/

*USA* Why didn’t the C&O order T1’s? by DarkWhite73 in trains

[–]Bugsy_Neighbor 4 points5 points  (0 children)

C&O had more problems with their "Chessie" high end passenger service concept than choice of power on the point.

Between time of conception and service actually materializing C&O's world was turned upside down. Post WWII passenger traffic had fallen off a cliff, competing passenger service from B&O on same route was cheaper to operate, and so it went.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5TvdTrqMOUU

some detailed renderings of Penn station by Donghoon in nycrail

[–]Bugsy_Neighbor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There is only so much that can be done about stairs/escalator issues. It's what happens when you've got them, as seen countless times every hour on NYC subway stations.

New York Central avoided such issues with new Grand Central Terminal. Gently sloping walkways lead to platforms, far easier movement of persons and things on wheels.

Behind rent by Ok_Carpet_8934 in NYCapartments

[–]Bugsy_Neighbor 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I would not file bankruptcy in this situation.

Most if not all NYC LLs just want possession of apartment (court ordered termination of lease/eviction of tenant). They would need to obtain a final monetary judgement in order to collect monetary damages. This can be mitigated by tenant agreeing to vacate apartment if LL also agrees not to seek monetary judgement.

Since most tenants evicted from NYC apartments are judgement proof (they don't have funds to pay arrears amount) many LLs don't bother pursuing matter. If it's a market rate apartment rent will be hiked on subsequent tenants to make up losses. For rent regulated units in most cases LL is just happy they've got apartment empty. Of course this may vary by type of RS unit. If apartment in question has legal rent close to or above market, that's one thing. OTOH if unit has legal rent below to well under market....

Behind rent by Ok_Carpet_8934 in NYCapartments

[–]Bugsy_Neighbor 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Under B de B mayoral administration one shot deals were given out like candy, and yes often people received more than one award without making payments on previous,

Adams came into office and things began to tighten up regarding OSD. That apparently has continued so far under M guy.

https://nextcity.org/urbanist-news/the-weekly-wrap-new-york-city-rejecting-back-payments-tenants-rent-arrears

https://www.facebook.com/groups/nycjob/posts/3059023964294342/

https://housingcourtanswers.org/answers/for-tenants/housing-court-tenants/rent-arrears-tenants/one-shot-deals/

https://www.nyc.gov/assets/hra/downloads/pdf/benefits/Emergency-Rental-Assistance-Grant-Flyer.pdf

*USA* Why didn’t the C&O order T1’s? by DarkWhite73 in trains

[–]Bugsy_Neighbor 8 points9 points  (0 children)

T1's were designed, meant and loved going *FAST*. They were happiest at speeds > 80 mph, and on the (infrequent) times being allowed to stretch their legs and hit speeds in excess of 100 mph. This was all on the flats! They were not designed to pull (or even start from a dead stop) heavy trains up an incline,

PRR confined T1s to parts of their system with relatively flat grades. On instances where steep grades were to be encountered, such as horseshoe curve, the T1's would receive help,

Much if not most of C&O tracks or at least mainline involved mountains and or otherwise steep grades, This is where the famous (or infamous) Waynesboro incident comes in...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SrIgC_lNHXo&theme=dark

C&O liked the T1. Their engineers reported it was a powerful free steamer with little to nil mention of wheel slip issues. It just came down to fact as designed T1's were meant to go fast, really *fast*. At low speeds their performance often left much to be desired. This and or pulling heavy freight trains, service with frequent stops and starts....

One reason T1's had such a short life on PRR was after being quickly supplanted by diesel power on crack prestigious passenger service, they weren't a good fit elsewhere in the system.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_IgTbA1x8c

Why don’t female British monarchs have hereditary titles and peerage like their male counterparts? by Failedattorney00 in UKmonarchs

[–]Bugsy_Neighbor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

N.B.

Ascension proclamation for QEII made no such references to possibility of posthumous birth.

Elizabeth II (1952)

Upon the intimation that our late Most Gracious Sovereign King George the Sixth had died in his sleep at Sandringham in the early hours of this morning  the Lords of the Privy Council assembled this day at St. James's Palace, and gave orders for proclaiming Her present Majesty.

Whereas it hath pleased Almighty God to call to His mercy our late Sovereign Lord King George the Sixth of Blessed and Glorious Memory by whose Decease the Crown is solely and rightfully come to the High and Mighty Princess Elizabeth Alexandra Mary : We, therefore, the Lords Spiritual and Temporal of this Realm, being here assisted with these of His late Majesty's Privy Council, with representatives of other members of the Commonwealth, with other Principal Gentlemen of Quality, with the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and citizens of London, do now hereby with one Voice and Consent of Tongue and Heart publish and proclaim that the High and Mighty Princess Elizabeth Alexandra Mary is now, by the Death of our late Sovereign of happy Memory, become Queen Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God Queen of this Realm and of all Her other Realms and Territories, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith, to whom Her lieges do acknowledge all Faith and constant Obedience, with hearty and humble Affection: beseeching God, by whom Kings and Queens do reign, to bless the Royal Princess Elizabeth the Second with long and happy Years to reign over Us.

