Armacing
-
Posts
635 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Project Database
User Guide
Store
Events
Posts posted by Armacing
-
-
On 3/27/2022 at 2:15 PM, ruraljuror said:
The nature of the buildings themselves?
All of what you said above is true, but you're missing my earlier point about adding to the housing stock. During the pandemic AirBNB dried up and the operators switched from STR to LTR. That proves my point: The housing stock can fluctuate in mode of utilization depending on the economic situation, but to the extent that construction was encouraged by AirBNB-type investors, then Nashville's housing stock was increased. How that stock is deployed in the market can vary from year to year, with the corresponding price impacts that you accurately noted in your post. What you left out was the ease with which houses currently dedicated to AirBNB can switch into the LTR or for-sale market.
As to your comments about NIMBY's... well, I have no sympathy for them. The NIMBY's and the zoning they support is the main reason housing is so expensive and the supply of housing is so low. I'm a firm believer in limiting a person's quality of life to what they can afford. If someone wants peace and quiet and solitude, living in the center city is a poor choice and they need to buy some land in the country. In short, I believe sustainable, vibrant, growing neighborhoods should be based on respecting other people's decisions about how to use their property, not using the govt. to restrict your neighbor's activities for your benefit.
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, nashvylle said:
I am completely against the S word, but you're using your cousin's financial difficulties to bring out your viewpoint, but telling others to not let financial difficulties to bring about their view...
There's one key difference though: I'm using financial hardship to highlight the injustice of government oppression, whereas you are using financial hardship to argue in favor of government oppression. I'm arguing that people should be free to voluntarily and peacefully enter into sales and rental agreements, and you are arguing that the police power of the government should be deployed to stop those voluntary and peaceful interactions between private citizens.
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, nashvylle said:
I do not want anything bad for your cousin nor do I want anyone not to make less money, but please also include the home owners whose home values are decreased substantially because they are next to airbnb houses that are filled with lousy noisy weekenders who don't give a **** about the neighborhood because they will soon be on a flight hungover back to their homes.
Good point, I forgot to add NIMBY's to the list of winners. Personally I think NIMBY's are a major problem when it comes to urbanization and housing availability/affordability, but you seem to have found common cause with the NIMBY's. I bet there is a huge overlap between NIMBY's opposed to STR and NIMBY's opposed to increased residential density.
Interestingly, if you take out the word "weekenders" and replace it with any ethnic group above that whole post sounds really xenophobic. "Making too much noise" has been an excuse to exclude innumerable groups of people throughout the history of Nashville, so I would just caution you about empowering NIMBY's with that kind of control about who can live next to them over any time scale (days, weeks, months) based on the aesthetic inconvenience experienced by the current residents. What do you call a city where the character of neighborhoods is never allowed to change and the ability of current residents to exclude outsiders is enshrined in law?
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, markhollin said:
^ ^ ^ But none of what you railed against here is socialism. So let's bring this to a close now. Feel free to go on your diatribes in the Coffeehouse. Thanks.
Yes it is Socialism because the stated reason for the AirBNB ban was to make it more affordable for people to buy a house. That is taking wealth/income/rights from the "haves" and transfering wealth/income/rights to the "have-nots". Is this the commentary you want hidden in the Coffee House? If someone is accusing AirBNB hosts of ruining the city, why that's just good wholesome commentary, but when someone actually points out the actual negative implications of that type of approach, then it should no longer be part of the conversation, right? I think it's a double-standard.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, markhollin said:
In our form of government neighborhoods and communities can work together to enhance or prohibit activities that they feel are either for the best or the detriment of their overall good.
I'm not trying to create hysteria. Quick story to give you an idea where I'm coming from: My cousin was an early 20's college graduate with a degree that was not very useful to get a job. People make mistakes though and deal with them as best they can, right? So she worked 2 jobs and lived at home for several years to save up enough money for a down-payment on a run-down historic home in the Foster Ave. neighborhood. Then she worked nights and weekends to refurbish the house by herself and when she completed the remodel she started renting it out through AirBNB. That allowed her to quit 1 of the part time jobs. Seeing this as a good investment and way to make a living, she kept living with her parents and saving for the down-payment to buy a second house. She bought the house and started remodeling, and right about the time that she finished the remodel Metro issued the guideline that an individual property owner can only operate one STR. This basically torpedoed her business plan and she had to rent out the house as LTR, which was much less income.
