Daily Archives: July 17, 2012
Democrats weep bitter tears over loss of 75 high-paid jobs, paying $299,000 on average, to North Carolina. “We raised the income tax just for them”, Governor Malloy wailed, “brought back the death tax and jacked up the conveyance tax on their homes … we took their money and are they grateful? No they’re spiteful and they’re hateful – thank God we still have Greenwich to kick around!”
Reached for comment, Franklin Fudrucker, chairwoman of the Greenwich Demmerkratik Party, chose to look on the bright side. “These 1%er’s salaries took up the same space as 400 real-people’s jobs,” he said, “so we’re actually netting an additional 325 jobs, once the Governor creates them. We’re on a roll!”
5 Gilliam Lane, Riverside, new construction, $3.250 million. Good builder, good house, no yard, noisy, busy location on Riverside Avenue. I like Zillow’s estimate of $2.8 million better ( and I could have been persuaded by something around $2.5), but the market has spoken. And there’s a shortage of new construction in Riverside, which Zillow’s algorithms probably can’t adjust for.
78 Baldwin Farms South, $3.295 million. It wasn’t worth its original price of $4.750 but a few years off the market and a couple of price reductions after it came back on this year brought it to where it should have been all along and a buyer recognized that. Good land, still a 1960 house for all its renovations but very pleasant and quite livable.
11 Bayside Terrace in Riverside didn’t even stay on the market long enough for the on-line sites to notice it but I did. I hesitated writing about it after last Thursday’s open house because I thought it was an excellent property for a builder/client but he never got back to me (off fishing?) and someone grabbed it Monday. 0.38 acre in the R-12 zone, a split level that will probably come down because it’s in original condition and would need a lot of work to bring it back, but this could have been a great starter home. $1.065 million, which some may not consider a starting point, but there it is.
Irving Picard, Trustee for Madoff victims, has just filed lis pendens – notices of suit – against the Madoff boys’ houses on Cherry Valley Road and Tomac Avenue.
Where will Ruthie move next?
75% of public school math teachers feel “unprepared” to teach 2nd Grade math, but this they can do with their eyes closed
High school instructor demonstrates how to apply condom using only one’s mouth, parents object. Liberals are coming out of (on?) the woodwork to defend these type of lessons. “Johnny can’t learn to read if he’s sexually unfulfilled” is, I suppose, the argument.
Eric Holder, Al Sharpton on their way to the scene to condemn lawlessness. Well, maybe not.
UPDATE: Same thing out in Oregon. And why not? These kids’ role model just told them that anyone’s property truly belongs to everyone else, so why not help themselves to it?
255 Round Hill Road, from $8.250 to $6.9 million. Not my cup of tea and certainly not my budget, but save $1.350 here, $1.350 there, and sooner or later you’re talking real money.
Closer to home and to earth, 21 Hendrie Avenue in Riverside has dropped from $1.995 to $1.875. I liked this renovated farmhouse (I believe that it, like several other farm houses on Hendrie, was moved here by a developer in the 1940s?); it’s in excellent shape and quite nice. Apparently $1.995 wasn’t the right price but this might do it.
No open houses worth wasting gas on today, by the way.
By lying. Consider today’s AP headline, “NYC’s trans fat ban made fast food a bit healthier”.
Utter nonsense: the myth of the danger of trans fats was debunked as early as 2002 yet the lie persists.
Consider what the AP propaganda actually says:
New York City now has hard evidence that its ban on trans fat in restaurant food made a meaningful dent in people’s consumption of the artery clogger and wasn’t just replaced with another bad fat.
So banning a food item reduces consumption – that’s hardly surprising, but where is the evidence of an improvement in health? Everything in the article – “Artery clogging”, for instance – rests and builds on the disproved assumption that trans fats clog arteries with “bad” cholesterol. Take away that base and the headline is indeed baseless.
There are good fats and bad fats. Trans fat is widely considered the worst kind for your heart, gram-for-gram more harmful than its better known cousin, saturated fat.
Worse than that, according to the article, “[s] mall amounts [of trans fats] occur naturally in some meat and dairy products. But much of the trans fat we eat is artificially produced, by hardening liquid oils so they can be used for baking or a longer shelf life.” Assumption: “artificial” is worse than “naturally occurring”. Facts to support that assumption? None.
As for the entire issue of trans fats fat in our diet, What does medical science say?
Trans fats were developed during the backlash against saturated fat — the artery-clogging animal fats found in butter, cream, and meats. Then food manufacturers realized that trans fats lasted longer than butter without going rancid. The result: Today trans fats are found in 40% of the products on your supermarket shelves.
“We used to use animal fats, and people said, ‘saturated fats are bad,’ so we switched to trans fats,” says Ruth Kava, PhD, RD, director of nutrition at the New York City-based American Council on Science and Health. “This kind of gives us an unfortunate focus on ingredients rather than the whole diet when the problem isn’t this fat or that fat, it’s too many calories.”
“Anything was good if it decreased saturated fat consumption in the 1950s through the 1980s,” agrees Alice H. Lichtenstein, Dsc, professor of nutrition at Tufts University in Boston. “But then studies began to question trans fats,” too. Finally, in the 1990s, the evidence became clear: When vegetable oil is turned into a solid, like butter, it acts like butter inside the body.
But butter turns out to be good for you. So trans fats that act like butter must also be good, no?
So we’ve gone from saturated fats being a deadly health hazard to a beneficial part of of diet. The media and its hysterical news consumers need a whipping boy and alar apples having been debunked, these people have, for today, focused on trans fats. In the end, all that we really know is that the entire hysteria is unnecessary and irrelevant:
The $415 million federal study involved nearly 49,000 women ages 50 to 79 who were followed for eight years. In the end, those assigned to a low-fat diet had the same rates of breast cancer, colon cancer, heart attacks and strokes as those who ate whatever they pleased, researchers are reporting today.
”These studies are revolutionary,” said Dr. Jules Hirsch, physician in chief emeritus at Rockefeller University in New York City, who has spent a lifetime studying the effects of diets on weight and health. ”They should put a stop to this era of thinking that we have all the information we need to change the whole national diet and make everybody healthy.””We are not going to reverse any of the chronic diseases in this country by changing the composition of the diet,” Dr. Howard said. ”People are always thinking it’s what they ate. They are not looking at how much they ate or that they smoke or that they are sedentary.”
The streets would be littered with these, as well as “The rat’s gone to jail and left me to mow the lawn” signage. Especially up on Round Hill Road.