Space Shuttle Enterprise Flies Over New York City April 27, 2012

Their Cheatin' Hearts

Big news! 

Huge news! 

Monumental news!

All of New York tonight is abuzz with this earth shattering development!

There is a website which you may have heard of (but that will remain nameless here) that makes it possible for people to meet other people who are married or in relationships to have "discrete affairs." Anyway, this very reputable site has just released a report indicating which towns and neighborhoods in the metro areas contains its highest per capita membership. And the neighborhoods in NYC with the highest number of people who belong to this "cheaters site" are, roughly in order: Park Slope, the Upper East Side, Forest Hills, Tribeca, Douglaston, Riverdale, and Howard Beach. 

Basically, with the exception of Howard Beach, the most affluent neighborhoods in NYC contains the most cheaters. At least, according to this "report," they do. 

What to make of this? 

Part of it is obvious. Wealthier people are more likely to be able to spend their money on silly things like this website. They are more likely not only to be able to afford the membership but all of the necessary accouterments of adultery: hotel rooms, secret cell phones, velvet robes, oils and lotions, negligees, whips and chains, masks and dog collars, riding crops -- you know, the basics. They can afford to hire babysitters to watch their kids while they're out doing their illicit banging. They probably work jobs that require them to travel and can use the excuse of "Oh honey, I'm gonna have to be out of town for a few days ..." Heck, part of it just technical: wealthier people are more likely to have high speed Internet connections in the first place!

Also, wealthier people like to do things in a more orderly, verifiable way -- like finding their lovers on a website designed for anonymity.

Part of me just thinks this is bogus. How does membership on a website really determine which neighborhoods have the most cheaters? I'm sure there are lots of people in poorer parts of town who cheat but do it the old fashioned way -- namely, bang their friends' girlfriends or people they pick up in bars. Something like adultery is probably impossible to quantify.

But here's the thing: this is not news. This isn't close to being news. This is a non-story story. It's nonsense. 

So why is it a huge news story? Why are dopes like me even blogging about it? 'Cause it's titilating. 'Cause it's easy to understand. 'Cause it's (literally) sexy. 'Cause it's a diversion.

And so much more interesting than the depressing state of the world. 

Law and Money in NYC

It's not exactly a secret that money plays a huge role in unbalancing the scales of American justice. 

It's easier for wealthy and powerful people to shield themselves from the legal consequences of their gross misdeeds while poor and powerless people get the book thrown at them for even the most minor of infractions. Every time there's a high profile criminal trial, it's always noted by the public and the press how rich defendants buy their acquittals with high priced lawyers. Every time a big corporation wins a liability case, it's usually noticed how their armies of lawyers win the day. 

Justice isn't blind -- it's for sale.

But those are only the high profile, sensational stories. How money and power really perverts justice is in the day to day, routine administration of it. When affluent people are arrested, they can easily bail themselves out. When poor people are arrested, they can't. When affluent people are arrested, their family can get a lawyer ASAP who can get the charges dismissed. Poor people are dependent on overworked public defenders who can't. Affluent people have the means to fight charges. Poor people don't. So affluent people are much more likely to wriggle out of legal problems while poor people are very often forced to take pleas. 

It's an awful, unfair situation. And it's alive and well in NYC. Read about it here.    

Art World Wars

The New York City art world is a big scary place.

If you're an artist, it's basically impossible to make a living from your art but it is possible, for the very lucky few, to make a fortune. For an artist in this town, if you want a career, you have to be good at your work but also good at business. You have to know people, get to know more people, network, get your work displayed and seen by the right people, and stay ahead of the trends. And your work has to stand out, be special, and resonate with collectors and art fans. 

Needless to say, it's tall order to have a career in the arts in this town.

I have a couple of relatives who are career artists and they are amazing at their work and have had success in the NYC art world. But whenever I talk to them about it, they tell me how hard it is to create and sustain a career. 

A couple of articles this week shed light on this very subject.  

New York magazine has a big special issue on how to make it in the art world in NYC. It's an unbelievably complicated, almost treacherous terrain. Obviously the thing that makes it so complex is the vast amounts of money sloshing around the art world in this town. Collectors are paying record amounts of money for art but there are also a record number of artists out there, hustling. The competition is fierce. The money is (potentially) huge. The egos are just as huge. 

Game on.

And money, ego and history along with downright stupidity are what lead to the demise, last year, of the historic Knoedler gallery. This was, believe it or not, the oldest gallery in NYC, older than the Met. The Knoedler essentially invented the NYC art world and lasted for 165 years -- but was brought low by selling forged artwork. It's an unbelievable story -- and shows just how complicated the art world in NYC is. Vanity Fair does an amazing investigation into what lead to the demise of the oldest art institution in NYC. 

It's a tragedy wrapped around a farce.

For once, great news

The week is young but already it's shaping up as one of the most consequential weeks in the history of NYC real estate ever. 

Consequential, mostly, for what won't be happening.

Namely, rent stabilization is here to stay and Walmart is staying out.