Then I see this post:
On 3/18/2022 at 10:32 AM, nashvylle said:destroying neighborhoods and making Nashville more unaffordable one host at a time.
So let's take a tally of how the overall good is being enhanced:
Potential tourist who wants to rent a house: Screwed
Small businesswoman trying to break into the rental business: Screwed
Potential house buyer: Screwed because they still got outbid by a girl living with her parents.
Big-name Hotel Company that gets the tourist because no houses were available : Ladies and gentlemen we have a winner!
Long-term renter who ended up in the 2nd house: Maybe they are a winner, but I'm not so sure. The only reason they're renting in the first place is because they can't afford to buy, which is a problem caused by metro's anti-density zoning restrictions. And you better believe my cousin will charge them max rent with plenty of increases to make up for lost revenue from the whole AirBNB debacle.
Politicians: Winner because they made it look like they did something good by punishing "evil investors" when really they didn't address the underlying problem... which is obvious because the problem of home affordability has gotten worse since that regulation was put in place.
Wow, so it turns out the overall good was enhanced by helping big corporations and politicians, while also punishing consumers and small business owners in a way that does nothing to improve home affordability. Interesting!
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
On 3/24/2022 at 10:00 AM, ruraljuror said:
If an Single Family Home is replaced by 3 tall skinnies that are all intended to be used as AirBNBs, then we haven't really increased the housing stock - all we've done is essentially increased the 'hotel' stock.
No, those are houses. Just because the owner of those houses chooses to use them for STR instead of LTR or sell them outright doesn't change the nature of the buildings themselves.
23 hours ago, PruneTracy said:I'm not trying to start something but I don't know if I would contrast AirBNB with big-money lobbies. Its revenue puts it at the same level as the mid-sized hospitality companies.
The houses themselves are not owned by AirBNB. They are owned by private individuals or other organizations who are investing in real-estate. AirBNB is just an app, like VRBO and others. The person you are really mad at is someone who decided to invest their money in real estate and earn rental income from it. But I ask you: Why are you so mad at them? Where do you want them to invest their money? The stock market? That's a joke! Crypto? Pokemon cards? Leave it in the bank and let inflation destroy the value? Rental income is one of the few cash-flow generating investments that small-time investors can use to keep up with inflation based on their ability to raise rent along with rising prices. Or maybe you just want them to live off of government hand-outs like socials security, is that it? Not everyone is able to work, nor does everyone receive a pension.
20 hours ago, Pdt2f said:Tens of thousands of potential homebuyers were priced out of this house over a 3 week period due to one person or organizations greed. You may say, whelp that’s the free market, and maybe you’re right. I just don’t care anymore.
Yeah, I am right. And you shouldn't let one financial difficulty cause you to throw up your hands in despair and embrace socialism. There are a million things I would like to buy that I can't afford, but you don't see me saying "I'm done with the free market! Let's take everyone's rights and property so that I can get what I want!". ...Because I know where that train leads and it is not a beautiful utopia where I get more stuff, it's a dismal land of suffering where everyone (including me) has less.
-
2
-
-
On 3/18/2022 at 10:32 AM, nashvylle said:
destroying neighborhoods and making Nashville more unaffordable on host at a time.
On the contrary, AirBNB is saving the Nashville tourism industry by providing a service that hotels do not and providing a political counter-point to the big-money interests of the hotel lobby. AirBNB has supported the continued construction of new, more dense, housing stock within the central city.
Every former resident who has sold their SFH lot so it could be re-developed into 2 or 3 "tall-skinnies" did so voluntarily and pocketed a nice profit in the process... so just how does that make a neighborhood "unaffordable"? If your answer is "Because it raises the property values and makes property taxes go up" then my response to you is "Then it's the Metro Government making the neighborhood unaffordable, not private land owners".
