Anonymous wrote:I hardly ever drive on Connecticut and would almost certainly never bike there, bike lanes or not.
What annoys about this whole episode is that I’m noticing a pattern of behavior with Bowser where she will float controversial proposals, launch drawn-out batteries of community consultations which bitterly divide neighbors, allow these processes to run their course, create the illusion that the decision and concepts have been finalized on the basis of the input received through the official consultation processes and the input of ANCs and relevant councilmembers, and then at the 11th hour switcheroo at the behest of shadowy interests that can’t legitimately claim to represent anyone beyond themselves.
This of course describes the Connecticut bike lane saga to a T, but also is exactly how things went down with several other non-transportation projects in my part of the city.
Some like the end result and so are inclined to defend Bowser or take issue with certain specifics, but no one should be able to argue with a straight face that this is what good municipal governance looks like. She is sowing division and completely undermining faith in the integrity in established structures for participatory governance. Of course, if you do not live in the District and don’t give a damn about anything in the city beyond the ease of your commute, I can understand why this wouldn’t bother you in the slightest.
Hopefully the city can find itself a radically better mayor in a couple of years and take a turn to becoming a better place for people to live, even at the cost of not being the most pleasurable of door mats for suburban commuters.
Bowser wanted ANC support for her voucher plan and the Chevy Chase Library and Small Area Plan. She used bike lanes to get that support and then dropped them because they weren't popular leaving the ANCs holding the bag for everything. The bike lane fiasco sucked up all the backlash and she succeeded.
Nothing about this proposal was an example of good governance. Always remember that it started as a seemingly innocuous discussion on whether or not to keep reversible lanes at rush hour.
I see the anti-Bowser conspiracy theorist is back.
DP. I love would be able to see some logic behind Bowser’s approach - such as that by undermining participatory planning processes and ANCs so that she can get things done faster - but it’s hard to see what she is getting out of all this other than making people hate each other and eventually her too. I tended to give her the benefit of the doubt until she flip-flopped all over the map on school openings over COVID, pitting teachers against parents and endowing the city with a truancy and youth crime crisis. She’s not the worst mayor in DC’s history by a long stretch, but she’s not a leader, has no discernible vision for the city, is a terrible administrator, and is very hard to relate to. In retrospect, it’s not hard to understand how she was almost lost to a Republican in her first mayoral election.
It’s quaint that you think there was real “participatory planning” in the first place. There’s only just power. DDOT only conducts citizen engagement to either inform people of the decisions they have made or to pretend that they are taking community input seriously to justify decisions they have already made. DDOT made a decision that was met with significant resistance from the business community, who are more important than the cycling activists DDOT has been catering to, and as result their decision was overturned. It’s only the mayor’s fault to the extent that she appoints DDOT leadership and DDOT leadership did a bad job of protecting the mayors interests. It’s probably why Everett Lott isn’t there anymore. It’s not more complicated than that.
What is quaint is that you think it’s perfectly fine that elected representatives privilege “business interests” - in reality, a handful of corporate landlords desperately hankering for a return to 2019 amidst their complete denial that the world has moved on - over the ability of DC residents to travel throughout their city in an inexpensive, healthy, safe, and environmentally-friendly manner.
Even the Fleet Feet Fenty's oppose new bike lanes on major roads. The world has indeed moved on.
Has the climate crisis gone away? What about the shortage of lithium and other critical minerals? Have flying cars solved road congestion yet? Have gas prices and the burden they impose on working houses fallen off? Sounds like your head has moved on further into the sand.
Bike lanes on Connecticut Avenue will not stop climate change, nor will they end racism.
Small changes are too small, they won't do anything. Big changes are too big, they're not feasible. I'm still waiting to hear if there are any changes that are juuuuuust right.
Similarly, we shouldn't do anything now, it's too soon. And after that, we shouldn't do anything, it's too late.
Yes, everyone that opposes a bike lane is a climate denier or working to prevent anything from happening to address climate change. Meanwhile, all of the bikers are saving the world, especially with their virtue-signaling! You guys are the bestest ever. Thank you for being so amazing, unlike us inferior plebes.
