4 ms·

Building large buildings to fill with empty space and spending huge amounts of money catering to the ultrarich, while there are still massive housing problems i

Building large buildings to fill with empty space and spending huge amounts of money catering to the ultrarich, while there are still massive housing problems in NYC, is definitely going to offend some people. A society which enables the rich to produce extraneous waste - literally making multimillion dollar luxury home spaces just to fill with nothing, so that you can skirt the law for building codes, and not even allow a person to live there - yeah that's offensive. The rich should be able to buy things they like, yes. But of course it's offensive when the country has a housing crises and the rich are building houses that nobody is allowed to live in, just so they can get a better view? I mean yeah that's pretty obviously offensive and a strong, real reason that people are opposing these towers - it's described in the article.

wongarsu 7y ago
If given the choice I think most of the ultra rich would prefer to fill useless space with living space to rent out. It would mean lots of money with little drawback. But they aren't given that choice. If they want their high towers building codes force them to leave that space empty. If having a building that high isn't the main problem then the fault is clearly with the building code, but with the developers or the customers.
- spaceheretostay 7y ago
  > But they aren't given that choice. If your argument is framed that the ultrarich aren't given enough choices in how to live in luxury, I'm not sure I'll understand the rest of your post. Yes the building code has a problem that is contributing to this issue, but let's get real here: The ultrarich are given all the options in the world. Not every option they choose need be so offensive to regular people.
  - wongarsu 7y ago
    No, my point is that the ultrarich have the choice between building a small tower that's completely used, or a bigger one with unused space. While the ultrarich prefer the version with the higher building, both scenarios end with the same amount of used space. Any waste of space is not a decision of the ultrarich but a consequence of the building code.
computer_czar 7y ago
So we shouldn't build anything at all to spite the rich while the poor don't have anywhere to live?
- spaceheretostay 7y ago
  That's obviously not what I said, you are clearly reading my post incorrectly. Here is my opinion to make it clear: We should be building 10x more than we currently are - it should be done efficiently and with affordable housing attached as well. > spite > anything at all > shouldn't Please don't fake-quote me like this. I said nothing of the sort and it's offensive that you would reframe my words with an obviously false-attribution like that.
freewilly1040 7y ago
The waste is generated as a means to get around the height regulation. The question is why have the regulation in the first place?
chrisco255 7y ago
The country doesn't have a housing crisis. Certain cities do. Certain states do. And the ones with the worst housing problems have the most restrictive real estate laws.
- spaceheretostay 7y ago
  I really don't understand this position. The country has a housing crisis because many of the cities in this country do. Removing the connection to the rest of America is an incorrect way of looking at it because of cause and effect: this is such a big problem in America today that it is affecting people who weren't directly in the housing-short markets themselves. A weakness in part of America is a weakness for all of America. It works this way with the outside world too - our housing shortages are part of a global problem. We are all in this together. Framing the issues that the world cities have internally as something that isn't a problem for people living elsewhere is just denying that we live in a connected society. One groups problems affect the other groups. > And the ones with the worst housing problems have the most restrictive real estate laws. Do you have a citation for that? I don't believe it's true.
  - ericd 7y ago
    I don’t have sources on hand, but it’s pretty well established that restrictive zoning is one of the major reasons for the shortage of urban housing that doesn’t meet demand (and hence has helped prices to skyrocket).
  - MR4D 7y ago
    Ignore the citation. Come to Houston and see for your own eyes. We don’t have zoning, and laws are pretty lax. HOAs are another story, but that’s a different issue entirely. New York has a problem - we don’t. And I’m not going to solve their problem because they created the set of choices that led to it. What makes America great is all of these cities get to make their own unique set of mistakes. Over time, we figure out as a whole what works and what doesn’t. Some cities can choose to follow that path or ignore it, but either way, it’s that city’s problem, not everyone’s problem.
- 7y ago
AlexTWithBeard 7y ago
... it's offensive when the country has a housing crises and the rich are building houses... Is it offensive to eat anything besides bread and water while there are so many hungry people in Africa?
- spaceheretostay 7y ago
  No, it's obviously not, and I do not understand how you got there. I clearly don't think that because that would be insane. Does my eating of an apple actively hurt people who are hungry in Africa? No, it doesn't. In fact, over the long run it will help them, because I would live longer to buy more to buy more of their goods and support them economically in the future with trade, etc. You know what would actively hurt the poor in Africa? Me eating bread and water and dying and being unable to help the world in any future way ever because I'm dead. Me choosing to have apples and peanut butter and other vegetables and proteins is so that I can live longer and improve the world more, with either open source software, general economic contributions, studies of the weather and climate to reduce overall risk, etc. Choosing to live on a diet that would kill me is not helpful to the poor in any part of the world. But does this building's existence with enormous effort put into cheating the rules, skirting the system, and catering to the exclusively epicrich actively harm the middle-class and poor living nearby? Yes it does. The rich who live in this building are not doing so purely to help others, they are not there to improve society, they are there and are specifically wasting resources with no benefit but their own view of NYC. It's obviously a very different situation.
  - purple_ducks 7y ago
    > Does my eating of an apple actively hurt people who are hungry in Africa? Apples aren't sold at cost. You, through consumption, have created a market for apples to sell at a price that would never be had in Africa.
wpasc 7y ago
Is the root of those housing crises those billionaires? How much of housing crises is attributable to corrupt zoning laws which prevent development? How much money spent by the NYC government is wasted, mismanaged, and poorly spent when that money should otherwise go to said housing crisis in NYC? I don't know the answers to those questions but its much easier to point at the rich buying ultra condos in NYC than it is to get to root issues in NYC. NYC is a high tax city in a high tax state with high wage earners. And the rich in NYC are still 100% the villian?
pmoriarty 7y ago
"A society which enables the rich to produce extraneous waste - literally making multimillion dollar luxury home spaces just to fill with nothing, so that you can skirt the law for building codes, and not even allow a person to live there - yeah that's offensive." There's a simple solution for vacant property: tax it heavily. For every year it remains vacant, raise the tax exponentially.

