August1991 Posted April 13, 2014 Report Posted April 13, 2014 I just spent a few hours in Manhatten, Queens (driving to JFK) and because I was lost, the Bronx. I like New York. The view from the Whitestone Bridge or Throgs Neck (did both, $7.50 - ugh) exists nowhere else on this planet. (For those curious of geology, because of glaciers and bedrock, the really tall buildings are at the low end of Manhatten or in midtown ) ---- Manhatten below 60th street (lotsa tourists) is one thing, but New York City is something else. NYC is divided on ethnic lines. Latinos in one area, blacks in another. Because of my GPS error, I wound up in "The Cloisters" - a white, first world enclave. ====== To me, New York is 1920s Berlin whereas Montreal is Vienna or Lvov in the 1890s. Quote
jbg Posted April 13, 2014 Report Posted April 13, 2014 (edited) New York rocks. It was once the capital of the U.S. until that was traded away in a typical political deal bad for New York. The city thrived anyway and has gone on to become the capital of the world. Edited April 13, 2014 by jbg Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
bleeding heart Posted April 14, 2014 Report Posted April 14, 2014 NY is an awesome city, I agree. Haven't been there in 20 years, but the memory is sweet. Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
August1991 Posted May 15, 2014 Author Report Posted May 15, 2014 (edited) New York rocks. It was once the capital of the U.S. until that was traded away in a typical political deal bad for New York. The city thrived anyway and has gone on to become the capital of the world. Rocks? To me, the question is whether New York City is "sustainable" - to use a modern term. IOW, in 2114 - one hundred years from now, will New York City still "rock", to use your term. Lvov 1914 compared to Lvov 2014? It sadly wasn't sustainable - and while its architecture is now attractive, Lvov doesn't.rock as it did 100 years ago. Edited May 15, 2014 by August1991 Quote
jbg Posted May 15, 2014 Report Posted May 15, 2014 Rocks? To me, the question is whether New York City is "sustainable" - to use a modern term. IOW, in 2114 - one hundred years from now, will New York City still "rock", to use your term. Lvov 1914 compared to Lvov 2014? It sadly wasn't sustainable - and while its architecture is now attractive, Lvov doesn't.rock as it did 100 years ago. Lvov (or Lemberg, or Lwow, or Lviv, whatever of its many names and nationalities you use) was never the New York City of Europe. While it had many ethnicities they have historically hated each other. The city changed national hands about 4 or 5 times within 100 years and the surrounding countries have concentrated more on fighting than progressing the region. New York City's history is quite the opposite. In fact, New York City has materially revived from its 1970's-era funk. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
August1991 Posted May 21, 2014 Author Report Posted May 21, 2014 Lvov (or Lemberg, or Lwow, or Lviv, whatever of its many names and nationalities you use) was never the New York City of Europe. But in a sense, Lvov was the 19th century version of 21st century New York City: a multilingual, multicultural metropolis. Or maybe Miami is a better American example. The question is whether such cities are sustainable. Lvov apparently wasn't, sadly. Quote
jbg Posted May 22, 2014 Report Posted May 22, 2014 (edited) But in a sense, Lvov was the 19th century version of 21st century New York City: a multilingual, multicultural metropolis. Or maybe Miami is a better American example. The question is whether such cities are sustainable. Lvov apparently wasn't, sadly. At least Lemberg, Lwow, Lvov Lviv was near the intersection of borders with greedy rulers, royal or otherwise. New York City doesn't have that peril. Edited May 22, 2014 by jbg Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
overthere Posted May 22, 2014 Report Posted May 22, 2014 To me, the question is whether New York City is "sustainable Isn't New York going to be underwater soon? Quote Science too hard for you? Try religion!