Not everyone who opposes a bike lane is a climate denier. Everyone who opposes a bike lane is opposing an action that will help to mitigate the effects of climate change. If more people biked and fewer people drove, that actually would help with climate change. Perhaps a few people who bike do so solely for the purpose of morally lording it over others, but it's not a common motivation. People who bike are not the best ever or the worst ever, but simply people like people generally are. Some people who bike are amazing, others aren't, just like people generally are. If you feel like someone is trying to make you feel like an inferior plebe, that's a you issue.
Please tell us all how much carbon dioxide emissions bike lanes on Connecticut Avenue will save and show your math and assumptions.
So everyone wants to talk climate but no one is willing to put in the hard work to actually prove how these bike lanes would reduce ghgs. Figures.
Anonymous wrote:If climate change is the goal then bike lanes are a horribly inefficient and wasteful use of limited dollars.
There are many goals that bike lanes serve and bike lanes are actually a very efficient use of limited dollars because they cost very little to install, reduce road maintenance expenditure, increase DC's sales and property tax revenue by increasing retail revenue and local property values.
Anonymous wrote:I think the giant anticlimax of pedestrianizing the slip lane ought to really guide the discussion here. We had a giant neighborhood freak out over ONE block of a protected bike lane. It finally went in last summer and guess what, the sky has not fallen and nobody cares. Houses are still being sold on that block at big profits and the ads actually mention the bike lane as an amenity.
Interesting that Councilmember Frumin said last year that that if the slip (service) lane parking were lost, Option C bike lanes would have to be rethought because the cumulative loss of parking in that part of Connecticut Ave would be significant.
And yet, we have seen no negative impact from the new plaza, and it seems like the businesses there are thriving.
Part of the problem is that the current crop of ANCs think they can just pass a resolution and get their way. In the past, ANCs worked hard with city officials to develop solutions to pending problems. Now it's just one resolution after another. The meetings are short and boring. And guess what? Nothing gets worked through or solved so we send up in a situation where the Mayor just ignores the ANCs. The bike lane issue was solvable, but it became too polarized.
Anonymous wrote:I think the giant anticlimax of pedestrianizing the slip lane ought to really guide the discussion here. We had a giant neighborhood freak out over ONE block of a protected bike lane. It finally went in last summer and guess what, the sky has not fallen and nobody cares. Houses are still being sold on that block at big profits and the ads actually mention the bike lane as an amenity.
Interesting that Councilmember Frumin said last year that that if the slip (service) lane parking were lost, Option C bike lanes would have to be rethought because the cumulative loss of parking in that part of Connecticut Ave would be significant.
And yet, we have seen no negative impact from the new plaza, and it seems like the businesses there are thriving.
That strip was a ghost town two Friday nights ago, with perfect weather. The only people outside at 9 p.m. were smokers and people asking for spare change.
Anonymous wrote:I think the giant anticlimax of pedestrianizing the slip lane ought to really guide the discussion here. We had a giant neighborhood freak out over ONE block of a protected bike lane. It finally went in last summer and guess what, the sky has not fallen and nobody cares. Houses are still being sold on that block at big profits and the ads actually mention the bike lane as an amenity.
Interesting that Councilmember Frumin said last year that that if the slip (service) lane parking were lost, Option C bike lanes would have to be rethought because the cumulative loss of parking in that part of Connecticut Ave would be significant.
And yet, we have seen no negative impact from the new plaza, and it seems like the businesses there are thriving.
The development project on the west side of Connecticut Ave may be in bankruptcy. Construction work has been halted. That’s unlikely to have much to do with bike lanes or even parking, but the local business climate is not “thriving.”
Anonymous wrote:I think the giant anticlimax of pedestrianizing the slip lane ought to really guide the discussion here. We had a giant neighborhood freak out over ONE block of a protected bike lane. It finally went in last summer and guess what, the sky has not fallen and nobody cares. Houses are still being sold on that block at big profits and the ads actually mention the bike lane as an amenity.
Interesting that Councilmember Frumin said last year that that if the slip (service) lane parking were lost, Option C bike lanes would have to be rethought because the cumulative loss of parking in that part of Connecticut Ave would be significant.
And yet, we have seen no negative impact from the new plaza, and it seems like the businesses there are thriving.
That strip was a ghost town two Friday nights ago, with perfect weather. The only people outside at 9 p.m. were smokers and people asking for spare change.
Upper NW in general is a ghost town by 9:00 on any night. That has been the case for decades.
