Blaid wrote:Hipster tax is conceptually the most wrong headed idea, the only places that have hipsters are places that are already cruising along the raggedy apex of the gentrification process. Sounds like y'all are advocating wealth redistribution by taxing success.
Portland has long passed that raggedy apex. Tax what you don't want.
But more seriously, re this New Urbanism that AEN is talking about-- is this a fad that's at it's apex, and about to be replaced by a newer fad; or a new long term planning direction that has legs?
"Liberalism is arbitrarily selective in its choice of whose dignity to champion." Adrian Vermeule
Blaidd Drwg wrote:
Johno is talking about a fully functioning suburbanmallsprawlvirus they are trying to remake into a residential feel urban village. The only lynchpin to secure the whole deal is a huge TOD hub, and even then, it serves mostly retail workers not residents. They have a tough row to hoe.
Back to disagreeing. The Village location is Pac Highway - its development mostly came before the Mall. It's an impractical walk to the Mall; but the Mall (and Boeing) is the $$$ cow that allows the town to dream its Village Dreams.
Also, there are jobs on Pac Highway. There's a strip club, a bunch of Somali stores, some chop shops, fast food restaurants, a pawn shop, a gas station, and some street entrepreneurs.
Oh, and the Immigration & Naturalization Center is right up the street.
*******
My money is on the development straight south of the Mall. The one Segale is developing from farmland. In other words, more sprawl.
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
Blaidd Drwg wrote:
Johno is talking about a fully functioning suburbanmallsprawlvirus they are trying to remake into a residential feel urban village. The only lynchpin to secure the whole deal is a huge TOD hub, and even then, it serves mostly retail workers not residents. They have a tough row to hoe.
Back to disagreeing. The Village location is Pac Highway - its development mostly came before the Mall. It's an impractical walk to the Mall; but the Mall (and Boeing) is the $$$ cow that allows the town to dream its Village Dreams.
Also, there are jobs on Pac Highway. There's a strip club, a bunch of Somali stores, some chop shops, fast food restaurants, a pawn shop, a gas station, and some street entrepreneurs.
Oh, and the Immigration & Naturalization Center is right up the street.
*******
My money is on the development straight south of the Mall. The one Segale is developing from farmland. In other words, more sprawl.
The Pac highway one will fail as will the TOD..the City has no purpose, it's entirely driven by retail taxes. If the TOD center had any real jobs to serve it might...but strip clubs, chop shops etc are just the scab on the wound that is Pac highway.
"He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that." JS Mill
Blaid wrote:Hipster tax is conceptually the most wrong headed idea, the only places that have hipsters are places that are already cruising along the raggedy apex of the gentrification process. Sounds like y'all are advocating wealth redistribution by taxing success.
Portland has long passed that raggedy apex. Tax what you don't want.
But more seriously, re this New Urbanism that AEN is talking about-- is this a fad that's at it's apex, and about to be replaced by a newer fad; or a new long term planning direction that has legs?
You're dead wrong about Portland from a planning standpoint. Snark is expensive. When the hipsters (Yuppees, nouveau riche term de jour) leave, your city is sinking unless it has a base...which frankly, this is America, we quit doing base a long time ago.
New Urbanism is not new nor is it a fad. New Urbanism is the twitch that people get when they look at suburbs, highway strip malls and entire states like Arizona, and Nevada and think..."what a shithole, how can we make this look there was ever a reason to be here. "
"He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that." JS Mill
Blaidd Drwg wrote:
The Pac highway one will fail as will the TOD..the City has no purpose, it's entirely driven by retail taxes. If the TOD center had any real jobs to serve it might...but strip clubs, chop shops etc are just the scab on the wound that is Pac highway.
I agree with your Pac Hy Village comment. By TOD, do you mean the transit/light rail center?
BTW, what is your opinion of the Light Rail, as currently implemented in Seattle, etc.?
