Post Author:
amg | 1:41 PM |
Link
|
TrackBacks
In 1919, the subway was private and not . Whole different issue.
In 1966, people didn't riot about the subway because they had other things to worry about.
In 1980, New York City was full of greed-lust, so they all had their drivers take them in their luxury town cars.
I'd still bet that, while riots might have been an exaggeration, there'd be a much larger outcry in NYC if transit workers went on strike then you see in London. Think about how often the London tube goes on strike. New Yorkers don't have the patience for industrial action that Londoners do. For that matter, think about how pissed people were when Metro shut down for a day last summer due to an impending and non-existen snowstorm. No riots, but lots of complaining. Think how they'd respond if it was, say, the escalator repair people striking.
Ugh.
1919 - Yeah, a little different as a private system, but people still depended on the subway and had to find a place to go. No riots.
1966 - Like we don't have other things to worry about now?
1980 - Greed-lust came a little after - 1980 was still the age of stagflation, graffiti-covered trains and Christopher Cross records. I'd have rioted.
Randoloph, I expect you could be moved to riot if the fare card dispenser shafted you for a dollar. You have to admit, there seems to be a lot of anger in you my friend.
One person stomping and screaming does not a riot make, unfortunately.
That depends on how hard he stomps and how loudly he screams.
Also, it could be a riot, in the sense of
5a. Unrestrained merrymaking; revelry
or
6 (Slang) An irresistibly funny person or thing.
The only riots I care about are the ones where I could walk away with a new TV set.
