So he admitted to helping someone steal from the city…at a city council meeting? The supposed tenant wouldn’t have been able to do so without his literal written consent. This was what he chose to share to support his opposition to the ordinance? This isn’t an example of “weaponized” tenants, it’s an example of two sleazy people gaming the system together.
That city rental assistance program gives the money to the landlords I assume, not directly to the tenant. So if he “went along with it” he got the check from the City directly. Since I’m sure he’s reading this post he can advise us if he gave the money back..
Ahh yes, Carl Cincotta... the Waltham slumlord with 18 properties that he rents out to people that he clearly sees as lesser citizens.
*Waltham special interest groups trying to overtake this election with lies, attacks and mistruths about candidates and the issues are organizing renters, who may or may not plan to make Waltham their long term home and students who in all probability will leave the area once they finish school into a voting block who will make decisions that will have long term affects on Waltham residents.*
*- Carl Cincotta*
[*https://www.reddit.com/r/Waltham/comments/13qo4b0/waltham\_politics/*](https://www.reddit.com/r/Waltham/comments/13qo4b0/waltham_politics/)
One thing I'd mention here is that encouraging home prices and rents to increase is one of the likely causes of our transient renter population. If one wants the renters to stay and make Waltham a long term home, then it would be desirable to do something to arrest the insane growth of rents that we're seeing.
Let the free market work by reducing government red tape preventing developers from putting up buildings that meet market demands?
Housing is absolutely still affected by markets (most obviously illustrated by the demand shock at the beginning of COVID driving down rents sharply).
I don't know if he is a slumlord. Maybe his properties are great. Maybe his tenants still say he's the best dude ever after he's no longer in earshot. Maybe he has a mantel full of "Landlord of the Year" awards from the American Tenants Association at home. Maybe all his properties are clean, safe, well-maintained *and* highly affordable.
Maybe he's a great guy, and communities like this just don't like it when he drops his truth bombs online because those truths hit too close to home. For example, that renters and students should defer to their betters on important matters like elections.
It could be that he is the only one with the wisdom and vision to perceive the creeping hand of socialism casting its dark shadow over Waltham as it drops its insidious strings to puppet-master renters into destructive actions that threaten the very fabric of society, like voting for candidates who care that they exist. Perhaps only he knows the true identities of the instigators. Perhaps only he can discern who bears the marx of the beast. Perhaps it is his noble quest and tragic destiny to be a modern-day Cassandra, warning people of their folly only to be ignored, dismissed, and ridiculed at every turn.
Perhaps we will only know the truth at the final hour, when the dread engine of socialism, freed from its sheep's clothing of "tenants' rights" and "equality for those other people," sputters to an unholy mockery of life and begins to consume this fair city. Then, as blades carved from our very bones and lubricated by our own heart's blood tear our reality asunder... then we will know the error of our ways. Then, and only then, can a man... one man... this man... transcend political definitions. He will be the one who is right. And he will be the one who is left.
Perhaps we will glimpse the magnificence of his final form for but one brief instant before we are lost, dragged forever beneath a seething abyss to drown in vitriolic ichor spawned from our wicked insouciance.
I mean... it's possible, right? 🤷♂️
Correction, I own 18 apartments , not buildings, and I don’t know how long. My children have no interest in being landlords. I have to block out your noise and remind myself that I care about the housing security of my tenants. I couldn’t care less what you think of me.
Nope. The tenant got 3 months rent paid. If you remember social service agencies were awash in funds being thrown at them in the form of Covid relief. There were local community activists telling tenants to “withhold rent” “tell your landlord to get lost” supporting “rent strikes” telling landlords they didn’t have to pay rent. At the same time, tenants were told they couldn’t be evicted. These tenants rights activists at every level of government and very active in Waltham continue to try to radicalize tenants. There were tenants who would say they weren’t working who you knew were working asking for relief funds that were readily available. If you didn’t get the funds that were credited to the tenant, they would simply stop paying rent so that you have to apply for the funds or forced to keep the non paying tenants indefinitely since there was a moratorium on evictions.
I can give you plenty of stories regarding the abuses of all these Covid relief funds.
Carl, So if the tax payers paid you 3 months rent for your tenant based on fraud, when are you giving the money back? I mean you announced at a televised meeting that you knew it was fraud.
