Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

clade_nade OP t1_jbxvbkc wrote

Besides being politically counterproductive -- who exactly does he think is voting for progressive candidates in cities? -- this take is like forty years out of date. Young white people in urban centers, known for their... dislike of seasoned food?

62

garth_meringue t1_jby2b15 wrote

I guess that's one way to say you hate the St. Patrick's Day Parade.

32

whybother5000 t1_jby4odl wrote

I’m guessing he’s not including all the Asians that comprise like 30-40% of downtown in his POC construct. Too inconvenient.

And if he’s waiting for folks to “swim upstream” whatever that’s supposed to mean he’ll be in a retirement community in Florida (“Del Boca Vista II”) before that happens.

33

nasty_brutish_longer t1_jby4xow wrote

First-wave gentrifier waxes polemic about gentry. Neophyte politician takes bait.

We need people to effectively take on the HCDO. This isn't how you do it.

32

AccountantOfFraud t1_jbywyfk wrote

Its not that complicated.

> In New York, the last decade has seen members of this newer, relatively higher-income group of Chinese Americans align more often with Republican candidates, said Pei-te Lien, a professor of political science at the University of California, Santa Barbara.
>
>
>
> “I think what the Republican Party has done well is to make very stark for people that they are the party that’s going to keep people safe,” Mr. Albert said. “Whether they’re actually doing it or not is probably less relevant.”

Its just successful propaganda.

−1

robocub t1_jbz2c3z wrote

I’d rather build coalitions with different communities. But I don’t get where everyone is saying this is anti Asian. But I can see what is it saying.

0

ILoveHotDogsAndBacon t1_jbz3xg1 wrote

So the Asian community is just ignoring the former presidents kung flu comments and the violence that was associated with it? Not to mention the white supremicist language and actions from the right? As a minority myself I would never support the Republican Party as it is currently

−4

Economy-Cupcake808 t1_jbz4n3h wrote

More evidence that progressives are absolutely unhinged and people should not vote for them.

1

ianisms10 t1_jbz77se wrote

Correct. New York was really the only place the GOP did well in the midterms, largely due to the crime messaging. They flipped 2 blue districts on Long Island, picked up seats in the state legislature in the city, and had the closest gubernatorial election in almost 20 years.

3

nasty_brutish_longer t1_jbzbiic wrote

I doubt I have any that you aren't already familiar with: coalitions and vote drives and all the hopeless drudgery critical to democracy. No easy wins.

And I think that's harmed by tacit endorsements of divisiveness, however ill-defined the group it's aimed at.

14

TheBravadoBoy t1_jbzcksy wrote

White people should be able to take a joke about bland food imo. The real reason this tweet sucks is because it’s begging for disinvestment instead of proposing a responsible middle ground between NIMBYism and YIMBYism that embraces New Urbanism while protecting long term residents

13

Vertigo963 t1_jbzcvps wrote

It's a shame it needs to be said, but since almost no one else in the entire thread has said it, it's not OK to be bigoted against white people. This statement should disqualify Mr. Oseguera from any future political office.

10

zjuka t1_jbzcy3x wrote

So you’re saying you don’t have any plans for 2024? Good. Elena is a decent candidate, affiliation with you doesn’t do her any favors. Having said that, I generally agree with your position. I just don’t think you can pull off any changes for Jersey community.

Also: if you don’t have any plans to run in the future, why don’t you change your Twitter info to “Private citizen who is totally entitled to his opinion that will not affect NJ politics”? Your failed 2020 campaign website is still featured there.

16

enron_scandal t1_jbzfjwl wrote

What is the context of this? I’m completely out of the loop.

1

zjuka t1_jbzg6nt wrote

By all means. Everyone should be involved more. But your retweets are harmful to the cause. T#### is a private citizen and can say whatever the f they want. People still associate you with the Progressive movement and you make it look like a s**t flinging contest.

Love, voting taxpayer

11

drkensaccount t1_jbzgwam wrote

If he has a problem with gentrification, it should be in the fact that many poor and middle class people are displaced by it. Not that the affected cities "used to be cool".