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
Blaidd Drwg wrote:
The Pac highway one will fail as will the TOD..the City has no purpose, it's entirely driven by retail taxes. If the TOD center had any real jobs to serve it might...but strip clubs, chop shops etc are just the scab on the wound that is Pac highway.
I agree with your Pac. Hy Village comment. By TOD, do you mean the transit/light rail center?
BTW, what is your opinion of the Light Rail?
Transit Oriented Development has worked really well where light rail works well (setting aside the fact it probably costs more than it returns in terms of transp dollars, that is not really the point)
Unfortunately, I don't think it's working well in the PNW. I want to believe.....but so far the only thing that is failing worse is bus rapid transit....holy shit! King Co screwed the pooch on this one so far.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
not to be a total downer, i think a couple NE revisionist developments locally might actually do well long term. Burien and (believe it or not...) White Center. Now, Centre Blanc (misnamed as all hell) may be a long play but there are solid reasons to belive it can turn
"He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that." JS Mill
So if you run off the rif raf where do they go? It's not like they evaporate just because they get forced out of the neighborhood.
I don't know who said it and I'm too lazy to read back through the thread but good schools, convincing people that can't afford kids to stop making the little future ex cons, and actually providing sustainable long term jobs that a family can live on is a bit more at the top of my list than a cafe on every corner. But that's a fucking fantasy so long as there so many stupid motherfuckers allowed to breed and vote.
it's not about running off the rif raf at all, but it's an economic reality that the more economically successful the place is, the less affordable it is to everyone else. Hence, in Seattle more poor people drive in to the city than affluent people.
gentrification and planning principles are on parallel tracks....and both tracks are powered by Capital and jobs is the root of this, but as a country, we've kinda decided that jobs for people are a lot less important than "fuck you, i do what i want"
"He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that." JS Mill
I live in the middle of a medium-sized city with a consolidated city/county metro government. I pay much higher property taxes (up to four times higher) than people in more remote parts of the county, and the services I receive in return are on par with those in the shittiest parts of Washington, DC. Metro "leaders" talk about developing areas in and around downtown, but nothing comes of that other than tax credits for their friends' businesses, a money pit of a downtown arena and condo units (also subsidized) that sit vacant. When they talk about dealing with the traffic that commuters face, no one suggests they stop encouraging people to live so far from their jobs.
That said, I still think people who live in remote parts of the county even though they work in the city are nuts. Commuting is misery.
"The biggest problems that we’re facing right now have to do with George Bush trying to bring more and more power into the executive branch and not go through Congress at all."
Blaidd Drwg wrote:it's not about running off the rif raf at all, but it's an economic reality that the more economically successful the place is, the less affordable it is to everyone else. Hence, in Seattle more poor people drive in than affluent people.
gentrification and planning principles are on parallel tracks....and both tracks are powered by Capital and jobs is the root of this, but as a country, we've kinda decided that jobs for people are a lot less important than "fuck you, i do what i want"
Same difference. Raise the cost to live in town and so the poor move out but still have to drive into town for work, groceries, etc, and so the $4+ a gallon gas only makes them more poor.
All this sunshine and rainbows bullshit would be great if it actually benefitted someone other than rich white assholes who don't really need it in the first place.
Maybe I'm missing the point. I'm short on sleep and generally pissed at the world.
Blaidd Drwg wrote:it's not about running off the rif raf at all, but it's an economic reality that the more economically successful the place is, the less affordable it is to everyone else. Hence, in Seattle more poor people drive in than affluent people.
gentrification and planning principles are on parallel tracks....and both tracks are powered by Capital and jobs is the root of this, but as a country, we've kinda decided that jobs for people are a lot less important than "fuck you, i do what i want"
Same difference. Raise the cost to live in town and so the poor move out but still have to drive into town for work, groceries, etc, and so the $4+ a gallon gas only makes them more poor.
All this sunshine and rainbows bullshit would be great if it actually benefitted someone other than rich white assholes who don't really need it in the first place.
