Wait, I think I finally caught you on some BS here my Frenn.
"Finally caught" me "on some BS" ??
I didn't realize you were trying so hard, sorry to disappoint you,
I don't post BS.
I know for a FACT that PC was practically EMPTY, when the street was closed to traffic..
Couple of Lonely Diners, and mostly Empty tables.
When the streets were first closed to traffic it was May of 2014, the BEGINNING of one of the slowest summers we've had here in Sos?a in many years and also the beginning of SANTO DOMINGO's (NOT THE MAYOR's) crackdown on prostitution . . . "Passions" and "CMP" closed down, etc.
It wasn't slow BECAUSE the streets were closed, it was slow BECAUSE it was LOW SEASON and also one of the slowest years we've had down here.
Was it a NICE Idea.. oh, I think it was great, not disagreeing with you.. would have been nice if it worked, but it did NOT.
At least we both agree on something it was a GREAT plan. But here is where you don't seem to get it. It DID WORK. It actually started to work out very well.
What you seem not to get is that the street closings were discontinued because of a few people who had their own agenda, NOT because it wasn't working.
The fact that it was normal slow season, and an abnormally slow season at that, see post #54 here:
http://dr1.com/forums/dr.debates/141...-2014-a-6.html , and that SANTO DOMINGO (NOT THE MAYOR) initiated a crackdown on prostitution, only helped the agenda of the few who wanted it open again.
and so you cant have it both ways...
First of all YOU seem to be confused about having it both ways:
first you post this:
Was it a NICE Idea.. oh, I think it was great . . .
Then you post this:
it was NOT a good Idea for PC . . .
Unfortunately YOU can't have it both ways . . .
I have it ONE way, IT WAS A GOOD IDEA AND IT WAS WORKING
It did NOT work, for whatever reason.. So it was NOT a good Idea for PC, NOR the Businesses who were Crying as they were bleeding Money every day.
Again, IT DID WORK AND IT WAS A GREAT IDEA. It was an EXCEPTIONALLY SLOW SEASON, a couple of those "Businesses who were Crying" also had their own agenda, and erroneously, like some here, attributed all their woes to the street closing, and not the real problem of it being an abnormally slow season. Also in the case of one of the more outspoken of the businesses crying, his business was a FAILURE because his business model was old, slow season/high season/any season, he had an agenda, he didn't own a bar or restaurant so he couldn't benefit from tables on the street.
So now that the cars are back and the Street is Busy again (by your own obervations) mainly because the Idea was abandoned, you want to BOTH Give credit to Iliana Neuman for the Idea, which did NOT work
AND at the same time you want to say you are happy that the street is Busy gain ?
Again, let me help you out "jd", can I call you "jd? . . . Thanks
It is NOW TWO YEARS LATER. The street IS NOT busy "mainly because the Idea was abandond". The street IS BUSY because of a sudden influx of tourists to Sos?a, and sepcifically on Pedro Clisante, NOT because Ilana Neumann's idea did not work, IT DID!, and yes I want to give Ilana credit for it!
And even though I haven't stated ANYWHERE, as you incorrectly want to attribute to me, that I am "happy that the street is Busy again." I will state it now, yes, I am VERY HAPPY for the businesses on Pedro Clisante that the "street is busy again."
sorry, your facts are correct. but your reasoning can not be based on both, they are Direct Opposites.
My facts are correct, my reasoning is based on the facts, your reasoning is based on your incorrect ASSUMPTION that the plan failed, IT DIDN'T.
not arguing, but it just does not add up.
I also am "not arguing", just stating some FACTS . . . AND THE FACTS DO ADD UP, your assumptions and speculation DO NOT.
Any by the way "jd". You did say I could call you "jd"? . . . If you want to accuse me of posting BS, no problem, just be specific about the BS I post and not your speculation.