17

oseguera2020 t1_jbzh929 wrote

You’ve made it abundantly clear you already had a negative opinion of me, so pardon if I don’t put much weight into the words of naysayers.

Love, a random person who doesn’t live in JC & isn’t running for office.

−8

sutisuc t1_jbzhjab wrote

He’s always been a clown. The funniest thing is I remember when he was trying to primary sires and clearly trying to come off like NJ’s AOC and people would ask him about it he’d get offended and bewildered by the question like that wasn’t EXACTLY what he was trying to do

7

No-Practice-8038 t1_jbzlfab wrote

They made inroads in places like San Francisco, Chicago, Boston, Philadelphia and other traditional democratic strong holds...even if they didn't win the midterms....but some how the Republican party isn't as dead as one would think. And we haven't even mentioned that they have made huge inroads with the Latin/Spanish communities.

2

JCComplainer t1_jbzmc12 wrote

Everything here is fine but it's not what would fix the situation (and what has happened since, to a degree): actually legalizing more housing, over the wishes of our friend, the OP of the tweet.

What's more, it has to happen on a regional and national level, against the resistance of "communities", i.e. a minority of busybody homeowners and parking-obsessed motorists who have endless energy and in many cases financial incentives to fight this.

EDIT: The fact is that Jersey City (and I realize you ran to represent more than just parts of JC) has done more than almost anywhere else in the country to support new public and social housing and the results have shown that this is still extremely problematic in practice.

The new Holland Gardens will still be trapped next to a traffic sewer which the governor is actually trying to make worse.

The city recently managed to turn a small mostly-Section 8 building into new Section 9 public housing- a building which only could be built in the first place because of JC's relatively permissive approach to development, and it was a complicated deal to do. We still have over 1,000 unused public housing units allowed and unbuilt.

Meanwhile, Jersey City has also been turning the old Honeywell site to a publicly-owned social housing complex- on the wrong side of a highway where there were no neighbors to complain. Where, other than driving, the main way to get out will be a light rail extension run by a hostile NJ Transit that does not care how slow trains get and has already cut frequencies dramatically since the HBLR opened.

20

AdComprehensive4529 t1_jbzpqpm wrote

Any negativity towards any group of people regardless of who they are is just I’ll mannered, disrespectful and gross, whether it be one specific group or many, it’s all rude and super frowned upon. Count me out

10

Vertigo963 t1_jbzr2ds wrote

Appreciate that a small number did condemn the tweet as racist, which is why I said "almost all." The vast majority of the comments here say nothing about the actual tweet, or use weak and general language (e.g., "clown"), or attempt to refocus on gentrification, populism, progressivism, and Asian-Americans.

4

ja_dubs t1_jbzsxvi wrote

Blatantly false. This is the first time I have heard of you. The tweet and your interactions in the thread are my first impression of you and they are strongly negative. This has nothing to do with policy and everything to do with your lack of decorum.

20

MossthisMossthatMoss t1_jbzth78 wrote

Born to two Polish immigrant parents in JC heights in the 80s. I love JC so much that I never left. I rather commute two hours to work every day than to live anywhere else. I don’t know why anyone would retweet this. Anyone.

24

Zealousideal_Rub5826 t1_jbzuap2 wrote

Not building new condos for "Melanin deprived YIMBYs" will force them to buy the run-down old housing stock that would otherwise go to the "wierdos", forcing the weirdos to move to Florida and Texas.

11

Brudesandwich t1_jbzufeu wrote

So the solution is to not build or renovate anything at all?

−1

LithiumFlow t1_jbzuptl wrote

Lol this is cringe as fuck, I voted for him in the primary last time but man shit like this really turns me off from so-called "progressives".

34

PixelSquish t1_jbzv5hm wrote

What a moron -

signed,

a very progressive Elizabeth Warren supporter.

8

JCYimby t1_jbzvaup wrote

I’m shocked that the “progressive” attorney for a Swiss bank that hides the money of wealthy people and withheld funds from Nazi victims has a dumb take on this.

