Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I also appreciate many forms of art but don't think "environmental art" makes much sense, artistically or environmentally.
I personally would not appreciate it if Christo or someone wanted to, say, put some stuff around the local lake and see it as art. "Making a statement," artistic or otherwise, in someone else's face isn't sporting.
Thought I'd bring this subject up to date because of something I saw in today's Sunday Denver Post in the op-ed section, page 4d.
Apparently this subject is still being bantered around. And an individual who is doing some cheerleading on this is Dan Marostica, who is the director of the Colorado Office of Economic Development and International Trade.
There isn't anything mentioned in this article about public comment with the government agencies, but I believe there are some scheduled meetings with the public regarding this "Over The River" project, which Christo has called it. They had a series of meetings earlier this year regarding this.
Mr. Marostica kind of let the cat out of the bag on one subject. Describing the project, he states that "the imagery is so startling and glorious that a certain communications company has created a television ad that creates the floating imagery with computers instead of fabric."
Apparently Christo's late wife had this "vision" about the project for a long time. The article states that he and his wife had traveled for 17 years and logged over 14,000 miles before settling in on the Arkansas river canyon.
Thought I'd bring this subject up to date because of something I saw in today's Sunday Denver Post in the op-ed section, page 4d.
Apparently this subject is still being bantered around. And an individual who is doing some cheerleading on this is Dan Marostica, who is the director of the Colorado Office of Economic Development and International Trade.
There isn't anything mentioned in this article about public comment with the government agencies, but I believe there are some scheduled meetings with the public regarding this "Over The River" project, which Christo has called it. They had a series of meetings earlier this year regarding this.
Mr. Marostica kind of let the cat out of the bag on one subject. Describing the project, he states that "the imagery is so startling and glorious that a certain communications company has created a television ad that creates the floating imagery with computers instead of fabric."
Apparently Christo's late wife had this "vision" about the project for a long time. The article states that he and his wife had traveled for 17 years and logged over 14,000 miles before settling in on the Arkansas river canyon.
It's still an idiotic idea that needs to be sent to the trash bin. The Arkansas Canyon is fine the way it is--it doesn't need a bunch of plastic French-artiste bull**** draped over it--even for 5 minutes. Let 'em go throw that crap on the Maginot Line, or something.
Theodore Roosevelt's quote about the Grand Canyon is absolutely spot-on right if applied to the Arkansas River Canyon:
Quote:
Leave it as it is. You can not improve on it. The ages have been at work on it, and man can only mar it. What you can do is to keep it for your children, your children's children, and for all who come after you, as one of the great sights which every American if he can travel at all should see.
As for the Economic Development Director, he should be fired for his comments. What an idiot.
Nature is the best architect/artist and also a great builder of cathedrals. IMO, non of the world reknowned cathedrals, chapels, and other religious shrines even begin to measure up to places like the Grand Canyon, Zion, Arches, or even the Colorado National Monument. I would hate to see a marvelous place like the Arkansas River Canyon defiled by the likes of Christo. I totally agree with the words of jazzlover....It's still an idiotic idea that needs to be sent to the trash bin. I would addd these words.....and screw the light on TIGHT.
I see a lot of discussion about mountain town economics in Colorado and differing opinions about the trust-fund type, rich second home owners, and long-time locals.
I am a software engineer with the ability to telecommute and make a good living albeit outside of the local economy. From an economics standpoint how can my type, with good conscience, move to, be involved in, and actually work to support and improve the local economy? I'd like to hear how people feel about this, as I feel it is a growing trend but not one of the "types" that I often hear about. What kind of impact both positive and negative does this type of living have on a small rural economy?
I'd like to learn more about some of the economics, as I grew up in a small midwestern town where everyone was able to commute ~45 minutes for employment. There was really no tourism in the community, so I am less familiar with the more tourism based small towns.
Thanks in advance, I'm sure I can learn some things from some of the more economic minded out there!
I see a lot of discussion about mountain town economics in Colorado and differing opinions about the trust-fund type, rich second home owners, and long-time locals.
