HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     
Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Midwest

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #2701  
Old Posted Sep 19, 2019, 6:55 PM
moorhosj moorhosj is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 511
Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician View Post
Don't be silly. There's a difference between what I'm saying and anarchy
No, we get it. Big government for landlords, small government for individual homeowners.

Quote:
so better tell the GOVERNMENT about it. Then they can pass a brand new law to intervene. Great way to go about addressing problems
Remember how you liked when landlords ran to the government to write a law for tax breaks on their vacancies, then they wrote a new law to intervene? It seems sometimes you do like problems solved this way.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2702  
Old Posted Sep 19, 2019, 7:00 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 17,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by moorhosj View Post
Remember how you liked when landlords ran to the government to write a law for tax breaks on their vacancies, then they wrote a new law to intervene? It seems sometimes you do like problems solved this way.
^ Sorry, bud, but you don't get to call that a double standard

Arguing for tax breaks is not the same as asking for a new law to be passed for every little nuisance

If you knew anything about the property tax appeal system you'd understand that nobody is out there "passing new laws to give landlords breaks". You have to appeal the existing taxes using a lawyer.

The only people trying to "pass new laws" are the ones trying to eliminate the ability to appeal your taxes based on vacancy.
__________________
Eat less
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2703  
Old Posted Sep 19, 2019, 7:04 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 17,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by moorhosj View Post
No, we get it. Big government for landlords, small government for individual homeowners.
How is it that I'm advocating for "Big Government for landlords"?

If your argument is the tax relief thing, you are making zero sense. Temporarily reducing your property tax bill is not the same thing as expanding Government and passing new laws

Stop being lazy
__________________
Eat less
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2704  
Old Posted Sep 19, 2019, 7:13 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 17,638
Come to think of it, show me this supposed law pushed by landlords where landlords get a tax break for vacancies. I'd like to see it. I can't seem to find it in my searches.
__________________
Eat less
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2705  
Old Posted Sep 19, 2019, 8:58 PM
moorhosj moorhosj is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 511
Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician View Post
Come to think of it, show me this supposed law pushed by landlords where landlords get a tax break for vacancies. I'd like to see it. I can't seem to find it in my searches.
I obviously touched a nerve here. I'm pretty sure you know that the vacancy tax break has existed for a while. There doesn't need to be a new law written when something already exists.

On the other hand, a new tax law was passed 2 years ago that included additional tax breaks for landlords at the Federal level.

Quote:
“If you purchase your property via a pass-through entity – such as an LLC, S-corporation, sole proprietorship, or partnership – you can further minimize your tax implications. The new tax laws have effectively brought the tax rate for pass-through entities down to 29.6 percent,” says Allen Shayanfekr, CEO/co-founder of Sharestates.
Quote:
“There are also new bonus depreciation rules,” says Samuel Tae, director of International Tax for Ryan, LLC. “These allow a taxpayer to immediately deduct from their taxable income 100 percent of certain capital expenditures and property improvements.”
There is nothing small government or fiscally conservative about these changes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2706  
Old Posted Sep 19, 2019, 9:18 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 17,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by moorhosj View Post
I'm pretty sure you know that the vacancy tax break has existed for a while. There doesn't need to be a new law written when something already exists.
Ahhh, so despite saying this:

Quote:
Remember how you liked when landlords ran to the government to write a law for tax breaks on their vacancies
..You couldn't come up with anything. As I suspected.

Quote:
There is nothing small government or fiscally conservative about these changes.
Yet you insist on going off on this tangent (just like you weirdly did a few pages ago when talking about food stamps) because you're simply unable to come up with an apples to apples argument.

Appealing your taxes has absolutely nothing to do with expanding Government and you know it. That's like saying that I received a speeding ticket and appealed it and won, hence by doing so I am pro big Government. Makes zero sense...
__________________
Eat less
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2707  
Old Posted Sep 25, 2019, 8:15 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 17,638
The question is......will the deadbeat pay his rent this time?

https://blockclubchicago.org/2019/09...waukee-avenue/

Of course, in his world view he doesn't have to pay his rent because there is no such thing as private ownership. How convenient!
__________________
Eat less
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2708  
Old Posted Sep 29, 2019, 1:23 PM
Stockerzzz Stockerzzz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 227
WBEZ: Raj Chetty On News Section 8 Voucher Program

Quote:
WBEZ: Your most recent paper, Creating Moves to Opportunity, was about a study in Seattle that aimed to help Section 8 voucher holders move to higher opportunity neighborhoods. The intervention you used was very high-touch.