13

clade_nade OP t1_jbzyqb8 wrote

I think we might have run into each other in person when canvassing for Joel Brooks. Or I might be misremembering. Anyway, Joel never talked like this (at least in public), and no serious candidate or organizer should, either.

31

Brudesandwich t1_jbzzacu wrote

I've all but blocked that account as well. You better believe they are on here as well. You can see the similarities of bow they write on here and on twitter. It's the same people who genuinely think they are doing something

7

zjuka t1_jc018p6 wrote

They are a private citizen and have as much right to be on here and on twitter as you and me, with all their dumbassery. Hector, on the other hand, is still associated by many with a Progressive cause and retweeting that dumbassey hurts the cause, which I don’t appreciate.

Now anyone that benefits from housing deregulation can screengrab this flaming pile of opinion and convince the undecided that Progressives are a bunch of militant ultra-leftists (not sure if that’s a right term) that try to set NJ on fire.

I personally know a lot of people that will be turned off from the Progressive cause, with all the good things that might come off it, if they think that this is what the movement is about.

6

oseguera2020 t1_jc01v1i wrote

I cherish & enjoy nuanced debates on policy, especially housing policy. But a forum where anything I write will be downvoted en mass doesn’t seem to be a good place for that sort of discussion.

I sincerely doubt this one Retweet changed anyone’s opinion of me, rather it provided those who already hated me a reason to justify their disdain.

−19

idontbs t1_jc0274o wrote

He didn’t make that statement, straw man argument here.

You can make your presence felt to garner public support BEFORE announcing you’re officially running for something. The whole purpose of that is to hopefully gain votes for your eventual campaign.

So… the comment you’re replying to was a fair statement and your response was a useless deflection.

0

zjuka t1_jc02lpa wrote

No, that’s the problem!

Most Progressives run on very reasonable and sustainable platform that includes most venerable populations but then a flaming clown attaches himself to the cause and starts flinging poop around on twitter.

Please at least consider looking into other progressive candidates’ platforms before you write them off as bunch of bozos.

8

idontbs t1_jc02q5d wrote

I mean, it changed mine.

I genuinely didn’t know who you were, and if it stayed that way probably would’ve voted for anyone running as a progressive democrat if I saw them on the ticket.

I really hope I’m wrong about you, but nothing you’re responding in this thread is giving me any sign that i am.

Then again, I’m just one person in JC, which might not matter to you.

Edit: formatting

19

oseguera2020 t1_jc045cp wrote

If you are open to finding out whether or not you were wrong about me, the offer to connect is always open. But I don’t think it’s fair or accurate to boil me & my advocacy down to one Retweet.

−15

paul-e-walnts t1_jc0494h wrote

The least surprising part of this is that the original tweet was from a white person . No one hates white people more than white progressives. But don’t worry, they’re one of the good ones.

20

WikiSummarizerBot t1_jc05qua wrote

UBS tax evasion controversies

>The Swiss investment bank and financial services company, UBS Group AG, has been at the center of numerous tax evasion and avoidance investigations undertaken by U.S., French, German, Israeli, and Belgian tax authorities as a consequence of their strict banking secrecy practices. The first major tax evasion controversy the bank was involved in occurred in 2007. Bradley Birkenfeld, an American banker stationed at UBS Switzerland AG, broke Swiss banking secrecy laws to disclose client information to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) alleging suspected tax evasion.

^([ )^(F.A.Q)^( | )^(Opt Out)^( | )^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)^( | )^(GitHub)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)

4

JeromePowellAdmirer t1_jc0e0ps wrote

Want to protect long term residents? Build dense housing instead of letting people build more one unit Bayonne Boxes that are net decreases in the housing stock.

In every community that's tried restrictive zoning, the end result has been mansions, not affordable housing. Jersey City still has tons of old buildings, if we ban new construction, everyone who would have moved to the new construction will move to the old homes and turn them into mansions instead.

6

objectimpermanence t1_jc0e7iy wrote

It’s interesting to see certain “progressives” employing the same immature tactics that Trump & Co. use when they have nothing substantive or useful to add to a conversation. He’s trying to be edgy like AOC, but he has zero substance.

It’s juvenile behavior and people who act like this should not be in positions of power.

