Comments by birmy
Posted on July 28 at 10:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Notice how the thefts do not state the streets and is vague as to when and how often it occurred. I am not sure if this is a strategy of the Niskayuna Police Department or an effort by them not to show how much it is happening on their turf. Not trying to be rude or disrespectful to their profession in any way. One way to catch a crook might be publicizing all the incidents to make neighbors aware that the person 4 doors down whom they've never spoken to just got hit so they can be extra vigilant.
Posted on July 21 at 8:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Nice pro charter school article. So in select charter schools the behavior of impoverished students is reflected by the fact that "36 percent of the selected 'charter' kids engaged in at least one of 11 risky behaviors, compared with 42 percent of the other teens." Then the article states, "Math and English scores after freshman year were higher in selected 'charter' kids than the other teens." Not sure why the AP doesn't list the scores? (Higher could mean 1% difference.) We can infer the scores were likely not too different from charter versus public/low performing because if it was startling difference they would of listed that fact. Very next sentence. "Moreover, just 9 percent of the selected kids dropped out of school, versus almost 1 in 4 of the others." That might mean a difference of 9 percent versus 22 percent (almost 1 in 4). Without any hard data to go on but vague things like "almost 1 in 4" and "scores were higher" we are left with no real data to chew on. Did the students who did not dropout in charter schools graduate in 4 years? Did the students who did not dropout have access to vocational skill studies in addition to regular liberal arts curriculum? We just don't know - but the absence of stats and the slant of the article is pretty clear. Makes me wonder who wrote the article… AP likely picked it up from a pro charter school source.
Posted on July 15 at 7:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)
From my experience, with a re-assessment in the Capital Region, the newer construction homes which are assessed at around their new construction cost start getting some relief from their older neighbors who start paying more... But beware… The larger and older homes (which have not been reassessed in a decade plus) of 3,000 square feet and more pay around $100-$105 a square foot (after the reassessment) and the smaller homes jump to around $140-$145 a square foot. This was described to me by an associate of GAR (reassessment company) as follows. "Do you know when you go to COSTCO and you buy bigger boxes of items such as cereal or what have you - you get a discount. The same principle applies to homes." So keep in mind - the people who bought smaller sized homes will pay more per square foot than the people who could afford larger homes. So the "smaller home" people will subsidize the cost of the people living in larger homes once the reassessment is complete. Not sure how the business reassessment works other than they have a completely different price per square foot that they pay. As far as Subway goes - looks like that $5 sub is being paid for by Schenectady taxpayers. :) They got a good deal with an assessment lower than what it cost to build.
Posted on July 14 at 7:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I wonder where the bank get the money to pay for this? Oh, I forgot. All the banks were recapitalized by giving the depositor almost next to nothing in interest for how many years in a row now? Guaranteed money maker for the banks - you get nothing for deposits and we loan you money at 3,4,5,6,7 percent or more depending on type of loan! This is a drop in the bucket for the banks… no one ever went to jail over this ether.
Posted on July 12 at 7:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Let's not jump to conclusions folks. The supervisor might of said what she did to the auditors to gain publicity for this incident which she is trying to stop through best practices going forward (such as not allowing for you to earn overtime when your home sick). Secondly, the 2 highway workers nearing retirement might not have been paid for unused leave hours and once they found out they felt sick about it.
Posted on July 10 at 4:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"Saint Rose’s own internal analysis reveals that shift, Russell said, with the percentage of tenure-track professors dropping from about 95 percent in 1995 to about 45 percent in 2009."
I am all for the adjuncts having more earning power but with the cost of private colleges reaching about $200,000 plus for 4 years it makes you wonder where all the money goes?
Posted on July 9 at 11:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Does every mall in the world have 1 entrance with a ka-zillion crashes? Or is there something wrong with this entrance?
Posted on July 2 at 11:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Great story. I wonder what public servants and private employers make it mandatory for their employees to learn such life savings skills.
Posted on July 1 at 7:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)
State workers, firemen, policeman, county workers, teachers and the like of public sectors workers so far as I know have "last in, first out" rules. Tenure is basically the same as civil service protection or leaving the police academy. In both cases YOU CANNOT be fired without due process and LOTS of legal wrangling.
The honest truth is I know a few people WITH KIDS who have moved from low tax areas to the Capital Region and they all have said our taxes went up 3-4 times but the schools are 10X better than where they came from so they don't mind. Reading local newspapers may not give people an idea of how TERRIBLE schools are in other states.
I love this article. Basically it says 'FIRE THE OLDER TEACHERS" as the younger ones have more ENERGY! Does a young fireman have more energy than an older one? To me, maybe we should just start firing all the older workers in this country who are making more money. But we have to do it across the board. We have to do it to all the public sector jobs I mentioned. Let's not single out teaching. Its time to fire the un-energetic old people as the Gazette article states,
Posted on June 25 at 10:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Very true Cracker!