cyclingyimby.bsky.social
78 posts
61 followers
215 following
Getting Started
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
Ah I see, I read your initial post as saying they were leaving it permanently empty, not putting it at slightly higher than market rent
comment in response to
post
Completely agree we should make those legal!
comment in response to
post
I'm not what you're saying here - are you arguing that it's worth it to take the hit on say $20k of rent per year, because taking tenants would somehow cause it to decrease in value by that much compared to leaving it empty?
comment in response to
post
Why wouldn't they just rent it out?
comment in response to
post
A sort of reverse May/Corbyn?
comment in response to
post
You said "How do we stop them from simply building more investment level luxury condos". I don't think we should be stopping people building luxury condos
comment in response to
post
How does that benefit them? The tax they write off is significantly less than the money they lose
comment in response to
post
If you don't build new condos, won't investors just buy up the existing housing? Not sure building fewer homes is the answer here
comment in response to
post
Oh wow
comment in response to
post
Who is OBL?
comment in response to
post
So isn't that way too much for working class people to afford anyway? i.e. the congestion charge would only affect people rich enough to afford $50 for two hours of parking
comment in response to
post
Yeah, isn't parking in Manhattan generally way too expensive for the working class?
comment in response to
post
And also just ignoring any benefit from being able to get to the doctors faster!
comment in response to
post
Yeah the time + gas saving from less congestion is surely worth the $9
comment in response to
post
I'm British, so maybe not understanding your terminology. Are you talking about workers who need to get themselves to the construction site, or the people driving building materials to the construction site?
comment in response to
post
How much is parking in Manhattan? Are many first responders able to pay the parking cost?
comment in response to
post
Not sure why a construction worker would need to drive, but a plumber saving twenty minutes twice a day would mean 40 minutes more work and allow them to make far more than $9
comment in response to
post
Sure - will be interesting to see how the improvement changes over the next few weeks
comment in response to
post
Traffic seems better today based on the tracker?
www.congestion-pricing-tracker.com
comment in response to
post
Agree lots of people drive into the city - but driving into the congestion relief zone is a step further.
I think a lot of people will swap to driving to a train/subway station and use that to complete their journey
comment in response to
post
I think that the fare income would be better spent on improving the service than on making fares free
comment in response to
post
If you look only at the subset of people who are drivers, then that's true. But most people who travel into Manhattan don't drive!
comment in response to
post
Do you know many people who can afford parking in Manhattan?
comment in response to
post
Interesting - could you link to that evidence? I had a quick Google but couldn't find anything
comment in response to
post
People who can afford parking in Manhattan are presumably pretty rich already aren't they?
comment in response to
post
So they are able to pay for parking in Manhattan, but can't pay for parking outside the zone and get the subway in?
comment in response to
post
How is traffic looking today compared to an average Sunday?
comment in response to
post
Even if (big if) the money directly collected gets spent on something other than transit, the people who are encouraged out of cars and onto transit will provide a boost to transit funding?
comment in response to
post
Interesting article - I think this should be B not A though?
comment in response to
post
I think a lot of people think you can raise enough money to have Scandinavian levels of public spending just by taxing billionaires, and not by having Scandinavian levels of taxes on middle and low income earners
comment in response to
post
Don't superyachts fill up at the same pumps as other boats use (and similarly superjets fill up at the same airfields that small planes use?)
comment in response to
post
I don't know much about it, but I assumed fuel for supercars and superyachts was the same as fuel for normal cars and boats, i.e. quite hard to tax at a higher rate
comment in response to
post
I don't think it's being negative to say that halving the House of Lords would save around £10m, which doesn't even start to put a dent in the billions needed to pay for fixing social care
comment in response to
post
I think there of lots of savings the government could make. However, most of them are either unpopular, or don't add up to enough to fully pay for the investment that social care and the NHS needs.
Basically tax needs to rise significantly to pay for them, which again is unpopular
comment in response to
post
Very much agree with cracking down on tax evasion and avoidance, but the government are already doing that by hiring an extra 5,000 staff for HMRC
comment in response to
post
How much do you think halving the number of Lords would save?
comment in response to
post
Yes that's what it would take to fix it properly
comment in response to
post
Neither IVF nor water company profits are worth several billion pounds a year, and the government is already trying to clawback money from Covid contracts.
Not replacing Trident would fund some of it, but only around £2-3 billion per year
comment in response to
post
Could you suggest something that would free up several billion pounds a year?
comment in response to
post
But I'm guessing they just wanted him to be generally more right wing!
comment in response to
post
Interesting - from what I read back then (mainly the Times and Telegraph), there were lots of complaints about Cameron not having an agenda beyond austerity - the bit I remember was him being asked why he wanted to be PM and him saying "because I'd be good at it"
comment in response to
post
I feel like that was also true for Cameron's government?
comment in response to
post
Apologies, missed that at the top!!
comment in response to
post
Good point - does that still hold if you show it as a % of that age group?