18

JeromePowellAdmirer t1_jc0em6d wrote

He's also a fake progressive like Brian Stack (who is currently using gobs of taxpayer money to fight Hoboken on their plan to build housing that might slightly block some Union City millionaires NYC views). The machine likes him. He voted to ban all marijuana stores from opening in Union City and I have no doubt he'd extend that to all of Hudson County if allowed.

4

NiceThingsJC t1_jc0h01d wrote

No idea who this guy is or what he’s running (ran?) for, but this should give any prospective voters enough insight into the type of politician he could be if elected. Not the tweet - everyone tweets dumb shit, stop fucking crying - but the responses, victimhood, radio silence for years and then a frenzy of activity, and finishing it off with some more flame fanning to salve his clearly fragile ego. How many red flags can you give prospective constituents? Tweet it, own it, say it with your fucking chest, and stop trying to have a “nuanced conversation”. Retweeting red meat isn’t the medium for nuanced conversations, that’s what you do when you’re too lazy to jerk off.

2

Empty_Smoke_6249 t1_jc0h9vz wrote

Like, I can’t imagine telling an old Jewish person, “not okay to be bigoted to Germans,” like it’s not fully justified dislike. Don’t want to be disliked? Don’t be an enslaving, lynching, redlining, segregationist piece of shit. People want to move on and have all be forgotten with no reconciliation. Meanwhile, basic idiots are having weddings on plantations with cotton bouquets. Not being bigoted to white people is not because it is not “deserved”. It just solves nothing and hate get us no where. But a white person telling POC it’s not okay to dislike them is laughable as f*ck.

−3

JeromePowellAdmirer t1_jc0hl30 wrote

You're the one who bragged about your Stack endorsement. While you're here, care to tell us why you believe marijuana doesn't belong in Union City? You made public comments claiming to be in support of marijuana sales in Union City and then went ahead and voted to ban it anyways, just like Stack. The literal textbook machine politician play.

8

oseguera2020 t1_jc0izxp wrote

I was never endorsed by Brian Stack. He endorsed my opponent in 2020.

I also never voted against dispensaries in UC because I’m not on City Council. The UC Council voted on the ordinance to ban cannabis dispensaries.

As a member of the Planning Board my vote was that the ordinance was consistent with the City’s Master Plan, because it is consistent with the Master Plan, despite my personal feelings about the substance of the ordinance.

If you check the Board minutes I spoke at length about my opposition to banning dispensaries & gave an interview to the Hudson County View reiterating my views. I have always been pro cannabis legalization.

Article linked below:

https://hudsoncountyview.com/union-city-planning-board-approves-measure-prohibiting-marijuana-establishments/

−4

objectimpermanence t1_jc0m14i wrote

NIMBY progressives tend to think that things like rent control will protect the current resident in that situation.

Which is true, but it’s very short-term oriented. NIMBY policies tend to benefit incumbents at the expense for future generations.

Living in Manhattan or San Francisco can be surprisingly affordable if you happen to still live in the rent controlled or rent-stabilized apartment you moved into in 1992. But all the young artists and professionals who come after you get screwed because rent control and various other NIMBY policies make new construction less abundant and thus more expensive.

6

JeromePowellAdmirer t1_jc0mg0j wrote

On 3/19/21, since deleted: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E1sK1zzWUAAXJ-x?format=png&name=small

Why was it necessary to say all the stuff about "this is a very densely populated community" if you didn't want it to pass? I also don't agree that the majority of Union City residents (an extremely Democratic city) oppose marijuana legalization. The true majority would have supported (had it not been for suppression through machine power) and a no vote on that would have given them a voice.

8

Able-Space t1_jc0o8t2 wrote

I think there might be some confusion on what a “YIMBY” is and why it’s worth critiquing. here’s a good explanation, and below is an excerpt if you don’t want to read the whole thing:

The problem, YIMBYs believed, was that a housing shortage was driving up rent prices. They rarely, if ever, talked about corporate landlords charging outrageous rents or that developers were demolishing rent-controlled apartments to build market-rate, luxury housing or that local and state governments needed to build more affordable housing and preserve already existing affordable-housing stock, such as rent-controlled apartments.