wongarsu 7y ago

If given the choice I think most of the ultra rich would prefer to fill useless space with living space to rent out. It would mean lots of money with little drawback. But they aren't given that choice. If they want their high towers building codes force them to leave that space empty. If having a building that high isn't the main problem then the fault is clearly with the building code, but with the developers or the customers.

spaceheretostay 7y ago
> But they aren't given that choice. If your argument is framed that the ultrarich aren't given enough choices in how to live in luxury, I'm not sure I'll understand the rest of your post. Yes the building code has a problem that is contributing to this issue, but let's get real here: The ultrarich are given all the options in the world. Not every option they choose need be so offensive to regular people.
- wongarsu 7y ago
  No, my point is that the ultrarich have the choice between building a small tower that's completely used, or a bigger one with unused space. While the ultrarich prefer the version with the higher building, both scenarios end with the same amount of used space. Any waste of space is not a decision of the ultrarich but a consequence of the building code.

computer_czar 7y ago

So we shouldn't build anything at all to spite the rich while the poor don't have anywhere to live?

spaceheretostay 7y ago
That's obviously not what I said, you are clearly reading my post incorrectly. Here is my opinion to make it clear: We should be building 10x more than we currently are - it should be done efficiently and with affordable housing attached as well. > spite > anything at all > shouldn't Please don't fake-quote me like this. I said nothing of the sort and it's offensive that you would reframe my words with an obviously false-attribution like that.

freewilly1040 7y ago

The waste is generated as a means to get around the height regulation. The question is why have the regulation in the first place?

chrisco255 7y ago

The country doesn't have a housing crisis. Certain cities do. Certain states do. And the ones with the worst housing problems have the most restrictive real estate laws.

spaceheretostay 7y ago
I really don't understand this position. The country has a housing crisis because many of the cities in this country do. Removing the connection to the rest of America is an incorrect way of looking at it because of cause and effect: this is such a big problem in America today that it is affecting people who weren't directly in the housing-short markets themselves. A weakness in part of America is a weakness for all of America. It works this way with the outside world too - our housing shortages are part of a global problem. We are all in this together. Framing the issues that the world cities have internally as something that isn't a problem for people living elsewhere is just denying that we live in a connected society. One groups problems affect the other groups. > And the ones with the worst housing problems have the most restrictive real estate laws. Do you have a citation for that? I don't believe it's true.
- ericd 7y ago
  I don’t have sources on hand, but it’s pretty well established that restrictive zoning is one of the major reasons for the shortage of urban housing that doesn’t meet demand (and hence has helped prices to skyrocket).
- MR4D 7y ago
  Ignore the citation. Come to Houston and see for your own eyes. We don’t have zoning, and laws are pretty lax. HOAs are another story, but that’s a different issue entirely. New York has a problem - we don’t. And I’m not going to solve their problem because they created the set of choices that led to it. What makes America great is all of these cities get to make their own unique set of mistakes. Over time, we figure out as a whole what works and what doesn’t. Some cities can choose to follow that path or ignore it, but either way, it’s that city’s problem, not everyone’s problem.
7y ago

AlexTWithBeard 7y ago

... it's offensive when the country has a housing crises and the rich are building houses... Is it offensive to eat anything besides bread and water while there are so many hungry people in Africa?

spaceheretostay 7y ago
No, it's obviously not, and I do not understand how you got there. I clearly don't think that because that would be insane. Does my eating of an apple actively hurt people who are hungry in Africa? No, it doesn't. In fact, over the long run it will help them, because I would live longer to buy more to buy more of their goods and support them economically in the future with trade, etc. You know what would actively hurt the poor in Africa? Me eating bread and water and dying and being unable to help the world in any future way ever because I'm dead. Me choosing to have apples and peanut butter and other vegetables and proteins is so that I can live longer and improve the world more, with either open source software, general economic contributions, studies of the weather and climate to reduce overall risk, etc. Choosing to live on a diet that would kill me is not helpful to the poor in any part of the world. But does this building's existence with enormous effort put into cheating the rules, skirting the system, and catering to the exclusively epicrich actively harm the middle-class and poor living nearby? Yes it does. The rich who live in this building are not doing so purely to help others, they are not there to improve society, they are there and are specifically wasting resources with no benefit but their own view of NYC. It's obviously a very different situation.
- purple_ducks 7y ago
  > Does my eating of an apple actively hurt people who are hungry in Africa? Apples aren't sold at cost. You, through consumption, have created a market for apples to sell at a price that would never be had in Africa.

wpasc 7y ago

Is the root of those housing crises those billionaires? How much of housing crises is attributable to corrupt zoning laws which prevent development? How much money spent by the NYC government is wasted, mismanaged, and poorly spent when that money should otherwise go to said housing crisis in NYC? I don't know the answers to those questions but its much easier to point at the rich buying ultra condos in NYC than it is to get to root issues in NYC. NYC is a high tax city in a high tax state with high wage earners. And the rich in NYC are still 100% the villian?

pmoriarty 7y ago

"A society which enables the rich to produce extraneous waste - literally making multimillion dollar luxury home spaces just to fill with nothing, so that you can skirt the law for building codes, and not even allow a person to live there - yeah that's offensive." There's a simple solution for vacant property: tax it heavily. For every year it remains vacant, raise the tax exponentially.