Chetty: We really think that the customized search assistance is what mattered, so the people implementing the program are going to be tremendously important. [In Chetty’s study, instead of just giving residents the voucher, highly motivated caseworkers were added to the process — helping people search for apartments, providing emotional support, and even giving some financial help for down payments. The study showed that with the extra help, significantly more Section 8 residents in Seattle moved to higher opportunity neighborhoods.] We were lucky to work with a group that was extremely passionate about the problem; they were sending me text messages in the evenings and driving families around, and they really cared. It wasn’t just a job; it was actually a passion.

I actually think that is precisely what might be lacking in many government programs. We stop at thinking about the dollars and cents and the budget and don’t necessarily think about implementation. Funding is necessary, if you don’t have any funding, there’s nothing to do. But [it’s important to take] that next step to really think hard about “how do we actually make it work for families?” If we think about our own families, often there’s a parent or relative or a teacher or a friend we can point to who, above and beyond the financial resources, took an interest, who helped each of us in the paths that we followed. And I very much think of this as being a similar phenomenon.

WBEZ: Can a model like that be replicated in Chicago and other cities?

Chetty: We are actually now in the process of working with a team of collaborators to bring that pilot to Chicago in the coming year.
It’s in the planning phase; funding has been secured. We’re also having conversations in New York, Charlotte, Milwaukee, and number of places across the country, as well as [the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)]. Chicago is in the lead.
Get ready for artificial “integration”.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2709  
Old Posted Sep 29, 2019, 3:29 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 17,638
^ Already happening. We get Section 8 inquiries into my north side properties all of the time.

I have no issues with that as long as they are willing to pay market rents, which I assume they are.
__________________
Eat less
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2710  
Old Posted Oct 9, 2019, 9:32 AM
Stockerzzz Stockerzzz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 227
Quote:
Survey says? Hike booze, cigarette, ride-sharing taxes, but leave property taxes alone, Chicago residents say in city’s online poll


Increase alcohol, cigarette and ride-sharing taxes, but hold the line on property taxes.

That’s what Chicago residents had to say in an online survey the city conducted as a companion to Mayor Lori Lightfoot’s recent budget town halls. The mayor wanted a variety of channels where residents could weigh in on spending and savings as the city faces a nearly $1 billion shortfall next year.

The survey, conducted between Aug. 16-Oct. 3, drew 7,347 responses from all residential ZIP codes, according to the mayor’s office.

A snapshot: “Nearly 72% of respondents indicated an interest in increasing the tax on cigarettes, while more than 85% feel property taxes should remain the same. Nearly 87% said they also feel sales tax should remain the same. The revenues that received a majority “Increase the tax or fee,” include ridesharing tax (46%), alcohol tax (46%) and the garage parking tax (44%).”

. . .
https://www.chicagotribune.com/polit...5je-story.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2711  
Old Posted Oct 9, 2019, 4:10 PM
IrishIllini IrishIllini is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 953
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stockerzzz View Post
I’m fine with all of those suggested increases, especially the garage parking tax . I pray we never have to bear witness to another parking podium again. At least a standalone garage can easily be demo’d for a higher use.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2712  
Old Posted Oct 9, 2019, 4:50 PM
LouisVanDerWright LouisVanDerWright is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 6,287
We should have a special tax for vaping, tax the shit out of it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2713  
Old Posted Oct 12, 2019, 8:08 AM
Stockerzzz Stockerzzz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 227
New State’s Attorney ad:

Video Link
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2714  
Old Posted Oct 12, 2019, 1:34 PM
k1052 k1052 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,733
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stockerzzz View Post
Kind of amazing how strong the sentiment is for more cigarette tax.

Lightfoot seems to be on the right track boosting fees on single rider FHVs. I wish that the city would just outright implement congestion pricing for at least River North and the loop M-F during business hours but I think that will have to wait until NYC does it's thing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2715  
Old Posted Oct 14, 2019, 7:56 PM
IrishIllini IrishIllini is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 953
https://www.chicagobusiness.com/comm...ing-task-force

Very surprised to see only 800 affordable units were delivered between 2015 and 2018. Anyone remember off hand how many units were delivered in that timeframe? It has to be way under 10%. Maybe under 5%?