YIMBYs simplistically concluded that the housing market needed to be flooded with more apartments, and that would ultimately drive down rents. They knew developers built almost exclusively luxury housing, and that was okay with them. YIMBYs insisted that more luxury housing would solve California’s housing affordability crisis. From the get-go, YIMBYs embraced trickle-down economics or what’s now called “trickle-down housing” policy. As middle- and working-class people have long known, trickle-down anything doesn’t work — except to make the rich richer.”

3

oseguera2020 t1_jc0oe4u wrote

You said earlier that I bragged about getting Stack’s endorsement, but you’re showing me a tweet where I said that he does retail politics better than other elected officials in Hudson County, which is just a statement of objective fact.

0

Zulumus t1_jc0siot wrote

As one of those blue collar Union City residents about to have his view blocked, I can guarantee you there aren’t many of these “millionaires” you’re dreaming up. Pretty normal people who just like to keep the little they have.

7

Vertigo963 t1_jc1axx7 wrote

For thousands of years, people of every racial and ethnic background have lived similar shameful histories, by creating states with unrepresentative and tyrannical governments, by subordinating and killing dissenters, freethinkers, and minorities, by waging wars of conquest against neighbors, and by keeping members of disfavored groups as slaves. This is the shared history of every human being and every community, regardless of skin color or ancestry. In my view, the only way to move past that history is to treat each other fairly, as individuals, in a new society that rejects the old prejudices and addresses the problems we have today. If doing that is laughable as f*ck, then so be it.

0

Empty_Smoke_6249 t1_jc1k6n7 wrote

We don’t live in a new society. We live in the same old prejudice society where white people own the majority of wealth as a direct result of past wrongs. The only way forward is to address those wrongs, not just play nice at an individual level.

−3

Vertigo963 t1_jc1nose wrote

Past wrongs are past and difficult if not impossible to address. Inequality of wealth is a current wrong that could be addressed by redistribution today, in a manner that helps every poor person, but the main barrier to that solution is racial chauvinism like yours that privileges certain poor people over others based on the color of their skin and creates endless conflict that keeps the oligarchy in charge.

0

Empty_Smoke_6249 t1_jc1s0lu wrote

Oh give me a break. It would be fairly easy (in the context of the US anyway) to address some very recent past wrongs that account for a significant portion of the existing wealth inequities across racial lines. I’m talking about the GI Bill and other post-WWII policies that helped build the white middle class - at the exclusion of Black Americans (including Black war veterans…I mean, just vile behavior). Similar legislation is possible. What’s lacking is the will power because, you guessed it, this is still a very white supremacist society and a Black underclass is needed for its survival. So keep that we are the world BS to yourself. We aren’t buying it.

0

Vertigo963 t1_jc1ykh2 wrote

I have strong factual disagreements with much of what you wrote, but I think the bottom line is that you cannot reasonably expect people from other racial groups to support programs that discriminate against them based on their skin color. If you ever want to work toward wealth equality for all Americans, regardless of skin color, let me know.

1

JCComplainer t1_jc20v90 wrote

"Trickle-down housing" is a term invented solely to attack the YIMBY case and conflates two unrelated things: "supply-side economics"--which is itself misnamed, because it is actually sending money to meet the demand-side of rich people, which was derided by its opponents as "trickle down"; as in, the money eventually trickles down to everyone else-and "filtering", which is the general observation that older housing becomes less valuable and thus more affordable, all else being equal.

Filtering is now derided by YIMBY opponents as "trickle-down housing", because the YIMBY point is that new "luxury" (a marketing term with no descriptive value other than "market-rate") housing will make older housing more affordable than it would be if that new luxury housing was not built. But on the scale of a city, this only can happen if the density of the new development is greater than before.

In the context of this original article, California did a great job in destroying cities with Proposition 13 which allowed homeowners and their inheritors to become incredibly rich and pay no taxes for massively increased land values, freeing them up to fight anything they didn't like forever with no negative consequences, while renters got screwed. They had to be screwed, not just because of a lack of rent control, but also because any new building of any sort has to pay fair taxes.