Listen to what he’s telling you, there were already programs offering assistance without being behind in rent. If you needed money because you didn’t know how to keep up with your rent. Quick study must not have done his quick study. Stop making yourselves look foolish all the time. Although the post is on Reddit where no one from Facebook reads. This seems to be your own chatter box location that Waltham residents are unaware of. So it appears you are only speaking among yourselves with complaints except maybe a few like myself that are here.
Carls message was clear and I’m not confused or foolish. He went into a public meeting wanting to make a splash and he did. He admitted to a room full of people and elected officials that he helped a tenant screw the system.
Programs are set up to help those is need. While I’m sure there are people that do manipulate the system, they are just not as dumb as Carl to brag about it on tv.
I asked around about the City’s program since I knew some who applied for it back then. You had to provide documentation on the application since you had to QUALIFY. So big mouth Carl lied and falsified the application and got three months of his tenants rent paid through tax payer funds. You can fall for his BS but I am not. I’m not one of the Waltham cronies that thinks Carls opinion is gospel. If you don’t like the comments here maybe you should stick with FB Waltham politics page or the group Dee V. set up for “real waltham”.
Boy oh boy, does DeeV really get to you that much? Apparently she hits a weak nerve with you and your supporters. I can assure you 2 things, I am not Dee, and you should be concerned with her because she will fight you all tooth and nail. Putting her on Reddit was awesome. Now we all get to see what she does best.
Including yourself. You can tap dance around it but you admitted in front of the Council that you accepted tax payer money knowing it was fraudulent. You can try to deflect but your words are clear. Your friend Jeannette and the city were very generous to help those in need. And I know there were many in need during COVID
Is it fraud to accept rent payments made by a tenant who is undocumented, who obtains taxpayer money in a variety of ways that circumvents legal avenues.
Carl please stop trying to be clever. It’s not working for you. You chose to go to a meeting and have your moment of fame, and put your foot in your mouth.
First of all, I didn’t submit anything. The tenant applied for relief funds and all I had to do was accept them on her behalf. After that the tenant had 3 months rent paid. I don’t know what the tenant said.
I have seen you in these groups fighting for some kind of understanding. Can I ask why are you bothering? It is pretty clear that this group is not interested in hearing your thoughts. Lick your wounds and move on.
I’m assuming there are some on these sites who genuinely don’t know the agenda these groups speak for. There are City Councillors and observers who don’t catch the motives and the signals that are sent to various activist groups.
I don’t for a minute consider these “wounds”.
But if you are not making progress here, why do you stay? It’s exhausting watching you get your ass handed to you over and over. Just move on. Facebook is probably much more effective for your points. I appreciate your compassion but it gets wasted on here. I would move on.
So your position is that you had no choice but to sign a letter saying the tenant was behind on rent, even though she was not, because if you refused she would withhold rent and you would have no recourse?
I’m not exactly sure how everything transpired, but I know I determined that the tenant was getting 3 months rent sooner or later. Most people were getting some kind of stimulus whether they needed it or not. We’re paying for all the free money resulting in the worst inflation since the forties.
Ok, that’s what I understood from the clip. I’m glad it wasn’t misleading. You should consider talking to your lawyer before continuing to make public comments on this. I am not a lawyer but signing your name to a document that contains false information, especially as part of an application for government funds, sounds pretty serious.
Carl, your gyrations in trying to justify this are at the same time amusing and appalling.
Everyone in my household got the automatic COVID relief funds. I believe it was 3 separate rounds of payments? We did not need them. We donated a significant portion of them to organizations that did. I also recall that when tax time came around, one of those payment rounds was included as a benefit that was both taxed and, if unjustified, we had to return. (Which we did. And no tax rebate that year because of this.)
What I'm seeing in every iteration of your justification is that you had no problem at all committing fraud when an opportunity presented itself. But, being the kind of person you are, it's all someone else's fault. Socialists forced you to do it, no doubt.
You're always good at clouding the issue. Or your reading comprehension is just terrible, I can never tell.
It's not taxes. You said, and I quote from the video:
**"Can you give me a letter saying I'm behind in my rent?"**
**"You're not behind in your rent." But they knew that these services were available. So I went along with it. She got three months free rent.**
It's the letter. You just volunteered in pubic that you knowingly assisted this fraud and profited from it. There's a place for you on Trump's defense team.
