5 ms·

Er, in this case the x% is like, 30+%. Lots of people take ski weekends in the winter.

ChuckMcM 9y ago
Probably true but it doesn't really take away from the point of resources being tied up by a percentage that is significantly less than 50% of the population. Rents businesses essentially "short circuit" the flow of capital through the economy. So a "one percenter"[1] buys a cabin which he rents through AirBnB to other "one percenters". Because he isn't a hospitality business he doesn't hire desk staff, a concierge, or pay taxes that are funding local government efforts. Instead the 'rents' just recirculate right back into the "one percenter" pool. The absurd extreme of this notion is something like the vision in Elysium of a rich people enclave with no need of any human "non rich" staff. I don't see that actually coming to pass but as Gates and others have noted, it is important to understand how technology can distort an economy and work on ways to repair that distortion. [1] In quotes because it is a stand end for 'top n% where n << 50'
- wbl 9y ago
  Increased affordable housing supply in these areas would help. Unfortunately residents often don't want it.
  - blackguardx 9y ago
    They generally used to be very affordable until highly paid remote workers and vacation rentals became more popular.
  - mistermann 9y ago
    Q: What's the difference between a developer and an environmentalist? A: A developer is someone who wants to build a cabin in the woods; an environmentalist is someone who already has one.
- Consultant32452 9y ago
  If you're talking about a true 1%er they're hiring handy-man types and maids. They're paying property tax on those homes, funding roads and schools they will never use. It's highly likely they are paying other state and local taxes too, including but not limited to income taxes. All of the other 1%ers who come into that area are spending money at local restaurants or other venues which is pulling money out of the 1% and into the hands of locals. If you're talking more like a 20%er, then they are either doing the same thing, or they live locally so even though they're not hiring a maid/handy-man, money is going from the 1%er to a person living in the local economy (themselves).
  - mistermann 9y ago
    Whew, I feel better now that it's clearly going to all work out with just a temporary minor hiccup as the economy readjusts.
    - Consultant32452 9y ago
      If the citizens of these towns want more affordable housing, they are free to vote such zoning into existence. If they continue to shoot themselves in the foot, then I'm not sure how many crocodile tears I'm supposed to shed for them.
      - mistermann 9y ago
        Oh right, in a democracy "the people" make the decisions, I forgot about that. /s
        Consultant32452 9y ago
        The smaller the government the easier it is for the people to have control. I mean, we're talking about towns of a few thousand people here. It has to be pretty easy to sway an election over a single issue like this if the people are in your favor.
  - ChuckMcM 9y ago
aphextron 9y ago
>Er, in this case the x% is like, 30+%. Lots of people take ski weekends in the winter. But the reality is that the resorts make their profits off a tiny percentage of the clientele. The middle class family who stays in a budget hotel, buys season passes, and brings their own food, ends up being a net loss for the company. Practically all the money is made on the full price daily ticket sales, expensive marked up restaurants, and high end real estate sales/rentals. Without the rich people who blow $20k on a week of skiing once a year, the industry as we know it simply would not exist.
_delirium 9y ago
You are significantly overestimating. According to the ski industry itself, which tends to use a fairly generous definition that includes things such as cross-country skiing, only around 7% of Americans ski: http://www.planetski.eu/news/4090 http://www.planetski.eu/news/4090 And many of these are people who live in day-trip distance of ski areas rather than renting or owning second homes, so the proportion in that market is even lower.

Probably true but it doesn't really take away from the point of resources being tied up by a percentage that is significantly less than 50% of the population. Rents businesses essentially "short circuit" the flow of capital through the economy. So a "one percenter"[1] buys a cabin which he rents through AirBnB to other "one percenters". Because he isn't a hospitality business he doesn't hire desk staff, a concierge, or pay taxes that are funding local government efforts. Instead the 'rents' just recirculate right back into the "one percenter" pool. The absurd extreme of this notion is something like the vision in Elysium of a rich people enclave with no need of any human "non rich" staff. I don't see that actually coming to pass but as Gates and others have noted, it is important to understand how technology can distort an economy and work on ways to repair that distortion. [1] In quotes because it is a stand end for 'top n% where n << 50'

wbl 9y ago
Increased affordable housing supply in these areas would help. Unfortunately residents often don't want it.
- blackguardx 9y ago
  They generally used to be very affordable until highly paid remote workers and vacation rentals became more popular.
- mistermann 9y ago
  Q: What's the difference between a developer and an environmentalist? A: A developer is someone who wants to build a cabin in the woods; an environmentalist is someone who already has one.
Consultant32452 9y ago
If you're talking about a true 1%er they're hiring handy-man types and maids. They're paying property tax on those homes, funding roads and schools they will never use. It's highly likely they are paying other state and local taxes too, including but not limited to income taxes. All of the other 1%ers who come into that area are spending money at local restaurants or other venues which is pulling money out of the 1% and into the hands of locals. If you're talking more like a 20%er, then they are either doing the same thing, or they live locally so even though they're not hiring a maid/handy-man, money is going from the 1%er to a person living in the local economy (themselves).
- mistermann 9y ago
  Whew, I feel better now that it's clearly going to all work out with just a temporary minor hiccup as the economy readjusts.
  - Consultant32452 9y ago
    If the citizens of these towns want more affordable housing, they are free to vote such zoning into existence. If they continue to shoot themselves in the foot, then I'm not sure how many crocodile tears I'm supposed to shed for them.
    - mistermann 9y ago
      Oh right, in a democracy "the people" make the decisions, I forgot about that. /s
      - Consultant32452 9y ago
        The smaller the government the easier it is for the people to have control. I mean, we're talking about towns of a few thousand people here. It has to be pretty easy to sway an election over a single issue like this if the people are in your favor.
- ChuckMcM 9y ago

aphextron 9y ago

>Er, in this case the x% is like, 30+%. Lots of people take ski weekends in the winter. But the reality is that the resorts make their profits off a tiny percentage of the clientele. The middle class family who stays in a budget hotel, buys season passes, and brings their own food, ends up being a net loss for the company. Practically all the money is made on the full price daily ticket sales, expensive marked up restaurants, and high end real estate sales/rentals. Without the rich people who blow $20k on a week of skiing once a year, the industry as we know it simply would not exist.

_delirium 9y ago

You are significantly overestimating. According to the ski industry itself, which tends to use a fairly generous definition that includes things such as cross-country skiing, only around 7% of Americans ski: http://www.planetski.eu/news/4090 http://www.planetski.eu/news/4090 And many of these are people who live in day-trip distance of ski areas rather than renting or owning second homes, so the proportion in that market is even lower.