In fact the "fair taxes" aren't fair, because buildings reset to market rate taxation, because they are newly built or because they are substantially modified, have to pay for all the undertaxed old buildings. This fact doesn't directly account for high overall housing costs- zoning, punitive "impact fees" on new development, and other policies do that- but it does mean that any new unsubsidized development has to charge high rents to pencil out.

So the "greedy landlords"--and they are greedy, it's capitalism-- are subsidizing the righteous homeowners who stood against overdevelopment. Well, at least the ones who own newer buildings do.

It is now too late and California is hemorrhaging population thanks to their intransigence, so California has passed YIMBY laws to fix the problem over their objections. Reality has shown one of the premises of this article--the idea that developers want to build in low income neighborhoods because land is cheap--to be false. Quite the opposite: developers have filed builders remedy complaints in Huntington Beach, Santa Monica, and other relatively wealthy towns. This is what YIMBYs thought would happen, because we understand that land is a residual and paying more, for more expensive land, one time, is only a small part of a development that can command higher rents.

All the other stuff about governments needing to "build affordable housing" or evil corporate landlords charging high rents is a smokescreen. These corporate landlords do not want more housing to be built and they say so in their corporate disclosures! It is a material risk to their bottom lines. Avalon Bay, Kushner, etc do not want competition. As for government needing to build affordable housing, who pays for that? The response is usually, "the rich". And how are they to be taxed exactly? The city can only tax them if they live here. And where are they going to live? Either they live in new "luxury" apartments, or they live in existing mansions, or they buy a crappy old house and demolish it, often demolishing multifamily housing for one big house, which is what they're definitely going to do if you make building new "luxury" buildings impossible.

5

sutisuc t1_jc27zh8 wrote

LMAO this is even better considering they live in JC but have NYC shit all over their profile. Surprised they didn’t put “NY/NJ” as their location.

2

HudsonRiverMonster t1_jc2956f wrote

Héctor Oseguera is not a leader in the Progressive Democrats of Hudson County or the statewide organization and hasn't been for a long time.

2

Hank929 t1_jc29wmn wrote

I'm gonna be super honest. The amount of politicians, "influencers" and realtors with the messiest takes on the Jersey City Reddit, isn't astounding at all.

0

Supernatural_Canary t1_jc2f0iq wrote

Despite the fact that I’m a hardcore progressive—and like many others here, would be your natural ally—this retweet makes me not like you. I’m not saying this is fair, since I don’t know you, but first impressions matter.

Whether you like it or not, now you’re in a position of having to change my mind about you based on further actions and words. And it’s clear this is a widely shared sentiment. However, given your defensive (and at times reactionary) responses in this thread, my first impression of you stands.

If you can’t recognize the difficult position you’ve put yourself in with many Jersey City progressives because of your unnecessarily charged rhetoric and the seeming inability to recognize legitimate reasons that your potential allies may not like what you say and how you say it, then you’re not as skilled of a politician as you think you are.

6

JCComplainer t1_jc2yre0 wrote

Correct. YIMBYs believe that the root cause of high housing costs is a lack of supply and support policies to allow more housing to be built near places where they themselves live to reduce housing costs. For example, a core YIMBY position would be that single-family zoning is bad because it limits the the production of affordable apartments, and so a developer who wants to build an apartment building in a single-family zoned area should be allowed to do so.

This has become a byword for a certain kind of guy that the original poster refers to. For the record, I am in fact a straight white guy who rides a bike who moved from NYC, but the bike is 11 years old and it cost $600 at the time.

1

RAWisROLLIE t1_jc3hs8d wrote

unseasoned food : racial comedy :: airplane food : comedy

2

justanothersynthdork t1_jc78nuv wrote

Hey Hector. I proudly voted for you in the last election but this really isn't a good look. I agree with your policies but on-line trolling and taunting feels an awful lot like an ex-president of ours. Might I kindly recommend logging off for a bit. It's the internet. Every tweet isn't a battle cry and there are much better ways to use your time. Good luck.

1