If your answer is "It drives up property values so that *new residents* can't afford to move into the central city" then my response to you is "Nobody is guaranteed the right to buy an affordable house wherever they want".
If your response is "It drives up property values and that raises the rent for people that don't own the homes they are living in" then my response to you is "They are renting, meaning they are just there temporarily... Nobody is guaranteed the right to continue to live in the same rental property without the rent ever going up".
The construction driven by AirBNB is re-vitalizing neighborhoods, adding to the overall available housing stock, increasing density, and providing a profitable income to people who willingly invest in Nashville housing. The city's limitations on AirBNB are a violation of private property rights that is short-sighted, self-destructive, and most likely a corrupt anti-competitive policy driven by the vested interests of the hotel industry.
-
1
-
5
-
-
10 hours ago, markhollin said:
Bridgestone Arena:
OK, 3 things about this:
1) Is this not evocative of the movie "Predator" for anybody else, or is it just me?
2) The fact that someone majored in Art and now their job is sculpting a cartoonized saber-tooth cat out of tires really makes me laugh.
3) Did anyone else hear about how a ransomware attack shut down Bridgestone for several weeks? I heard from a friend that they couldn't ship product for a long time. Pretty embarrassing for a company of that size.
-
1
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, samsonh said:
It affects you regardless as a taxpayer, if even in a small way. Also, this isn’t socialism, this is kleptocracy.
Yeah, exactly: Socialism is based on taking something from someone against their will and not giving them anything in return.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, Luvemtall said:
So for your health, don’t let it get to you.
I don't even live in Davidson county, so it doesn't really affect me. I'm just speaking up for the benefit of those less fortunate... Seeing as how I'm an SJW and all... Berating socialists online is my contribution to society!
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
Personally, I would be satisfied if our skyline ends up looking like Calgary. There's not really a major tower that defines that skyline, but the sheer mass of buildings causes people who see it to say "Wow, I guess there is a lot of business going on here!" If we could have an unbroken chain of high-rises stretching from the riverfront to Vandy, I would consider that an absolute win even if we never get a supertall.
-
6
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
10 hours ago, Bos2Nash said:... I find it a little crony like for the CEO of the beneficiary of the first tax district to be calling for another tax district that will greatly benefit another very wealthy organization in the city.
... a tax district where residents would pay more taxes for certain upkeep ...
We all keep saying "we must keep the burden off the taxpayer", but by creating additional special tax districts that funnels tax funds that otherwise would go into the general to fund things such as roads, schools, transit (GASP), essential services, etc. we are actually still putting burden on the tax payers. All of this to keep a financial burden off some very wealthy people.
YES! You are 100% correct, Bos2Nash! It is a foregone conclusion that the ultimate source of funds underlying this entire project is tax revenue. Oh sure, they will find 100 different ways to re-label and re-package the means by which the tax payer is funding the project... But make no mistake: The taxpayer will be funding it because otherwise the government wouldn't be involved. If this were funded by private investors they wouldn't need the government to underwrite/guarantee/back-stop/subsidize the project.
Using public land that was acquired with tax revenue. Re-directing taxes within a zone to one investment that causes the rest of the county to have to pick up the slack. Issuing bonds that cause the city to incur interest expense and use up its line of credit that could otherwise fund public projects. This is all one big game of hide-the-cheese from the public that involves kick-backs and bribes and no-bid contracts and all the other corrupt shenanigans that go along with a government that knowingly or unknowingly (which is worse?) uses public funds to invest in a money-losing capital works project for the benefit of well-connected millionaires.
-
6
-
3 hours ago, Luvemtall said:
Just a little FYI for those who think the taxes here are outrageous. My sister who lives in Connecticut, has a 40 year old 1250 sq ft house on 1/5 acre in a small suburban neighborhood. She pays 1000 dollars a month for her house taxes , that’s right people 12,000 dollars a year for just her home taxes!! They also have personal property taxes ( cars, motorcycles, rv, etc) her new car cost 550 dollars a year in taxes. So , I’m really thinking that for all the gripes about the taxes here,,, if you only knew.
Wasn't Connecticut on the verge of bankruptcy or something a few years ago? I guess they found a way to solve their budget problems. I love it! They get what they deserve.
