Re:We are publishing the tax secrets of the .001%
by RC_ITR on Tuesday June 08, 2021 @12:54PM
(#27437688)
>brought their culture with them.
Yikes. Do you really think places like SOMA, SLU, DTLA, etc. got better because rich people brought their 'culture' there? I'd recommend you visit said places and see for yourself, most of the 'culture' is in adjacent (usually historically minority) neighborhoods.
Re:We are publishing the tax secrets of the .001%
by motohagiography on Tuesday June 08, 2021 @03:42PM
(#27439831)
Specifically, I said that rich(er) people go to those places because the people who were there before them made those places appealing. Poor(er) people who made due and built a community with businesses and neighboors that attracted others. As for why people who say 'yikes' seem to scare so easily, the concern is noted and ignored.
Re:We are publishing the tax secrets of the .001%
by frockington1 on Tuesday June 08, 2021 @02:07PM
(#27438710)
In those places there is a huge value difference between the adjacent neighborhoods and the rich neighborhoods. This is primarily due to a culture of stability and safety
Re:We are publishing the tax secrets of the .001%
by RC_ITR on Tuesday June 08, 2021 @03:18PM
(#27439583)
What are you trying to say? That DTLA is safer/cheaper than Little Tokyo (you're wrong)? That SOMA is safer than the Mission(you're wrong)? That SLU is safer than Capitol Hill(you're wrong)?
Re:We are publishing the tax secrets of the .001%
by vineyardmike on Tuesday June 08, 2021 @02:18PM
(#27438852)
> in adjacent (usually historically minority) neighborhoods.
These are the people that brought their culture. Their housing is probably also well appreciated.
Just because middle class people benefit from the subsidy of low interest rates that create asset bubbles does not mean that the people who raised families in a neighbourhood or a city are somehow undeserving of the rewards on their equity.
The idea that money not taken in taxes is an "expenditure," or an advantage, and this idea of accounting for the hypothetical opportunity cost of not taking some peoples money as a tax privilege is bizzare.