It is always funny to be downtown, or Navy Yard or somewhere else and be around thousands of people and then head uptown and once you cross a bridge, there is nobody out, the sidewalk cafes are empty etc.
Anonymous wrote:Part of the problem is that the current crop of ANCs think they can just pass a resolution and get their way. In the past, ANCs worked hard with city officials to develop solutions to pending problems. Now it's just one resolution after another. The meetings are short and boring. And guess what? Nothing gets worked through or solved so we send up in a situation where the Mayor just ignores the ANCs. The bike lane issue was solvable, but it became too polarized.
The ANC let their (middle) fingers do the talking.
Anonymous wrote:If climate change is the goal then bike lanes are a horribly inefficient and wasteful use of limited dollars.
There are many goals that bike lanes serve and bike lanes are actually a very efficient use of limited dollars because they cost very little to install, reduce road maintenance expenditure, increase DC's sales and property tax revenue by increasing retail revenue and [/b]local property values.
So you’re saying that bike lanes will increase commercial property values and rents? And how will that help local businesses that are already struggling with rent costs?
Anonymous wrote:If climate change is the goal then bike lanes are a horribly inefficient and wasteful use of limited dollars.
There are many goals that bike lanes serve and bike lanes are actually a very efficient use of limited dollars because they cost very little to install, reduce road maintenance expenditure, increase DC's sales and property tax revenue by increasing retail revenue and [/b]local property values.
So you’re saying that bike lanes will increase commercial property values and rents? And how will that help local businesses that are already struggling with rent costs?
Bike lanes will increase business at businesses, which will lead to higher property values, HOW TERRIBLE!!!!!!!!!!1111111111111
Anonymous wrote:I hardly ever drive on Connecticut and would almost certainly never bike there, bike lanes or not.
What annoys about this whole episode is that I’m noticing a pattern of behavior with Bowser where she will float controversial proposals, launch drawn-out batteries of community consultations which bitterly divide neighbors, allow these processes to run their course, create the illusion that the decision and concepts have been finalized on the basis of the input received through the official consultation processes and the input of ANCs and relevant councilmembers, and then at the 11th hour switcheroo at the behest of shadowy interests that can’t legitimately claim to represent anyone beyond themselves.
This of course describes the Connecticut bike lane saga to a T, but also is exactly how things went down with several other non-transportation projects in my part of the city.
Some like the end result and so are inclined to defend Bowser or take issue with certain specifics, but no one should be able to argue with a straight face that this is what good municipal governance looks like. She is sowing division and completely undermining faith in the integrity in established structures for participatory governance. Of course, if you do not live in the District and don’t give a damn about anything in the city beyond the ease of your commute, I can understand why this wouldn’t bother you in the slightest.
Hopefully the city can find itself a radically better mayor in a couple of years and take a turn to becoming a better place for people to live, even at the cost of not being the most pleasurable of door mats for suburban commuters.
Bowser wanted ANC support for her voucher plan and the Chevy Chase Library and Small Area Plan. She used bike lanes to get that support and then dropped them because they weren't popular leaving the ANCs holding the bag for everything. The bike lane fiasco sucked up all the backlash and she succeeded.
Nothing about this proposal was an example of good governance. Always remember that it started as a seemingly innocuous discussion on whether or not to keep reversible lanes at rush hour.
I see the anti-Bowser conspiracy theorist is back.
DP. I love would be able to see some logic behind Bowser’s approach - such as that by undermining participatory planning processes and ANCs so that she can get things done faster - but it’s hard to see what she is getting out of all this other than making people hate each other and eventually her too. I tended to give her the benefit of the doubt until she flip-flopped all over the map on school openings over COVID, pitting teachers against parents and endowing the city with a truancy and youth crime crisis. She’s not the worst mayor in DC’s history by a long stretch, but she’s not a leader, has no discernible vision for the city, is a terrible administrator, and is very hard to relate to. In retrospect, it’s not hard to understand how she was almost lost to a Republican in her first mayoral election.
It’s quaint that you think there was real “participatory planning” in the first place. There’s only just power. DDOT only conducts citizen engagement to either inform people of the decisions they have made or to pretend that they are taking community input seriously to justify decisions they have already made. DDOT made a decision that was met with significant resistance from the business community, who are more important than the cycling activists DDOT has been catering to, and as result their decision was overturned. It’s only the mayor’s fault to the extent that she appoints DDOT leadership and DDOT leadership did a bad job of protecting the mayors interests. It’s probably why Everett Lott isn’t there anymore. It’s not more complicated than that.