Maybe I'm missing the point. I'm short on sleep and generally pissed at the world.
well if you really don't like the effects of gentrification, go beat up a faggot. Gays are the Shock Troops of gentrification....first it's a nice homo couple who gardens, then a couple kayaking lesbians, pretty soon whitey be running yo ass out.
"He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that." JS Mill
I live in the middle of a medium-sized city with a consolidated city/county metro government. I pay much higher property taxes (up to four times higher) than people in more remote parts of the county, and the services I receive in return are on par with those in the shittiest parts of Washington, DC. Metro "leaders" talk about developing areas in and around downtown, but nothing comes of that other than tax credits for their friends' businesses, a money pit of a downtown arena and condo units (also subsidized) that sit vacant. When they talk about dealing with the traffic that commuters face, no one suggests they stop encouraging people to live so far from their jobs.
That said, I still think people who live in remote parts of the county even though they work in the city are nuts. Commuting is misery.
Your services are really as bad as DC? emergency response time? water sewer garbage? access to all utilities?
I guess it's possible.
Whenever I hear people complain about their taxes I want to say, then don't live where other people want to live, scarcity of the resources drives up cost. The suburban model of home ownership is that your home is now just another vehicle for storing and creating (and often losing) wealth. you're partly complaining that your asset is worth too much money.
"He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that." JS Mill
Blaidd Drwg wrote:
Whenever I hear people complain about their taxes I want to say, then don't live where other people want to live, scarcity of the resources drives up cost.
What do you say when people complain about badge-heavy cops? Move to the country?
IMO, citizens have a right to see their money spent wisely, not wasted. And to get a fair value for their tax dollar.
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
Blaidd Drwg wrote: Whenever I hear people complain about their taxes I want to say, then don't live where other people want to live, scarcity of the resources drives up cost. The suburban model of home ownership is that your home is now just another vehicle for storing and creating (and often losing) wealth. you're partly complaining that your asset is worth too much money.
There is very little direct correlation between tax burden and service efficiency/effectiveness-- high tax burdens can create the opposite effect. You know that.
Case and point: Chicago schools.
"Liberalism is arbitrarily selective in its choice of whose dignity to champion." Adrian Vermeule
Turd I made no assertion that there was a correlation between pauying a lot and getting cadillac service. I simply find it hard to believe Colorado has worse services than metro DC but I've have never lived in either one. DV cops suck pretty bad from what i understand.
Tax Rate too high? fair enough, you vote on this shit, vote the other way.
Efficiency of Money Spent? Fair enough....you vote on auditors, County Council Members, PTA...
but far and away, the largest determiner in the amount of tax you pay? The Value of your Home.
You are locked into this by a series of choices you make, the one you have the greatest sway over? Where you live.
Johno, I completely respect your point, If you pay a lot in taxes, you'd expect to see that money spent well. Turd is correct, depending on who's spending, often it's money down the hole. I pay a pretty decent chunk in taxes in Seattle. I'm pleased with my kids school, with the parks and with the overall way the city government is run. It's ain't perfect but it ain't bad. One less stadium would not hurt but that's how it goes....that's the choice I made for an easy commute and a job that pays.
"He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that." JS Mill
Blaidd Drwg wrote:
but far and away, the largest determiner in the amount of tax you pay? The Value of your Home.
You are locked into this by a series of choices you make, the one you have the greatest sway over? Where you live.
BTW, there's a line of thought that makes sense to me: shitty city schools drive folks to the 'burbs, where families pay more, in taxes & commute, to get their kids into decent schools. Real estate in certain school districts commands more $ because of the good reputation of the schools there. The higher price of real estate is an additional "tax" those people pay.
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
Blaidd Drwg wrote:
but far and away, the largest determiner in the amount of tax you pay? The Value of your Home.
You are locked into this by a series of choices you make, the one you have the greatest sway over? Where you live.