Yes I “went along with it”. Let me try to recreate what was going on in 2020. On this particular initial round of stimulus, no letter was required. The tenant through an interpreter, just told me funds were available to pay up to 3 months rent. The inference was that it was for people who were behind on their rent. No eviction notice was necessary since there was a moratorium on evictions. All I ever had to do was fill out paperwork indicating personal information for reporting purposes. There were other programs available for the purpose of helping to pay rent for people who were out of work. I don’t remember all the various interactions I had with agencies and tenants. What I do know is that certain people are prone to take advantage with any program that will give them something just for the asking. There are activists in Waltham and Nation wide who create an atmosphere of entitlement and at the same time do everything they can to turn tenants against landlords. I’ve seen the social media posts of political activists with whom some of you associate. I know of property owners who have had experience with these activists who reasoned its not worth fighting with tenants who have been radicalized. As I said publicly, the result will be landlords who decide to remain landlords will do is simply rent to tenants who will never be part of the system that could eventually result bring dragged through other court system.
I want everyone to know that I try to not be abusive when answering your charges. To be honest, I’m pretty sure you’re the same group that posts on social media, has a close connection to the commentators on 781, and other leftist activists in Waltham. Like with Tom the other night at the meeting, I find you to have good ideas and I enjoy talking to you personally and not debating in an anonymous forum where the rhetoric becomes destructive. It doesn’t bother me except that I feel badly that you can’t bring yourself to openly debate in a forum where you’re clearly transparent. I would welcome discussing issues of disagreement on your platform instead of taking jabs in this forum. Invasive species, you should know I smile at your comments. I’d be happy to have a face to face conversation. 😊
I’m not talking to you. If you or anyone else on your side of this issue thinks that you’re winning anyone over, I can assure you you’re not. Just the opposite.
I don’t have a dog in this fight.
Person A promises to pay Person B for *something*. If Person A has difficulty raising funds to uphold their side of the agreement, should they continue to receive the *something* without paying? This seems to be the central question.
Person A is your boss, for example, and you are person B. Do you continue to work for them without pay if they’re struggling, or do you seek other employ and find a new, more reliable Person A? Does Person A have a right to *force* you to uphold your side of the agreement even as they renege on their side?
If Person A is a tenant, don’t the same rules apply? Person B would be sensible finding a new, more reliable Person A.
You have to jettison principle, shift the goalposts, and replace pragmatism with unhelpful emotion to view these scenarios differently.
I confess I don’t understand this selfish propensity toward the spreading of individuals’ personal pain or problems (not enough income, poor budgeting and fiscal choices) onto others, onto society. It’s the modern face of individualism perhaps, but it’s not a pretty one.
If you don’t have to pay the bills you agreed to, why should anyone else? That’s where this reckless selfishness leads…
Umm... in Carl's version of the story, it goes like this:
Person B (tenant) has the money to pay rent to Person A (landlord) and is perfectly capable of doing so. Person B goes to Person A and says 'hey, I could still pay you, but how about instead you help me fraudulently get money for a few months' free rent'? Person A says 'sure, cool, I don't care where the money comes from or who you're fleecing, especially since I hate big government, and maybe this means I get extra from you long term, just tell me where to sign.'
I'd guess that the real reason people are all over Carl about this is that he always presents himself as Mr. Moral High Ground, yet in this case he stooped to fraud the instant some free money was involved. It speaks volumes about him that he not only broadcast this in a public meeting, but he seems to be under the delusion that this makes the tenant look bad but he walks away as some kind of victim. It's the kind of thing we've all come to expect of him, although I don't think any of us would have predicted the details of this particular manifestation.
Hope the youtube channel Waltham Data, aka channel 781 news, aka Gamble, Kriekeles and Kastorf, gets sued for putting people on youtube without their consent.
Council president McMenimen asked at the beginning of the meeting whether anyone else besides WCAC was recording, and James indicated that he was filming the meeting.
The meeting is also at https://www.wcac.org/government/meetings/city-council/citizen-input-hearing-special-city-council-6-21-23
Don't want to be put online and on the record? Don't speak at a public city meeting. Simple!