What is quaint is that you think it’s perfectly fine that elected representatives privilege “business interests” - in reality, a handful of corporate landlords desperately hankering for a return to 2019 amidst their complete denial that the world has moved on - over the ability of DC residents to travel throughout their city in an inexpensive, healthy, safe, and environmentally-friendly manner.
Even the Fleet Feet Fenty's oppose new bike lanes on major roads. The world has indeed moved on.
Has the climate crisis gone away? What about the shortage of lithium and other critical minerals? Have flying cars solved road congestion yet? Have gas prices and the burden they impose on working houses fallen off? Sounds like your head has moved on further into the sand.
Bike lanes on Connecticut Avenue will not stop climate change, nor will they end racism.
Small changes are too small, they won't do anything. Big changes are too big, they're not feasible. I'm still waiting to hear if there are any changes that are juuuuuust right.
Similarly, we shouldn't do anything now, it's too soon. And after that, we shouldn't do anything, it's too late.
Yes, everyone that opposes a bike lane is a climate denier or working to prevent anything from happening to address climate change. Meanwhile, all of the bikers are saving the world, especially with their virtue-signaling! You guys are the bestest ever. Thank you for being so amazing, unlike us inferior plebes.
Not everyone who opposes a bike lane is a climate denier. Everyone who opposes a bike lane is opposing an action that will help to mitigate the effects of climate change. If more people biked and fewer people drove, that actually would help with climate change. Perhaps a few people who bike do so solely for the purpose of morally lording it over others, but it's not a common motivation. People who bike are not the best ever or the worst ever, but simply people like people generally are. Some people who bike are amazing, others aren't, just like people generally are. If you feel like someone is trying to make you feel like an inferior plebe, that's a you issue.
Please tell us all how much carbon dioxide emissions bike lanes on Connecticut Avenue will save and show your math and assumptions.
So everyone wants to talk climate but no one is willing to put in the hard work to actually prove how these bike lanes would reduce ghgs. Figures.
Anonymous wrote:If climate change is the goal then bike lanes are a horribly inefficient and wasteful use of limited dollars.
There are many goals that bike lanes serve and bike lanes are actually a very efficient use of limited dollars because they cost very little to install, reduce road maintenance expenditure, increase DC's sales and property tax revenue by increasing retail revenue and local property values.
Glad to see that you've been supporting our local I-71 businesses this afternoon.
Anonymous wrote:I hardly ever drive on Connecticut and would almost certainly never bike there, bike lanes or not.
What annoys about this whole episode is that I’m noticing a pattern of behavior with Bowser where she will float controversial proposals, launch drawn-out batteries of community consultations which bitterly divide neighbors, allow these processes to run their course, create the illusion that the decision and concepts have been finalized on the basis of the input received through the official consultation processes and the input of ANCs and relevant councilmembers, and then at the 11th hour switcheroo at the behest of shadowy interests that can’t legitimately claim to represent anyone beyond themselves.
This of course describes the Connecticut bike lane saga to a T, but also is exactly how things went down with several other non-transportation projects in my part of the city.
Some like the end result and so are inclined to defend Bowser or take issue with certain specifics, but no one should be able to argue with a straight face that this is what good municipal governance looks like. She is sowing division and completely undermining faith in the integrity in established structures for participatory governance. Of course, if you do not live in the District and don’t give a damn about anything in the city beyond the ease of your commute, I can understand why this wouldn’t bother you in the slightest.
Hopefully the city can find itself a radically better mayor in a couple of years and take a turn to becoming a better place for people to live, even at the cost of not being the most pleasurable of door mats for suburban commuters.
Bowser wanted ANC support for her voucher plan and the Chevy Chase Library and Small Area Plan. She used bike lanes to get that support and then dropped them because they weren't popular leaving the ANCs holding the bag for everything. The bike lane fiasco sucked up all the backlash and she succeeded.
Nothing about this proposal was an example of good governance. Always remember that it started as a seemingly innocuous discussion on whether or not to keep reversible lanes at rush hour.
I see the anti-Bowser conspiracy theorist is back.