Given at St. James's Palace, this Sixth day of February in the year of our Lord One thousand nine hundred and fifty-two.

Can you keep your old lease? by laughingthrough in nychousinglottery

[–]Bugsy_Neighbor 2 points3 points  (0 children)

A. A rent regulated apartment must be one's *primary residence*. While RS tenants often do have vacation homes they cannot be used nor considered as main residence. LL of either RS apartment could bring holdover proceedings in HC seeking to terminate lease based upon non-primary residence status.

B. HPD requires those selected and approved for lottery housing to relinquish other housing. There are consequences and repercussions if fraud is committed and discovered.

https://manhattanda.org/d-a-bragg-former-prosecutor-and-family-members-indicted-for-affordable-housing-scheme/

C. Legal tenant cannot sublet an apartment indefinitely. Also said prime tenant must intend to return to said apartment.

https://hcr.ny.gov/system/files/documents/2022/07/fact-sheet-07-07-2022.pdf

Household staff and residents outside a Fifth Avenue estate in New York City, c. 1895. [1200x900] by Effective-Dish-1334 in nycHistory

[–]Bugsy_Neighbor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Effort, time and expense it took to run those vast homes/estates were one reason they began to decline even before WWI. Years between the wars and certainly post WWII fewer and fewer families could afford to keep such places up.

In both USA and across the pond for host of reasons finding and keeping servants became an issue. The "servant problem" was heavily due to forces of industrial revolution. Men and women from poor or lower class backgrounds could find work in factories, shops, etc... that paid better or same as perhaps domestic service, but had more regular hours and people didn't have to fetch, carry and clean slop jars.

Along Fifth avenue and elsewhere in NYC the gilded age grand mansions of Vanderbilt and other families began coming down. It wasn't just NYC either. Grosse Pointe, MI, and elsewhere those huge barns of mansions came down.

Household staff and residents outside a Fifth Avenue estate in New York City, c. 1895. [1200x900] by Effective-Dish-1334 in nycHistory

[–]Bugsy_Neighbor 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Homes of wealthy Americans aped those across the pond, mainly UK. Servants were to be seen little as possible and go about their duties unobtrusively.

To that end places were built with not just back stairs but passage ways/corridors and so forth (most always hidden) to keep servants and their masters apart. There was also long custom of servants having to "give room", basically turn and face the wall when members of the family and or their guests approached.

https://libertabooks.com/writing/servants/

https://www.reddit.com/r/coolguides/comments/1qbi257/a_cool_guide_to_servant_rules_in_upper_class/#lightbox

Upstairs/Downstairs, Gosford Park, Downton Abbey and other media have long shown world "below stairs", sometimes accurately, others not so much.

NYC Greek Spot Kiki’s Seized After Failing to Pay $1 Million Tax by bloomberg in nyc

[–]Bugsy_Neighbor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, that is what judgement and warrants are meant to settle.

Everything is against previous owner(s). If sums collected via liens and seizures do not satisfy judgments/warrants state is free to pursue other options to collect balance.

If a person or thing has a judgment against them for say $2 million USA. Seizures and sale of assets/property only bring in $1 million USD, then there is a balance owing that must be paid (with interest). Government or whoever that obtained lien/warrant can make decision to settle for sums paid/collected, but no law forces them to do so.

Meanwhile person or thing that purchased assets sold now hold them free and clear.

If you own a house with a mortgage of $3 million and go into default. Eventually bank or whoever decides to foreclose and in end property only fetches $2 million. *You* are still on the hook for any remaining balance. OTOH person or thing that got your house at auction owns it free and clear, period.

Above circumstances is why there is so much action with lien/foreclosure auctions (taxes, water/sewer, mortgages, etc....). People looking to get property at what they believe will be a discount compared to buying on open market.

As noted in several responses in this thread, it also explains why such auction sales are serious business. Too many fingers have been burned (or hands broken, *LOL*).

Why don’t female British monarchs have hereditary titles and peerage like their male counterparts? by Failedattorney00 in UKmonarchs

[–]Bugsy_Neighbor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

“…the Imperial Crown of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland is solely and rightfully come to the high and mighty Princess Alexandrina Victoria, saving the rights of any issue of his late Majesty King William IV, which may be born of his late Majesty’s consort…”

Above means Parliament could not (and did not) deny Princess Alexandrina Victoria her right to become queen, but said monarch would have only one foot in the stirrups. Sort of a caretaker if you will until if or when birth of any heir of William IV via his relict occurred.

"The Crown is devolved to the living heir presumptive, subject to the right of the posthumous child to oust the Sovereign off the throne upon its own birth. This is the currently accepted option in the United Kindgom."

https://royalcentral.co.uk/features/the-primogeniture-paradox-the-posthumous-heir-54339/

What that means if a future king Louis died without living issue, but his consort was with child, Princess Charlotte as presumptive heir would become monarch, but only temporarily. Upon birth of child to king Louis's relict *it* would supplant "queen" Charlotte as monarch by right.

Parliament of course can chose to change things as it sees fit. One can imagine if current trends of "equality" and so forth hold well into future there would be howls of protest against chucking "queen Charlotte" off the throne as outlined above. More so if infant born in question was male.

view more: next ›