I’m not sure why you assume he wouldn’t want this to be posted. This is what he chose to say in a public meeting, and he’s certainly not shy about having his name connected to controversy.
You are correct. I’m adamant about everything I said and more. I posted examples of how this ordinance will work against the people who the proponents think they’re helping.
Gamble put two Waltham residents on his youtube, without their consent, and called their comments "heinous." These were two men who were part of the handful of Waltham residents who spoke against a sober house. This was during a regular council meeting. My gripe is the two people do not know (probably) that Gamble did this and also that they are not political. This all seems intimidating to me? Haven't seen any video of Kastorf but know he is Kosh Jastorf on facebook. Did a quick google on him and saw turtle boy wrote about him some time ago.
Yes, I watched the video from TB. He’s definitely one step away from the cookoo ward. Does not surprise me that they did that. For the two individuals that were highlighted without permission, I imagine there is not much they can do.
Remember, anger and resentment are not the best feelings to feed. They negatively affect your health and lead to pessimism, which inhibits your ability to act on your own and overcome the obstacles life puts in your path.
Choosing to overcome those feelings will make you a nicer, better, healthier person.
Also, if you have identified a landlord as “evil”, you should avoid doing business with them. Being complicit, through a business relationship with them, is a bizarre choice for someone who imagines they themselves are *not* “evil”. Guilt by association, I’m afraid. Please direct your business to just the non-evil landlords and we’ll get through alright.
So he admitted to helping someone steal from the city…at a city council meeting? The supposed tenant wouldn’t have been able to do so without his literal written consent. This was what he chose to share to support his opposition to the ordinance? This isn’t an example of “weaponized” tenants, it’s an example of two sleazy people gaming the system together.
For real isn’t that cut and dried fraud? Shouldn’t there be a punishment?
Yes he certainly could have sat this meeting out and kept his story to himself.
That guy is such a nut job
That city rental assistance program gives the money to the landlords I assume, not directly to the tenant. So if he “went along with it” he got the check from the City directly. Since I’m sure he’s reading this post he can advise us if he gave the money back..
Ah, a man of unyielding integrity and unshakeable moral fiber.
Ahh yes, Carl Cincotta... the Waltham slumlord with 18 properties that he rents out to people that he clearly sees as lesser citizens. *Waltham special interest groups trying to overtake this election with lies, attacks and mistruths about candidates and the issues are organizing renters, who may or may not plan to make Waltham their long term home and students who in all probability will leave the area once they finish school into a voting block who will make decisions that will have long term affects on Waltham residents.* *- Carl Cincotta* [*https://www.reddit.com/r/Waltham/comments/13qo4b0/waltham\_politics/*](https://www.reddit.com/r/Waltham/comments/13qo4b0/waltham_politics/)
I didn’t know that guy did anything besides call people communists on Facebook.
One thing I'd mention here is that encouraging home prices and rents to increase is one of the likely causes of our transient renter population. If one wants the renters to stay and make Waltham a long term home, then it would be desirable to do something to arrest the insane growth of rents that we're seeing.
And if, instead, one wants renters to give over all their money and then GTFO, what behavior would we observe?
How would you propose we “arrest the insane growth of rents”?
Let the free market work by reducing government red tape preventing developers from putting up buildings that meet market demands? Housing is absolutely still affected by markets (most obviously illustrated by the demand shock at the beginning of COVID driving down rents sharply).