First, the Supreme Court declined to hear a case brought by some Manhattanites seeking to overturn the state's rent stabilization rules. That means that over one million New Yorkers who live in rent stabilized homes are no longer in danger that their rents will skyrocket. It's hard to overstate what a big deal this is. This city's middle class is already dying but rent stabilization is one of the few things propping it up. Had the court heard the case and overturned the law, the havoc this would wreck on the city's middle class would have been devastating. Mercifully it won't happen. Personally, I was surprised: this Supreme Court is the most conservative in almost a hundred years and has shown no hesitancy in overturning laws that it finds ideologically distasteful. This has been the most pro-business, pro-rich, anti-worker, anti-poor Supreme Court ever so the fact that they decided to leave these rules intact is quite pleasant. For once, this Supreme Court made me happy -- as it should for the whole city.

Second, the stench of Walmart is probably guaranteed not to waft into this city anytime soon. The retail giant has been busted for bribery in Mexico. This scandal is just in the nascent stage and it's hard to know how big it'll get or what the fallout will be. However, the argument that Walmart is good for this city is now harder and harder to make. Why should this city give the green light for a criminal organization to set up shop in our town and destroy small businesses? Even it's proponents can't defend the company. And, boy, the proponents should try hard. A few times that I've blogged about Walmart, I got "comments" from "readers" saying how great Walmart is for NYC. These were probably paid hacks spouting some company generated talking points. I wonder if such "comments" will be forthcoming now.

So this has been an historic and historically good week for real estate in NYC. Homeowners and small business owners got a break. Let the good times roll!!

Can't Beat the Rent

Beating the rent is one of the fundamental characteristics of any New Yorker. Paying as little as possible for as much space as possible is built into the DNA of all the people who call this city home. 

So how about living in a mansion for free?

Believe it or not, some people do it. There are a very, very lucky few people manage to land gigs as caretakers of historic homes all over the city. The basic gig: they get to live in these places rent free so long as they make sure the homes are properly maintained and sometimes give guided tours. Sure, they are paying rent in terms of labor (being a caretaker is a job) for which they don't get paid, but having a huge place to live in the densest city in the country ain't a bad deal.

Needless to say, as someone who loves NYC and history and would love to live in a big house rent free, yours truly is jealous. 

Let's just hope that, for these caretakers, ghosts of the previous characters don't urge them to kill their families. Remember this dialogue from The Shining?

Jack: Mr. Grady, you were the caretaker here.  Grady: I'm sorry to differ with you, sir, but you are the caretaker. You've always been the caretaker. I should know, sir, I've always been here. Did you know, Mr. Torrance, that your son is attempting to bring an outside party into this situation? Did you know that? ...  Jack: It's his mother. She, uh … interferes.  Grady: Perhaps … they need a good talking to, if you don't mind my saying so. Perhaps … a bit more. My girls, sir, they didn't care for the Overlook at first. One of them actually stole a pack of matches and tried to burn it down. But I corrected them, sir. And when my wife tried to prevent me from doing my duty, I … corrected her.    

Awesome scene.

And talking about care taking and NYC real estate, some people are really taking care of their buildings roofs. Check out these photos, they're amazing. 

FBI, NYPD Launch New Search in Etan Patz Case

Reality Estate

When you watch TV shows set in NYC or other great places, if you're like me, you wonder how much the characters' home or apartments might cost to own or rent. Never mind the plot -- what about the digs?

Sadly, for us New Yorkers, real estate always wins out.

That's why you must check out this piece from Vanity Fair by New York real estate legend Barbara Corcoran appraises the values of fictional TV dwellings past and present?

Would the Jeffersons still be able to afford their dee-luxe apartment in the sky?

How much would the rent on Carrie Bradshaw's apartment be -- and could a newspaper columnist afford it?

What about the 2 Broke Girls?

And do you know it would be cost almost a quarter of a billion dollars to buy Downton Abbey?

For shows set in NYC, some do a more realistic job than others in portraying the homes of New Yorkers. For example, in Mad About You, the size of Paul and Jaime's one bedroom was realistic -- except for the size of their bathroom which was enormous. Friends, on the other hand, was roundly criticized for having several minimally employed twenty-somethings living in apartments the size of Australia. Seinfeld was mostly realistic -- although how Kramer ever payed rent remains a mystery.

A Milestone

Today Mr NYC hit another milestone: over 100,000 page views. That averages to about 20,000 a year over the last five years. 

Not bad.

Granted that's not exactly a record setting number but let's put it into perspective: there are countries with smaller populations than that. There are major cities in states in this country with smaller populations than that. Heck that's more people than vote in your average election. 

And it's an especially good number for a blog that's not a diary of someone's sex life. 

So thanks to all of you who read this blog and keep reading. I'll try to make it sexier in the future. 

The Woes of Willard

Wannabe president and monumental douche Willard Mittens Romney boasts about how his business career makes him the ideal guy to be the next president. 

Apparently destroying companies to fill his pockets makes him qualified to help unemployed people. 

You should read this Village Voice article that sheds some light on this awful man's 'bidness career and how it has destroyed lives and communities. He really is a narcissistic, greedy, and deluded scumbag who will make the already huge disparities of wealth even huger, will destroy the social safety net, will roll back women and minority rights, and turn this country into a banana republic.

Is this the man we want leading our country? You have to mentally ill if you do.