BTW, there's a line of thought that makes sense to me: shitty city schools drive folks to the 'burbs, where families pay more, in taxes & commute, to get their kids into decent schools. Real estate in certain school districts commands more $ because of the good reputation of the schools there. The higher price of real estate is an additional "tax" those people pay.
The confounding factor is that the real estate is thought of as a legitimate investment...it sometimes holds its value and sometimes it doesn't. We were really good at thinking about our homes as an investment when you could flip them for double digit percentage increases in value....when that fiasco dried up everyone acts all butthurt about their tax burden and the shittiness of their investing.
"He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that." JS Mill
Blaidd Drwg wrote:Your services are really as bad as DC? emergency response time? water sewer garbage? access to all utilities?
I guess it's possible.
My street is prone to flooding for no reason other than the neglect of the city. We have inadequate drainage that was made worse by the streets being resurfaced without being regraded. The city also refuses to clean the streets. If it weren't for busy-body retirees in the neighborhood, all of our storm drains would be permanently blocked by debris.
But I don't know about emergency response times.
Whenever I hear people complain about their taxes I want to say, then don't live where other people want to live, scarcity of the resources drives up cost. The suburban model of home ownership is that your home is now just another vehicle for storing and creating (and often losing) wealth. you're partly complaining that your asset is worth too much money.
No, I'm complaining about local politics being a clusterfuck. Our tax rates are higher than those the metro government charges in other parts of the county. I wish my house was worth as much as some that have both lower rates and lower total tax bills.
"The biggest problems that we’re facing right now have to do with George Bush trying to bring more and more power into the executive branch and not go through Congress at all."
My experience with New Urbanism is that it's every bit as depressing as Old Suburbanism, only you've got J. Crew and an Apple Store vs. TJ Maxx and a Best Buy. Same top-down mentality, smothering architecture and banality.
milosz wrote:My experience with New Urbanism is that it's every bit as depressing as Old Suburbanism, only you've got J. Crew and an Apple Store vs. TJ Maxx and a Best Buy. Same top-down mentality, smothering architecture and banality.
ZING
"He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that." JS Mill
I live in the middle of a medium-sized city with a consolidated city/county metro government. I pay much higher property taxes (up to four times higher) than people in more remote parts of the county, and the services I receive in return are on par with those in the shittiest parts of Washington, DC. Metro "leaders" talk about developing areas in and around downtown, but nothing comes of that other than tax credits for their friends' businesses, a money pit of a downtown arena and condo units (also subsidized) that sit vacant. When they talk about dealing with the traffic that commuters face, no one suggests they stop encouraging people to live so far from their jobs.
That said, I still think people who live in remote parts of the county even though they work in the city are nuts. Commuting is misery.
Blaidd Drwg wrote:What is the basis for your actual tax rate being higher?
The parts of the county outside of the old city limits didn't want the city's high taxes and shitty services. They were allowed to maintain their cheaper, better services; but were still given seats on the metro council that decides how not to provide services to the city.
And, Turd, I was talking about my county, not Baltimore County. Anyone who lives in either Baltimore or the surrounding strip-mall purgatory that is its suburbs is insane.
"The biggest problems that we’re facing right now have to do with George Bush trying to bring more and more power into the executive branch and not go through Congress at all."
milosz wrote:My experience with New Urbanism is that it's every bit as depressing as Old Suburbanism, only you've got J. Crew and an Apple Store vs. TJ Maxx and a Best Buy. Same top-down mentality, smothering architecture and banality.
Blaidd Drwg wrote:What is the basis for your actual tax rate being higher?
The parts of the county outside of the old city limits didn't want the city's high taxes and shitty services. They were allowed to maintain their cheaper, better services; but were still given seats on the metro council that decides how not to provide services to the city.
And, Turd, I was talking about my county, not Baltimore County. Anyone who lives in either Baltimore or the surrounding strip-mall purgatory that is its suburbs is insane.
I see why you might rant about politics
"He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that." JS Mill