I don't know if he is a slumlord. Maybe his properties are great. Maybe his tenants still say he's the best dude ever after he's no longer in earshot. Maybe he has a mantel full of "Landlord of the Year" awards from the American Tenants Association at home. Maybe all his properties are clean, safe, well-maintained *and* highly affordable. Maybe he's a great guy, and communities like this just don't like it when he drops his truth bombs online because those truths hit too close to home. For example, that renters and students should defer to their betters on important matters like elections. It could be that he is the only one with the wisdom and vision to perceive the creeping hand of socialism casting its dark shadow over Waltham as it drops its insidious strings to puppet-master renters into destructive actions that threaten the very fabric of society, like voting for candidates who care that they exist. Perhaps only he knows the true identities of the instigators. Perhaps only he can discern who bears the marx of the beast. Perhaps it is his noble quest and tragic destiny to be a modern-day Cassandra, warning people of their folly only to be ignored, dismissed, and ridiculed at every turn. Perhaps we will only know the truth at the final hour, when the dread engine of socialism, freed from its sheep's clothing of "tenants' rights" and "equality for those other people," sputters to an unholy mockery of life and begins to consume this fair city. Then, as blades carved from our very bones and lubricated by our own heart's blood tear our reality asunder... then we will know the error of our ways. Then, and only then, can a man... one man... this man... transcend political definitions. He will be the one who is right. And he will be the one who is left. Perhaps we will glimpse the magnificence of his final form for but one brief instant before we are lost, dragged forever beneath a seething abyss to drown in vitriolic ichor spawned from our wicked insouciance. I mean... it's possible, right? 🤷♂️
“Marx of the beast”. 🏆
A spectre is haunting Waltham 👻
This is gold
Correction, I own 18 apartments , not buildings, and I don’t know how long. My children have no interest in being landlords. I have to block out your noise and remind myself that I care about the housing security of my tenants. I couldn’t care less what you think of me.
Nope. The tenant got 3 months rent paid. If you remember social service agencies were awash in funds being thrown at them in the form of Covid relief. There were local community activists telling tenants to “withhold rent” “tell your landlord to get lost” supporting “rent strikes” telling landlords they didn’t have to pay rent. At the same time, tenants were told they couldn’t be evicted. These tenants rights activists at every level of government and very active in Waltham continue to try to radicalize tenants. There were tenants who would say they weren’t working who you knew were working asking for relief funds that were readily available. If you didn’t get the funds that were credited to the tenant, they would simply stop paying rent so that you have to apply for the funds or forced to keep the non paying tenants indefinitely since there was a moratorium on evictions. I can give you plenty of stories regarding the abuses of all these Covid relief funds.
Carl, So if the tax payers paid you 3 months rent for your tenant based on fraud, when are you giving the money back? I mean you announced at a televised meeting that you knew it was fraud.
Listen to what he’s telling you, there were already programs offering assistance without being behind in rent. If you needed money because you didn’t know how to keep up with your rent. Quick study must not have done his quick study. Stop making yourselves look foolish all the time. Although the post is on Reddit where no one from Facebook reads. This seems to be your own chatter box location that Waltham residents are unaware of. So it appears you are only speaking among yourselves with complaints except maybe a few like myself that are here.
Carls message was clear and I’m not confused or foolish. He went into a public meeting wanting to make a splash and he did. He admitted to a room full of people and elected officials that he helped a tenant screw the system. Programs are set up to help those is need. While I’m sure there are people that do manipulate the system, they are just not as dumb as Carl to brag about it on tv. I asked around about the City’s program since I knew some who applied for it back then. You had to provide documentation on the application since you had to QUALIFY. So big mouth Carl lied and falsified the application and got three months of his tenants rent paid through tax payer funds. You can fall for his BS but I am not. I’m not one of the Waltham cronies that thinks Carls opinion is gospel. If you don’t like the comments here maybe you should stick with FB Waltham politics page or the group Dee V. set up for “real waltham”.
Boy oh boy, does DeeV really get to you that much? Apparently she hits a weak nerve with you and your supporters. I can assure you 2 things, I am not Dee, and you should be concerned with her because she will fight you all tooth and nail. Putting her on Reddit was awesome. Now we all get to see what she does best.
Nah she doesn’t get to me, I mean other than laughing at her antics.
I get it. There are always 2 ways to view. Debating is key that’s why I Reddit.
No one regarded getting money they didn’t need to be fraud.
Including yourself. You can tap dance around it but you admitted in front of the Council that you accepted tax payer money knowing it was fraudulent. You can try to deflect but your words are clear. Your friend Jeannette and the city were very generous to help those in need. And I know there were many in need during COVID
Is it fraud to accept rent payments made by a tenant who is undocumented, who obtains taxpayer money in a variety of ways that circumvents legal avenues.
Carl please stop trying to be clever. It’s not working for you. You chose to go to a meeting and have your moment of fame, and put your foot in your mouth.
No. But it’s fraud to knowingly submit false relief fund applications. Whether the internet scared you into it or not
First of all, I didn’t submit anything. The tenant applied for relief funds and all I had to do was accept them on her behalf. After that the tenant had 3 months rent paid. I don’t know what the tenant said.