jbg Posted May 23, 2014 Report Posted May 23, 2014 Isn't New York going to be underwater soon?Not likely. The closest we came to that was in 1821 (yes you read right). An unnamed hurricane took a direct hit on NYC and the East and Hudson Rivers merged from Bowling Green (the southernn tip) to Canal Street, which is about 1 3/4 kms. north. Even Irene, in 2011 which may have been the next direct hitter (some controversy over whether it was still a hurricane and where it's direct hit was), didn't come close. Sandy threw up a huge storm surge but even that didn't merge the rivers. Nice try for the climate alarmists. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Wilber Posted May 23, 2014 Report Posted May 23, 2014 (edited) Nice try for the climate alarmists. Oh, it's coming, not immediately but it's coming. Edited May 23, 2014 by Wilber Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
Bonam Posted May 23, 2014 Report Posted May 23, 2014 Oh, it's coming, not immediately but it's coming. Pretty sure that regardless of any possible sea level rise, New York will raise the needed funds to build adequate barriers to prevent it from being "underwater". Quote
Wilber Posted May 23, 2014 Report Posted May 23, 2014 Pretty sure that regardless of any possible sea level rise, New York will raise the needed funds to build adequate barriers to prevent it from being "underwater". At the rate the US government gets anything done, they better get started pretty soon. So should the rest of us .http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/17/climate-change-antarctica-glaciers-melting-global-warming-nasa http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2635170/Antarctic-ice-losses-doubled-159-GIGATONNES-thats-430-000-Empire-State-Buildings-year-satellite-reveals.html Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
guyser Posted May 23, 2014 Report Posted May 23, 2014 Pretty sure that regardless of any possible sea level rise, New York will raise the needed funds to build adequate barriers to prevent it from being "underwater".Like in New Orleans and Army Corp of Engineers? Well, if NYC wants to, lets hope they hire the dutch.....or the Italians. They appear to know what they are doing Quote
Wilber Posted May 23, 2014 Report Posted May 23, 2014 Like in New Orleans and Army Corp of Engineers? Well, if NYC wants to, lets hope they hire the dutch.....or the Italians. They appear to know what they are doing The Dutch and Italians will be too busy trying to save their own asses. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
guyser Posted May 23, 2014 Report Posted May 23, 2014 (edited) The Dutch and Italians will be too busy trying to save their own asses.They have a huge head start tho. Edited May 23, 2014 by Guyser2 Quote
Wilber Posted May 23, 2014 Report Posted May 23, 2014 (edited) They have a huge head start tho. In as much of the Netherlands is below sea level already, yes, but their systems will all have to be raised to accommodate higher levels and new systems to protect areas that weren't threatened before. Some of the worlds largest cities are at near sea level already. Coastal counties in the US have 39 % of the country's population and generate nearly half its GDP. Edited May 23, 2014 by Wilber Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
jbg Posted May 24, 2014 Report Posted May 24, 2014 Oh, it's coming, not immediately but it's coming.The thread is supposed to be about NYC, not global warming. My point was only that NYC has experienced issues with its rivers before and it seems to still be doing quite well. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
jbg Posted May 24, 2014 Report Posted May 24, 2014 At least Lemberg, Lwow, Lvov Lviv was near the intersection of borders with greedy rulers, royal or otherwise. New York City doesn't have that peril.Also Lemberg, Lwow, Lvov Lviv never approached being even a national, much less a world capital. As an aside, I am reading a book about Robert E. Lee. When Washington DC was almost occupied by rebel forced during the Civil War, it was New York City that was slated to become the temporary repository of government. In fact, many documents and most removable property was taken to New York for just such an event, and safekeeping. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Wilber Posted May 24, 2014 Report Posted May 24, 2014 The thread is supposed to be about NYC, not global warming.My point was only that NYC has experienced issues with its rivers before and it seems to still be doing quite well. I didn't make a remark about "climate alarmists". Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
-TSS- Posted May 24, 2014 Report Posted May 24, 2014 I must admit that not having visited NYC will remain a serious void in my life-experience. Quote
jbg Posted May 26, 2014 Report Posted May 26, 2014 I must admit that not having visited NYC will remain a serious void in my life-experience.So why not fill it and come? Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.