DP. I love would be able to see some logic behind Bowser’s approach - such as that by undermining participatory planning processes and ANCs so that she can get things done faster - but it’s hard to see what she is getting out of all this other than making people hate each other and eventually her too. I tended to give her the benefit of the doubt until she flip-flopped all over the map on school openings over COVID, pitting teachers against parents and endowing the city with a truancy and youth crime crisis. She’s not the worst mayor in DC’s history by a long stretch, but she’s not a leader, has no discernible vision for the city, is a terrible administrator, and is very hard to relate to. In retrospect, it’s not hard to understand how she was almost lost to a Republican in her first mayoral election.
It’s quaint that you think there was real “participatory planning” in the first place. There’s only just power. DDOT only conducts citizen engagement to either inform people of the decisions they have made or to pretend that they are taking community input seriously to justify decisions they have already made. DDOT made a decision that was met with significant resistance from the business community, who are more important than the cycling activists DDOT has been catering to, and as result their decision was overturned. It’s only the mayor’s fault to the extent that she appoints DDOT leadership and DDOT leadership did a bad job of protecting the mayors interests. It’s probably why Everett Lott isn’t there anymore. It’s not more complicated than that.
What is quaint is that you think it’s perfectly fine that elected representatives privilege “business interests” - in reality, a handful of corporate landlords desperately hankering for a return to 2019 amidst their complete denial that the world has moved on - over the ability of DC residents to travel throughout their city in an inexpensive, healthy, safe, and environmentally-friendly manner.
Even the Fleet Feet Fenty's oppose new bike lanes on major roads. The world has indeed moved on.
Has the climate crisis gone away? What about the shortage of lithium and other critical minerals? Have flying cars solved road congestion yet? Have gas prices and the burden they impose on working houses fallen off? Sounds like your head has moved on further into the sand.
Bike lanes on Connecticut Avenue will not stop climate change, nor will they end racism.
Small changes are too small, they won't do anything. Big changes are too big, they're not feasible. I'm still waiting to hear if there are any changes that are juuuuuust right.
Similarly, we shouldn't do anything now, it's too soon. And after that, we shouldn't do anything, it's too late.
Yes, everyone that opposes a bike lane is a climate denier or working to prevent anything from happening to address climate change. Meanwhile, all of the bikers are saving the world, especially with their virtue-signaling! You guys are the bestest ever. Thank you for being so amazing, unlike us inferior plebes.
Not everyone who opposes a bike lane is a climate denier. Everyone who opposes a bike lane is opposing an action that will help to mitigate the effects of climate change. If more people biked and fewer people drove, that actually would help with climate change. Perhaps a few people who bike do so solely for the purpose of morally lording it over others, but it's not a common motivation. People who bike are not the best ever or the worst ever, but simply people like people generally are. Some people who bike are amazing, others aren't, just like people generally are. If you feel like someone is trying to make you feel like an inferior plebe, that's a you issue.
Please tell us all how much carbon dioxide emissions bike lanes on Connecticut Avenue will save and show your math and assumptions.
So everyone wants to talk climate but no one is willing to put in the hard work to actually prove how these bike lanes would reduce ghgs. Figures.
Anonymous wrote:I hardly ever drive on Connecticut and would almost certainly never bike there, bike lanes or not.
What annoys about this whole episode is that I’m noticing a pattern of behavior with Bowser where she will float controversial proposals, launch drawn-out batteries of community consultations which bitterly divide neighbors, allow these processes to run their course, create the illusion that the decision and concepts have been finalized on the basis of the input received through the official consultation processes and the input of ANCs and relevant councilmembers, and then at the 11th hour switcheroo at the behest of shadowy interests that can’t legitimately claim to represent anyone beyond themselves.
This of course describes the Connecticut bike lane saga to a T, but also is exactly how things went down with several other non-transportation projects in my part of the city.
Some like the end result and so are inclined to defend Bowser or take issue with certain specifics, but no one should be able to argue with a straight face that this is what good municipal governance looks like. She is sowing division and completely undermining faith in the integrity in established structures for participatory governance. Of course, if you do not live in the District and don’t give a damn about anything in the city beyond the ease of your commute, I can understand why this wouldn’t bother you in the slightest.
Hopefully the city can find itself a radically better mayor in a couple of years and take a turn to becoming a better place for people to live, even at the cost of not being the most pleasurable of door mats for suburban commuters.