-
2
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
2 hours ago, markhollin said:“The people that like the idea — and the development that would occur around it — need to speak up. Because the ‘not in my backyard’ folks are very vocal.”
I think he has more to fear about the "not from my wallet" folks than he does from the NIMBY's. Those two groups are motivated by entirely different things.
One group wants to stick their nose into other people's business (NIMBY's) and the other group just wants to be left alone (taxpayers). It takes a special kind of crony-capitalist to tell the long-suffering Davidson county taxpayer "Hey, we need to take your money and invest it in this one business that will really help out the other businesses that I represent at the CVB" . And then when the tax payer yells back "Hey, I thought you guys were smart business-people. Why don't you figure out how to fund it yourselves??", he has to reply "Yeah, we already did the math and it only works if you pay for it". LOL!!!
-
6
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
2 hours ago, smeagolsfree said:A little news coming today for this project. Just a heads up for you guys.
I hope the news is that Tony convinced the neighbors to sell him more land and he's re-designing the tower! I love the current design, don't get me wrong. But I bet he would like to do a project with a larger footprint....
-
8
-
10 hours ago, Baronakim said:
I really fail to see why on Earth they would save this. It is non native and it would be far, far cheaper to just put in a container tansplanted. It is very unlikely to survive a couple of years of construction at any rate.
I don't know, they are pretty tough plants. It would be cool if they have an all yucca theme to their landscaping.
-
3 hours ago, jjbradleyBrooklyn said:
This is what I read late yesterday, too. I'm hoping not, but I think 2022 could be a pivotal year for economic conditions in the US. Hoping a lot of projects get started that are waiting to, in terms of these skyscrapers, sooner rather than later, to beat out a slow down with the economy, potentially.
Yeah but I don't think they are racing against a slow-down, but rather trying to get a head of commodity/fuel inflation and rising interest rates.
-
2
-
-
On 3/5/2022 at 1:31 PM, nashvylle said:
$2BN investment in semi-conductors would have an incredible ROI, as well as bring in a flood of transplants who displace everyone here. no one in Nashville currently has that skill set and it’s much easier to relocate people now than teach nashvillians for the ROI to be maximized.
I'm not so sure locals would be locked out of those roles. In addition to the many skilled trades employed in maintenance, I think the technician jobs would also be open to locals. Remember the ill-fated Hemlock Semiconductor plant in Clarksville? Hemlock had plans to fully fund a semi-conductor manufacturing program at Austin Peay to create a pipeline of local skilled workers. I bet something similar could be done with TSU or Nashville State Community College... Heck - throw some of that $2B into skills training. It bears repeating: The alternative you are proposing is literally to have people squirting mustard onto hot dogs and pouring beer into plastic cups for a handful of days each year. I'm talking about year-round high-skilled labor with the upper-echelon of engineers being transplants from elsewhere (but they also raise Nashville's profile as a place where skilled workers can be found).... And don't forget all the other tech firms that will be attracted as well.
Let's cut out the middle man! Instead of paying for a sports team and hoping the executives at some company will be impressed by the stadium and move their corporation here, let's just pay the construction cost for companies to bring their high-skill/high-pay manufacturing jobs here. Even building a 50-story skyscraper and selling it to a bank for half price if they relocate their headquarters to Nashville would be a better deal because at least it would generate tax revenue and bring lots of high-paying jobs. If the goal is to build out the East Bank, just drop the stadium entirely and use $2B to fund construction of 10 skyscrapers costing $200M each and sell them at discounted prices contingent upon corporate relocation. Boom! Density, jobs, tax revenue, built-in demand for downtown residential units. And I will personally guarantee the ROI far exceeds the stadium... if not, then I owe you a coke!
-
3
-
-
On 3/3/2022 at 6:12 PM, natethegreat said:
“Socialism for the rich” isn't how I’d frame it. I’d think of it as an equity deal with multiple investors. The different investors have different objectives. If the city invests in something like this... They’re doing it because they think they can earn an appropriate return on their investment... they may not technically break even on their investment... But what they will do is raise the attractiveness and potential of the city, juicing the hotel industry, restaurants industry, etc.