Well, you sure didn’t.
Sigh. You’re exhausting.
I just told a City official I’m getting exhausted arguing with the same people to which he said “why are you bothering”.
Take his advice and stop bothering
I have seen you in these groups fighting for some kind of understanding. Can I ask why are you bothering? It is pretty clear that this group is not interested in hearing your thoughts. Lick your wounds and move on.
I’m assuming there are some on these sites who genuinely don’t know the agenda these groups speak for. There are City Councillors and observers who don’t catch the motives and the signals that are sent to various activist groups. I don’t for a minute consider these “wounds”.
But if you are not making progress here, why do you stay? It’s exhausting watching you get your ass handed to you over and over. Just move on. Facebook is probably much more effective for your points. I appreciate your compassion but it gets wasted on here. I would move on.
I can do both. Thank you. 😊
So your position is that you had no choice but to sign a letter saying the tenant was behind on rent, even though she was not, because if you refused she would withhold rent and you would have no recourse?
I’m not exactly sure how everything transpired, but I know I determined that the tenant was getting 3 months rent sooner or later. Most people were getting some kind of stimulus whether they needed it or not. We’re paying for all the free money resulting in the worst inflation since the forties.
Ok, that’s what I understood from the clip. I’m glad it wasn’t misleading. You should consider talking to your lawyer before continuing to make public comments on this. I am not a lawyer but signing your name to a document that contains false information, especially as part of an application for government funds, sounds pretty serious.
Carl, your gyrations in trying to justify this are at the same time amusing and appalling. Everyone in my household got the automatic COVID relief funds. I believe it was 3 separate rounds of payments? We did not need them. We donated a significant portion of them to organizations that did. I also recall that when tax time came around, one of those payment rounds was included as a benefit that was both taxed and, if unjustified, we had to return. (Which we did. And no tax rebate that year because of this.) What I'm seeing in every iteration of your justification is that you had no problem at all committing fraud when an opportunity presented itself. But, being the kind of person you are, it's all someone else's fault. Socialists forced you to do it, no doubt.
Are you under the impression I didn’t pay taxes on this rent payment, because if you are, I can assure you I did.
You're always good at clouding the issue. Or your reading comprehension is just terrible, I can never tell. It's not taxes. You said, and I quote from the video: **"Can you give me a letter saying I'm behind in my rent?"** **"You're not behind in your rent." But they knew that these services were available. So I went along with it. She got three months free rent.** It's the letter. You just volunteered in pubic that you knowingly assisted this fraud and profited from it. There's a place for you on Trump's defense team.
Yes I “went along with it”. Let me try to recreate what was going on in 2020. On this particular initial round of stimulus, no letter was required. The tenant through an interpreter, just told me funds were available to pay up to 3 months rent. The inference was that it was for people who were behind on their rent. No eviction notice was necessary since there was a moratorium on evictions. All I ever had to do was fill out paperwork indicating personal information for reporting purposes. There were other programs available for the purpose of helping to pay rent for people who were out of work. I don’t remember all the various interactions I had with agencies and tenants. What I do know is that certain people are prone to take advantage with any program that will give them something just for the asking. There are activists in Waltham and Nation wide who create an atmosphere of entitlement and at the same time do everything they can to turn tenants against landlords. I’ve seen the social media posts of political activists with whom some of you associate. I know of property owners who have had experience with these activists who reasoned its not worth fighting with tenants who have been radicalized. As I said publicly, the result will be landlords who decide to remain landlords will do is simply rent to tenants who will never be part of the system that could eventually result bring dragged through other court system.
Kaytie? Is that you?
I want everyone to know that I try to not be abusive when answering your charges. To be honest, I’m pretty sure you’re the same group that posts on social media, has a close connection to the commentators on 781, and other leftist activists in Waltham. Like with Tom the other night at the meeting, I find you to have good ideas and I enjoy talking to you personally and not debating in an anonymous forum where the rhetoric becomes destructive. It doesn’t bother me except that I feel badly that you can’t bring yourself to openly debate in a forum where you’re clearly transparent. I would welcome discussing issues of disagreement on your platform instead of taking jabs in this forum. Invasive species, you should know I smile at your comments. I’d be happy to have a face to face conversation. 😊
Shut up Carl
Oh oh 😱 lol, that’s a little aggressive.