Bowser wanted ANC support for her voucher plan and the Chevy Chase Library and Small Area Plan. She used bike lanes to get that support and then dropped them because they weren't popular leaving the ANCs holding the bag for everything. The bike lane fiasco sucked up all the backlash and she succeeded.
Nothing about this proposal was an example of good governance. Always remember that it started as a seemingly innocuous discussion on whether or not to keep reversible lanes at rush hour.
I see the anti-Bowser conspiracy theorist is back.
DP. I love would be able to see some logic behind Bowser’s approach - such as that by undermining participatory planning processes and ANCs so that she can get things done faster - but it’s hard to see what she is getting out of all this other than making people hate each other and eventually her too. I tended to give her the benefit of the doubt until she flip-flopped all over the map on school openings over COVID, pitting teachers against parents and endowing the city with a truancy and youth crime crisis. She’s not the worst mayor in DC’s history by a long stretch, but she’s not a leader, has no discernible vision for the city, is a terrible administrator, and is very hard to relate to. In retrospect, it’s not hard to understand how she was almost lost to a Republican in her first mayoral election.
It’s quaint that you think there was real “participatory planning” in the first place. There’s only just power. DDOT only conducts citizen engagement to either inform people of the decisions they have made or to pretend that they are taking community input seriously to justify decisions they have already made. DDOT made a decision that was met with significant resistance from the business community, who are more important than the cycling activists DDOT has been catering to, and as result their decision was overturned. It’s only the mayor’s fault to the extent that she appoints DDOT leadership and DDOT leadership did a bad job of protecting the mayors interests. It’s probably why Everett Lott isn’t there anymore. It’s not more complicated than that.
What is quaint is that you think it’s perfectly fine that elected representatives privilege “business interests” - in reality, a handful of corporate landlords desperately hankering for a return to 2019 amidst their complete denial that the world has moved on - over the ability of DC residents to travel throughout their city in an inexpensive, healthy, safe, and environmentally-friendly manner.
Even the Fleet Feet Fenty's oppose new bike lanes on major roads. The world has indeed moved on.
Has the climate crisis gone away? What about the shortage of lithium and other critical minerals? Have flying cars solved road congestion yet? Have gas prices and the burden they impose on working houses fallen off? Sounds like your head has moved on further into the sand.
Bike lanes on Connecticut Avenue will not stop climate change, nor will they end racism.
Small changes are too small, they won't do anything. Big changes are too big, they're not feasible. I'm still waiting to hear if there are any changes that are juuuuuust right.
Similarly, we shouldn't do anything now, it's too soon. And after that, we shouldn't do anything, it's too late.
Yes, everyone that opposes a bike lane is a climate denier or working to prevent anything from happening to address climate change. Meanwhile, all of the bikers are saving the world, especially with their virtue-signaling! You guys are the bestest ever. Thank you for being so amazing, unlike us inferior plebes.
Not everyone who opposes a bike lane is a climate denier. Everyone who opposes a bike lane is opposing an action that will help to mitigate the effects of climate change. If more people biked and fewer people drove, that actually would help with climate change. Perhaps a few people who bike do so solely for the purpose of morally lording it over others, but it's not a common motivation. People who bike are not the best ever or the worst ever, but simply people like people generally are. Some people who bike are amazing, others aren't, just like people generally are. If you feel like someone is trying to make you feel like an inferior plebe, that's a you issue.
Please tell us all how much carbon dioxide emissions bike lanes on Connecticut Avenue will save and show your math and assumptions.
So everyone wants to talk climate but no one is willing to put in the hard work to actually prove how these bike lanes would reduce ghgs. Figures.
Anonymous wrote:I think the giant anticlimax of pedestrianizing the slip lane ought to really guide the discussion here. We had a giant neighborhood freak out over ONE block of a protected bike lane. It finally went in last summer and guess what, the sky has not fallen and nobody cares. Houses are still being sold on that block at big profits and the ads actually mention the bike lane as an amenity.
Interesting that Councilmember Frumin said last year that that if the slip (service) lane parking were lost, Option C bike lanes would have to be rethought because the cumulative loss of parking in that part of Connecticut Ave would be significant.
And yet, we have seen no negative impact from the new plaza, and it seems like the businesses there are thriving.
Says the likely academic/nonprofit/government employee that has never started or run a small business.
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}