Submitted by The_Dream_of_Shadows t3_11o0fac in RhodeIsland
[deleted] t1_jbq92l7 wrote
[deleted]
ericivar t1_jbqb8n5 wrote
What a loss that would have been. So much history - gone.
WhackedOnWhackedOff t1_jbqjk65 wrote
False equivalence. What history would Fane Tower have eroded? Route 195??
[deleted] t1_jbr76m1 wrote
[deleted]
RandomChurn t1_jbsem0d wrote
>Decades from now people are going to look back at this plan and be as grateful that it didn’t happen
Why wait? This is easily the best local news I've heard in the 2020s 😅
realbadaccountant t1_jbqdwbo wrote
Yea enjoy the further housing shortages and continued sprawl of SFHs. Well done NIMBYs
stosyfir t1_jbqo2va wrote
“Luxury Apartments” in a skyscraper isn’t going to help the housing problem. The people affected by the housing problem wouldn’t be able to live here.
fishythepete t1_jbrc5ny wrote
>“Luxury Apartments” in a skyscraper isn’t going to help the housing problem.
Yes. It is. You know what helps a housing shortage? Housing. In the absence of new high end housing, people coming in from Boston / NY will be competing for the existing high end housing stock. The people they’re competing with go down market, and so on.
>The people affected by the housing problem wouldn’t be able to live here.
No shit. But they won’t be able to afford the place they’re living now either if there isn’t new housing built that absorbs new higher income residents.
[deleted] t1_jbrd5rs wrote
[deleted]
automaton11 t1_jbrfroi wrote
Doesnt this perpetuate the inflation thats causing the crisis in the first place? The way to treat it is to add housing to the middle of the curve, balancing the function. Adding housing to the right hand side of the curve only pushes everyone down to the left and perpetuates the problem, albeit with richer and richer people. See also: Manhattan
fishythepete t1_jbrhswe wrote
Let’s talk about the middle of the curve when it comes to housing. You know what term can almost universally describe it? Used. 10,20, 50 years old. At least that here in New England.
There is next to no economic incentive to build new low cost housing, just like there’s nearly no economic incentive to build new low cost cars. Most consumers would sooner buy a $5,000 used car with AC and power windows than a $5,000 new car with neither.
So it is with housing. New market rate housing (short of those tremendously successful housing projects we flirted with in the 60s / 70s) is always the top of the market. But if it’s never built, then it will never be there in 30 years as a moderate cost housing option.
meme-scraperr t1_jbtj26z wrote
YES!!!! Agreed. Thank you! So frustrating these people all have that same “luxury housing” line
[deleted] t1_jbqgj9q wrote
[deleted]
kayakhomeless t1_jbqhgjy wrote
“I support housing in general, just not in this particular case. Or any other case. Just not in my backyard.”
Status_Silver_5114 t1_jbqj30c wrote
Which is not what anyone is actually saying here. Build units here but take the vanity project tax sucking luxury part of it. There’s better ideas for that would house more actual people who need It here than providences take on Gherkin building.
BitterStatus9 t1_jbqld95 wrote
Nobody said that. Just because something is in your backyard doesn’t make it good. There are a lot of other reasons why this project sucked.
automaton11 t1_jbqtnk1 wrote
I do not support more luxe housing, you heard it here first.
automaton11 t1_jbqu2wf wrote
Housing shortages? Those apartments were like 3k a month and up. Anyone who can afford that is not participating in the housing shortage.
fishythepete t1_jbrcc94 wrote
Sure. The people who would move there aren’t going to be displacing other people who can’t pay what they can for another place in the area.
Shoddy-Sleep-8832 t1_jbru4ri wrote
Exactly. As someone who is currently occupying an "affordable" unit, this is very true. it was a big step down from what I was used to living in. When I had to move (within the same zip code btw), the only units available were significantly more expensive and far less quality than places I had been in for the last 20+ years. Virtually everyone in my neighborhood which has been a "lower" class neighborhood for the past 50 years, are middle class salaried, and in some cases, professional workers. The units are mostly duplexes and developed mill complexes, that are still run down junk, but now they cost more than the luxury apartments and rental single family houses costed like 5 years ago.
fishythepete t1_jbres9v wrote
>This is not how this functions.
Yes, u/automaton11, That is exactly how this functions.
>Housing price is better represented as a function of objective quality, not of demand. People move, houses dont.
Unironically using the phrase “objective quality” shows just how far you are over your skis here.
>Building high end housing will gentrify an area without elevating struggling classes.
Non sequitur…
>Owners of homes of a given quality level will generally continue to rent to persons of a given income class.
As someone who’s owned several rental properties, that’s not how that works. Landlords seek market clearing rents. They don’t give a fuck about someone’s “income class.”
>Over time this can change, but it changes more slowly than does housing turnover, and because of that, people follow the housing, not the other way around.
I have no idea what you’re trying to say here, and I’m not convinced you do either.
>100 luxury apartments will bring in 100 rich people from wherever. If rich people move out of houses in RI, they move out of houses that will not immediately be filled by people of lesser means. You have the function backwards.
One of us has it backwards, and it is not me. If you’re under the impression that the creation of new luxury housing is what draws economically mobile people to the area, you are mistaken. People are moving down from Boston every week, happily trading the longer commute for the one day a week they need to be in the office for the lower cost of living. If the Fane Tower isn’t built, they’re still coming, and they’ll take the next best thing on the market.
automaton11 t1_jbrg1gg wrote
Why is your response filled with insults?
fishythepete t1_jbrgteb wrote
Pointing out that you don’t have a clue what you’re talking about isn’t an insult just because it hurts your feelings.
realbadaccountant t1_jbspwb0 wrote
I’m not as disappointed at this deal getting canceled as I am at the number of morons who seem to think this is a good thing for anybody. People on both sides of the aisle are shockingly ignorant about basic economics.
automaton11 t1_jbrh2nq wrote
Youre a landlord lol. Whats your big claim to fame? How much education do you need to be a ri landlord lol
Faine abandoned his own project. Cry some more
fishythepete t1_jbri16m wrote
>Youre a landlord lol. Whats your big claim to fame? How much education do you need to be a ri landlord lol
Reading comprehension not your strong point I guess? Hint - “owned” is what we call Past Tense.
How much education do you need to hold really strong opinions on topics you know nothing about? Asking for a friend.
automaton11 t1_jbrkmi9 wrote
Why is it that all your comments are downvoted? Are you good enough at economics to figure that out?
fishythepete t1_jbrljt7 wrote
>Why is it that all your comments are downvoted? Are you good enough at economics to figure that out?
The fact that you think this is some sort of own is in fact what we would call an “epic self own”.
If you think the popularity of a position has any reasonable relation to whether or not it is correct, then you’ve been asleep since 2016.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments