SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/index.php)
-   Midwest (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/forumdisplay.php?f=39)
-   -   CHICAGO | Politics & Current Events (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=213683)

aaron38 Aug 28, 2017 4:17 PM

Gentrification would be much less of a problem if property taxes for existing homes didn't double every time a tear-down rebuild occurs or an empty lot gets a new building.
Just because my neighbor cashes out and someone with more money moves in doesn't mean I get a raise and can suddenly afford to pay hundreds more a month in taxes.

It's government that is pricing people out of gentrifying neighborhoods, not developers. And it's wrong to say that a neighborhood has to remain depressed and crumbling as the only way to keep it affordable, because that's the only way government will keep the taxes low.

Maybe that's why we see South side politicians putting zoning freezes on major arterials? If the city is going to say "there's a micro brewery and trendy Thai fusion restaurant around the corner from you, you must be rich and can pay double", then the only solution is to keep new businesses out of the area.

bcp Aug 28, 2017 5:14 PM

well said...once again, gov't creates a problem and their only answer is "more gov't and taxes!"

moorhosj Aug 28, 2017 7:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bcp (Post 7905476)
well said...once again, gov't creates a problem and their only answer is "more gov't and taxes!"

I hope you would say the same thing about the GI Bill, a governmental transfer of wealth that helped build the great American middle class. The over-the-top libertarian bent of this board is a little too much sometimes. (Unless we are talking about a parking podium or ugly design, then this board is all about government intervention, but that is a topic for another day.)

The lack of affordable housing is a problem across the United States, not specific to Chicago. Maybe it is possible that the "market" has failed; we should at least entertain the possibility. Wages are not rising, and have not risen in 20 years, for middle-income earners. Little inventory was built from 2010 to 2015, so rents have increased due to low supply. Stagnant income plus increased housing costs gives us the problem we see today.

Stunnies23 Aug 28, 2017 7:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by moorhosj (Post 7905640)
I hope you would say the same thing about the GI Bill, a governmental transfer of wealth that helped build the great American middle class. The over-the-top libertarian bent of this board is a little too much sometimes. (Unless we are talking about a parking podium or ugly design, then this board is all about government intervention, but that is a topic for another day.)

The lack of affordable housing is a problem across the United States, not specific to Chicago. Maybe it is possible that the "market" has failed; we should at least entertain the possibility. Wages are not rising, and have not risen in 20 years, for middle-income earners. Little inventory was built from 2010 to 2015, so rents have increased due to low supply. Stagnant income plus increased housing costs gives us the problem we see today.

There are plenty of affordable housing options in Chicago. It's just that they are not 'trendy neighborhoods'. Instead they are blue collar hoods such as Clearing, Garfield Ridge, Hegewisch, etc.

llamaorama Aug 28, 2017 7:39 PM

So in the absence of property taxes, where do you suppose money for even basic city services come from?

I find it ironic there's complaints about "government waste" coming from people who want billions in new transit. In a city that's shrinking and has stagnant transit ridership in a state that is falling into a fiscal emergency.

moorhosj Aug 28, 2017 7:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stunnies23 (Post 7905651)
There are plenty of affordable housing options in Chicago. It's just that they are not 'trendy neighborhoods'. Instead they are blue collar hoods such as Clearing, Garfield Ridge, Hegewisch, etc.

Based on a quick google search there are not many places are available for rent in these areas. They are mostly single family homes in the $150k-$250k range. This is "affordable" for many, but a $100k home can still require a $20k down payment.

The problem is not for home owners, they capture property value increases through home equity. While they may have to move if the property taxes get too high, they will re-coup that and more when they sell the house. The problem is with renters who see their monthly rents rise with higher property values.

emathias Aug 28, 2017 10:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by moorhosj (Post 7905640)
I hope you would say the same thing about the GI Bill, a governmental transfer of wealth that helped build the great white American middle class. The over-the-top libertarian bent of this board is a little too much sometimes. (Unless we are talking about a parking podium or ugly design, then this board is all about government intervention, but that is a topic for another day.)
...

It's not commonly known by the general population, but despite the fact that the GI Bill was originally created to help WWII vets, it wasn't until long after World War II that black soldiers were able to benefit from it anywhere near as much as white soldiers. This was due to two primary reasons. First, when it came to housing, even the GI Bill housing benefits fell under jurisdiction of lending requirements that included "red-lining," the racist practice of legally preventing blacks from buying in certain areas, and banks refusing to loan money for homes that weren't in those areas. Second, the educational aspect of the GI Bill was allowed to be administered at the state and local level, which meant that Jim Crow and other vestiges of institutional racism prevented large numbers of returning black soldiers from taking advantage of higher education in the same way that returning white soldiers were.

It's really one of the great shames of Federal programs, and that history is starting to be better known recently - in the past couple of years there have been some bigger main-stream stories highlighting it - but for a long time few people outside of the black community or people who were really intimately familiar with the way the programs actually played out, knew that the GI Bill was of so little use to returning African-American soldiers. It was (maybe) better than nothing for the returning black soldiers, but white soldiers benefited much, much more from it to such a degree that it actually ended up perpetuating racial disparities more than helping to heal them. I found that especially disheartening when I learned about it since prior to learning about it, I'd often seen the role of black soldiers in WWII as playing a big role in getting the Civil Rights Era started, and of their service helping to level the playing field. Unfortunately, while it did contribute to the Civil Rights Era, it didn't help level the economic playing field and may have actually made it worse.


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:02 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.