'; //-->

Friday, April 30, 2004

IT'S 3 A.M. AND I'VE JUST GOTTEN BACK FROM SAM AND ADAN'S PLACE IN QUEENS. I'm tired, I want to go to bed right now, but first, I need to punctuate a comment I made regarding New York City's current mayor, Michael Bloomberg.

If I recall correctly, ET asserted that Bloomberg was giving the outer boroughs the shaft, what with his proposed tolls on the bridges. ET further commented that the mayor was in the habit of cutting recycling days in the outer boroughs, while leaving the recycling schedule of Manhattan unchanged.

My reply was that Manhattanites pay more rent and more tax money than those who live in Queens, Brooklyn, or the Bronx (at least for now.), and therefore, it was fair that they get more public services. In hindsight, perhaps I should have worded my thoughts a little differently. What I meant was, since Manhattanites provide more in income taxes to the city in any given year, they are entitled to be LAST as far as having their public services reduced or even renounced.

I believe this is perfectly logical. The outer boroughs probably need Manhattan a lot more than Manhattan needs them. It is the borough that brings in the tourists from all parts of the world. Businessmen congregate here; Wall Street and Broadway and Times Square and Chinatown are all located in Manhattan. It is in the interest of New York City, not to mention New York State, as a whole, to see that the streets of Manhattan are routinely free of garbage and recyclables.

I doubt that the majority of tourists nowadays bought a ticket to New York City because they saw "Midnight Cowboy" and thought, "I've gotta go THERE." They want the photogenic, and hygienic, NYC Giuliani's been promoting since the 90's. So in closing, no, the fact that Manhattan is comprised almost exclusively of millionaires does not entitle them to more of the basic social services. But a strong Manhattan benefits the outer boroughs, too, and if Bloomberg doesn't want garbage piling up on the streets of the Jewel of the Northeast, he is only protecting the state's most valuable commodity.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home