rats in the palisades--DISGUSTING!

[straight outta camden]

Originally Posted by pbergen

when my parents finally moved out of the city to the suburbs, we were so thankful that we didn't have to deal with vermin anymore. seriously, they're a reality of everyday life for a very large chunk of new yorkers.

Sure. But you're missing the local subtleties here. Pacific Palisades is not the kind of place where the very large chunk of people live. It's an extremely expensive suburb--or would be a suburb if it were possible to tell the difference between the city of LA and the suburbs of LA. Think one of the nicer parts of Long Island. The mere thought of any living thing turning up in the Palisades that makes less than $100,000 a year is horrifying. A bunch of rats is way beyond the pale.

I thought the LA Weekly piece was fun, though it was marred slightly by the usual LA Weekly insistence on the incompetence of local officials, uselessness of politicians etc. That magazine is written by people even more pessimistic about LA than the denizens of city-data.

[katenik]

Originally Posted by straight outta camden

Sure. But you're missing the local subtleties here. Pacific Palisades is not the kind of place where the very large chunk of people live. It's an extremely expensive suburb--or would be a suburb if it were possible to tell the difference between the city of LA and the suburbs of LA. Think one of the nicer parts of Long Island. The mere thought of any living thing turning up in the Palisades that makes less than $100,000 a year is horrifying. A bunch of rats is way beyond the pale.

I thought the LA Weekly piece was fun, though it was marred slightly by the usual LA Weekly insistence on the incompetence of local officials, uselessness of politicians etc. That magazine is written by people even more pessimistic about LA than the denizens of city-data.

sorry. it had the most complete coverage of the story that i could find, but yeah, it's a rag!

[hsw]

Suspect NYC has far more amusing issues for the affluent than does LA's Westside....

Those $10MM+, pre-war apts in Manhattan often have a rat issue to point that they need to install "filters" in bldg's sewage pipes to avoid rats surfacing in one's toilet bowl....

Most of these $10MM+ pre-war apts have inept, old HVAC systems....prob inferior climate control vs a typical, newer house in the lovely Inland Empire....

And Manhattan is only place in US where the sophisticate wearing a dapper $5K+ suit and $20K+ watch often commutes to office in a dangerous, dirty cab worth about ?$100 driven by someone who clearly can't drive safely....or is driven around in a POS Linc TownCar, also driven by someone who can't drive, but wears a cheap suit, unlike the cabbie....

And guys commuting to Manhattan from lovely suburbs like Greenwich typically choose a decidedly 3rdWorld commute involving some combination of a sweaty, smelly, communal train ride and a pleasant walk through Midtown to office, in midst of either cold/brown slush or dripping humidity....

[pbergen]

Originally Posted by straight outta camden

Sure. But you're missing the local subtleties here. Pacific Palisades is not the kind of place where the very large chunk of people live. It's an extremely expensive suburb--or would be a suburb if it were possible to tell the difference between the city of LA and the suburbs of LA. Think one of the nicer parts of Long Island. The mere thought of any living thing turning up in the Palisades that makes less than $100,000 a year is horrifying. A bunch of rats is way beyond the pale.

I thought the LA Weekly piece was fun, though it was marred slightly by the usual LA Weekly insistence on the incompetence of local officials, uselessness of politicians etc. That magazine is written by people even more pessimistic about LA than the denizens of city-data.

yup, i'm familiar with pacific palisades and am not trying to minimize the nastiness of the rodent situation there. but as hsw mentioned above, nyc's super affluent sometimes have to deal with serious vermin issues themselves - things that you wouldn't expect for such wealthy people. as bad as this story about rats in the palisades is, the equivalent class of super elite in nyc probably deal with far worse.

again, not trying to diminish this story or how outrageous it is. it was pretty shocking for me to read, since i'd never really seen or heard about that much vermin in la. it's just that in nyc, seeing vermin is a daily occurrence on the sidewalks or subway tracks, in the parks, or in many people's apartments.

[pbergen]

Originally Posted by hsw

Suspect NYC has far more amusing issues for the affluent than does LA's Westside....

Those $10MM+, pre-war apts in Manhattan often have a rat issue to point that they need to install "filters" in bldg's sewage pipes to avoid rats surfacing in one's toilet bowl....

ahh, the old "rat popping through your toilet bowl to bite you in the a$$ (literally)" routine...only in new york. that's why you always need to keep your toilet seat down if you live in an older and/or rat-infested building.

[Delron]

Sweet baby Jesus, what a horror story. That toxic dump should have been bulldozed, with the twin 78 year old nutcases still in the house along with their "pet" rats.

Absolutely disgusting. Check out the other rat/rodent topic for more, BTW...

[majoun]

Originally Posted by straight outta camden

Sure. But you're missing the local subtleties here. Pacific Palisades is not the kind of place where the very large chunk of people live. It's an extremely expensive suburb--or would be a suburb if it were possible to tell the difference between the city of LA and the suburbs of LA. Think one of the nicer parts of Long Island. The mere thought of any living thing turning up in the Palisades that makes less than $100,000 a year is horrifying. A bunch of rats is way beyond the pale.

I thought the LA Weekly piece was fun, though it was marred slightly by the usual LA Weekly insistence on the incompetence of local officials, uselessness of politicians etc. That magazine is written by people even more pessimistic about LA than the denizens of city-data.

When I went to Uni High many years ago, I remember the biology teacher stating that Beverly Hills, Bel Air, and the Hollywood Hills had the most rats in Los Angeles because the very affluent tend to create more trash for them to feed upon. I suspect the same might be true in the Palisades.