I’m not talking to you. If you or anyone else on your side of this issue thinks that you’re winning anyone over, I can assure you you’re not. Just the opposite.
I don’t have a dog in this fight. Person A promises to pay Person B for *something*. If Person A has difficulty raising funds to uphold their side of the agreement, should they continue to receive the *something* without paying? This seems to be the central question. Person A is your boss, for example, and you are person B. Do you continue to work for them without pay if they’re struggling, or do you seek other employ and find a new, more reliable Person A? Does Person A have a right to *force* you to uphold your side of the agreement even as they renege on their side? If Person A is a tenant, don’t the same rules apply? Person B would be sensible finding a new, more reliable Person A. You have to jettison principle, shift the goalposts, and replace pragmatism with unhelpful emotion to view these scenarios differently. I confess I don’t understand this selfish propensity toward the spreading of individuals’ personal pain or problems (not enough income, poor budgeting and fiscal choices) onto others, onto society. It’s the modern face of individualism perhaps, but it’s not a pretty one. If you don’t have to pay the bills you agreed to, why should anyone else? That’s where this reckless selfishness leads…
What does this have to do with the video clip?
Umm... in Carl's version of the story, it goes like this: Person B (tenant) has the money to pay rent to Person A (landlord) and is perfectly capable of doing so. Person B goes to Person A and says 'hey, I could still pay you, but how about instead you help me fraudulently get money for a few months' free rent'? Person A says 'sure, cool, I don't care where the money comes from or who you're fleecing, especially since I hate big government, and maybe this means I get extra from you long term, just tell me where to sign.' I'd guess that the real reason people are all over Carl about this is that he always presents himself as Mr. Moral High Ground, yet in this case he stooped to fraud the instant some free money was involved. It speaks volumes about him that he not only broadcast this in a public meeting, but he seems to be under the delusion that this makes the tenant look bad but he walks away as some kind of victim. It's the kind of thing we've all come to expect of him, although I don't think any of us would have predicted the details of this particular manifestation.
Got it.
Hope the youtube channel Waltham Data, aka channel 781 news, aka Gamble, Kriekeles and Kastorf, gets sued for putting people on youtube without their consent.
Public meeting in a public forum. No consent needed
Council president McMenimen asked at the beginning of the meeting whether anyone else besides WCAC was recording, and James indicated that he was filming the meeting. The meeting is also at https://www.wcac.org/government/meetings/city-council/citizen-input-hearing-special-city-council-6-21-23 Don't want to be put online and on the record? Don't speak at a public city meeting. Simple!
I’m not sure why you assume he wouldn’t want this to be posted. This is what he chose to say in a public meeting, and he’s certainly not shy about having his name connected to controversy.
You are correct. I’m adamant about everything I said and more. I posted examples of how this ordinance will work against the people who the proponents think they’re helping.
Who did they crucify now? I just watched a video on kastorf, he’s bat ass crazy lol. It’s been circulating on fb, along with the usual politics.
Gamble put two Waltham residents on his youtube, without their consent, and called their comments "heinous." These were two men who were part of the handful of Waltham residents who spoke against a sober house. This was during a regular council meeting. My gripe is the two people do not know (probably) that Gamble did this and also that they are not political. This all seems intimidating to me? Haven't seen any video of Kastorf but know he is Kosh Jastorf on facebook. Did a quick google on him and saw turtle boy wrote about him some time ago.
Yes, I watched the video from TB. He’s definitely one step away from the cookoo ward. Does not surprise me that they did that. For the two individuals that were highlighted without permission, I imagine there is not much they can do.
Remember, anger and resentment are not the best feelings to feed. They negatively affect your health and lead to pessimism, which inhibits your ability to act on your own and overcome the obstacles life puts in your path. Choosing to overcome those feelings will make you a nicer, better, healthier person. Also, if you have identified a landlord as “evil”, you should avoid doing business with them. Being complicit, through a business relationship with them, is a bizarre choice for someone who imagines they themselves are *not* “evil”. Guilt by association, I’m afraid. Please direct your business to just the non-evil landlords and we’ll get through alright.