I don’t understand how this has become such a politicized issue. For CTU to join the rally is bizarre unless I’m missing something. Most CPS faculty and staff wouldn’t even qualify for affordable housing?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2716  
Old Posted Yesterday, 12:53 PM
k1052 k1052 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,733
The union's apparent focus on the ARO is misplaced. I personally think the requirement is possibly too high especially in the downtown 20% zones. Really you're never going to tackle a housing problem without getting at the zoning that keeps lots of housing from getting built and in our case that means going after aldermanic prerogative.

Now 10% citywide onsite over 10 units if there is lots of land zoned for higher density residential as of right with waived parking requirements plus you don't have to dance with the alderman? Then we are talking.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2717  
Old Posted Yesterday, 1:08 PM
k1052 k1052 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,733
The legal weed map downtown expanding a bit.

City plans to loosen weed-free zone downtown

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/mari...-zone-downtown

Quote:
Retail marijuana sales would be allowed west of State Street, rather than LaSalle Street, in River North, although the banned area would extend farther north than the original boundaries, under a draft ordinance being circulated ahead of a key City Council zoning committee hearing tomorrow.

The revised boundaries would exclude retail marijuana sales between Lake Michigan and State Street north of the river. In the Loop, the exclusion zone would remain the same: stretching between the Chicago River and the lake south of the river.

Lightfoot’s original proposal would have prohibited retail marijuana shops from Lake Michigan to LaSalle Street in River North and between the lake and the Chicago River in the Loop. From north to south, the banned zone would have extended from Oak Street to Ida B. Wells Drtive.

The City Council’s zoning committee is expected to take up the ordinance tomorrow afternoon.
While an improvement it still doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I can walk into any convenience store in the zone and buy alcohol. When I lived in SF there was a large dispensary right on Market Street (for the pearl-clutchers about Michigan or State St) and I walked past it several times a day...there were no problems.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2718  
Old Posted Yesterday, 3:34 PM
Handro Handro is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Chicago
Posts: 341
Quote:
Originally Posted by k1052 View Post
The legal weed map downtown expanding a bit.

City plans to loosen weed-free zone downtown

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/mari...-zone-downtown



While an improvement it still doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I can walk into any convenience store in the zone and buy alcohol. When I lived in SF there was a large dispensary right on Market Street (for the pearl-clutchers about Michigan or State St) and I walked past it several times a day...there were no problems.
There is still a weirdly significant number of people who think these legal dispensaries will bring criminal elements, and the sort of people who will be buying legal marijuana are going to be, I dunno, dope heads harassing people on the street or something.

My dad is on a planning commission in the suburbs and they are currently deliberating if/where to allow dispensaries in town. He said the couple of meetings they've had so far have been PACKED and mostly with people who have bizarre, outdated concerns about weed. Granted, that's the suburbs so you'd expect a few more pearl clutchers, but still.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2719  
Old Posted Yesterday, 3:51 PM
k1052 k1052 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,733
Quote:
Originally Posted by Handro View Post
There is still a weirdly significant number of people who think these legal dispensaries will bring criminal elements, and the sort of people who will be buying legal marijuana are going to be, I dunno, dope heads harassing people on the street or something.

My dad is on a planning commission in the suburbs and they are currently deliberating if/where to allow dispensaries in town. He said the couple of meetings they've had so far have been PACKED and mostly with people who have bizarre, outdated concerns about weed. Granted, that's the suburbs so you'd expect a few more pearl clutchers, but still.

CA had a larger and much more, uh, liberal medical marijuana program running since 96 so people had a long time to get experience that this wouldn't cause real problems. Anecdotally nobody I talk to is actually very worried about it in the downtown area.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2720  
Old Posted Today, 3:07 PM
Baronvonellis Baronvonellis is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 816
Yea, that's really bizarre people are worried about weed shops downtown or in the burbs. The legal weed shops I've seen in Oregon and Amsterdam are about as exciting as a convenience store. I mean stoners are the calmest and mellowest sort of drug user. I would be more worried about a Big 10 bar being nearby lol. Those sports fanatics get alot more crazy and rowdy than people that smoke weed
Reply With Quote
     
     
End

Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Midwest
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:43 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.