So essentially you are arguing that the government should arbitrarily funnel the citizen's scarce capital into the tourism industry. And since money doesn't magically materialize out of thin air, this must *necessarily* come at the expense of other sectors of the economy. I posted earlier that if the government is going to play the role of investment banker, the least they could do would be to invest in something that creates jobs far better than the minimum wage service jobs in the tourism industry. I suggested semi-conductor manufacturing, which would assuredly beat the pants off of tourism in terms of raising the attractiveness of the city, providing jobs, and funding a tax base that supports increased infrastructure spending.
What's more attractive than a city where you can be entertained? One where you can make lots of money doing business there. And that's what high-tech manufacturing would bring to Nashville.
On 3/3/2022 at 8:40 PM, SumnerCountian said:...answer me this. If not one dime of taxpayer money goes into the stadium project, where do you actually think that money will go...
As long as they don't spend it on the stadium, that scarce capital will be deployed in 500,000 investments around the city and earning returns far superior to any investment the Metro Government could ever dream of making. Just to make sure this is super easy to understand: There is no possible way according to the laws of physics that any committee, or council, or commission, or any other body of decision-makers within the Metro government could ever possess, or act upon, the sheer quantity of market knowledge currently being employed by the 500K+ residents of Nashville as we speak. Why is that important, you might ask? Because the success of an investment in terms of ROI is directly related to how much market knowledge investors utilize when making their risky investment decisions. Market knowledge is always incomplete when making an investment, but the more you have, the better chance of turning a profit and avoiding loss. This is why every centrally-planned socialist/communist country that ever existed is characterized by mal-investment, waste, and destruction of wealth.
Are the many investments made by Nashvillians with their money highly visible? No. Are they profitable. Yes.
Is the stadium highly visible? Yes. Is it profitable? No.
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
5 hours ago, colemangaines said:Is anyone else fed up with companies intentionally misspelling words to try to be unique?
Don't you mean "Yooneek"?
-
2
-
6
-
18 hours ago, donNdonelson2 said:
I remember there being significant problems with river bank erosion when Opryland’s river taxis were running regularly. They were forced to reduce their speed dramatically in order to lower the wake and limit impact on the banks.
Good point. But it's probably a good idea to reinforce the river banks for a variety of reasons, not just to accommodate increased river traffic. So I look at it as a multi-purpose improvement to the river that guards against industrial/public boat traffic and erosion from floods. If we truly want to make the river into a centerpiece for the city, then we need to improve the banks to make it more durable for human use and resistant to natural erosion. If that reinforcement can also take the form of a "riverwalk" that provides opportunities for pedestrian recreation and bike riders to and from the water taxi docks, then so much the better. Not every part of the river will need to be reinforced, only those parts vulnerable to erosion. Some of the banks are solid rock.
-
2
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
5 hours ago, BnaBreaker said:It's now sixteen years since that line opened, and it continues to be all this city has in the way of a rail system of some kind. Not to sound pessimistic, but that's pretty pathetic.
And look at that unused river right next to the train. I still contend river & lake passenger ferries would be less capital intensive, more flexible, and just unique enough to capture the public's attention.
-
6
-
4 hours ago, Luvemtall said:
Here is a post from 2007 right before construction was to begin. So take it for what it’s worth, it was actually approved and ready to go.
I wonder what ever happened to "Scorcher"?
-
3 minutes ago, nashvylle said:
I do not. I think it's much easier to sell the residential project to investors and lenders when you have the thousands of office workers fully in place and complete.
Good point. And saving it for last also leaves open the chance that it could be re-designed to be taller...
-
3
-
Ask Me Anything: Libertarianism Explained!
in Nashville Coffee House
Posted
Yes it is. If you have a better definition, then throw it out there.
It's always helpful to accurately describe something, and the argument that people's property rights need to be restricted for the financial benefit of others is obviously collectivist, and the implementation of government policies to achieve that goal is clearly socialist in nature. The way it helps the conversation is by cutting through all the nonsense and getting to the root of the issue.... otherwise the discussion could take days to make any real progress.