I am a software engineer with the ability to telecommute and make a good living albeit outside of the local economy. From an economics standpoint how can my type, with good conscience, move to, be involved in, and actually work to support and improve the local economy? I'd like to hear how people feel about this, as I feel it is a growing trend but not one of the "types" that I often hear about. What kind of impact both positive and negative does this type of living have on a small rural economy?
I'd like to learn more about some of the economics, as I grew up in a small midwestern town where everyone was able to commute ~45 minutes for employment. There was really no tourism in the community, so I am less familiar with the more tourism based small towns.
Thanks in advance, I'm sure I can learn some things from some of the more economic minded out there!
There are categories of people in every town that have differing social and economic impacts:
- Long time locals, and I mean no disrespect by this, are often those without the means or skills to move somewhere else. Yes, some stay because they like it and have ties to the area, but in most small towns, people who go off to college and get a degree seldom come back for a significant amount of time. You'll get the stray doctor, lawyer, teacher, or other professional who grew up in the town and came back, but not often. Many locals fall in one of two categories: small business owners, and cheap labor. Both tend to be a bit resentful of newcomers who move in and take jobs or open stores as competition.
- Trustifarians and retired folks have little role other than part time work and spending money in the local economy. They are likely to have come into a town, paid cash for a house (driving prices up), and they work to get discounted ski passes. Telecommuters are a lot like this, except they don't take jobs from the locals.
- Second home owners are kind of like locusts. They show up, they consume, and they leave. They do spend a lot of money, but are not generally well-liked as many have no regard for the culture of the area.
Whoa Davidv! You're getting as bad as Jazzlover in your categorizing of retired and second home owners as being EVIL
How about this as a scenario: I'm retired and own a second home in Buena Vista. I come there for three months every summer. BTW, No way on earth that I would be looking for a discounted lift ticket LOL. And, Davidv, I didn't pay cash for my home (would be nice, tho).
I am there for three months and pay property taxes for twelve months. My property taxes help support the schools (my kids are 33 and 36, so I don't put a drain on the school system), sheriff, fire department, and probably some other stuff that I can't remember. So, I am paying the exact same property taxes as someone who is "local" and lives there for twelve months. How can that be bad?
Additionally, when I'm not there, I don't have a need for the sheriff, the fire department, or county personnel. So in addition to having no children in the school system, I am putting far less drain on the county services than someone who lives there year round. How can that be bad?
Davidv says that second home owners "show up, consume, and then leave". Well, my consumption supports local businesses. I buy my plants at the local nursery, I do my grocery shopping at the local market, I get my hair cut at the local salon, and I go to the local farmer's market. In doing all of this, I am putting money into the local economy and supporting the small business owners. How can that be bad?
Davidv says that second home owners are generally not well liked. I've never, ever been treated bad by anyone in town. In fact, my beautician always says how glad she is to see me. Should I be suspect?
Last edited by Dreaming of Hawaii; 05-05-2014 at 05:10 PM..
Reason: typos
davidv makes a pretty good summary. I will disagree with the statement that implies that all locals that stayed in their communites are too dumb, poor, etc. to leave. Many are actually quite talented--often multi-talented (one usually has to be to make a living in a small community, and have made a conscious decision to forego a lot material wealth and big-city trappings in order to live and raise their children in a small town. Unfortunately, that small town culture is about the first thing that gets destroyed when the trustifarians, part-time residents, and metro transplants overrun a small town. Most of them just do not know how to live in a small town culture. So, they turn into what they left and what they profess to hate about the 'burbs and metro areas. I've seen happen too so many Colorado towns over the last 40 years that I've lost count. In fact, the Colorado towns that have been culturally wrecked by that type of "progress" far outnumber the relatively few "real" small towns left in Colorado. That is one of the reasons that I left the state. Sadly, in my opinion, Salida is one the Colorado towns that is just about to be wrecked by the cultural shift away from its small town roots.
Dreaming's post above shows some real ignorance of how government and public services work in Colorado. First of all, residential property tax rates are so low in Colorado that most residential properties consume more dollars in public services than they pay in property taxes. That is ESPECIALLY true of rural "ranchette" tracts. Law enforcement, fire protection, road maintanance, and similar services go on whether or not homes are occupied full-time or not. As for schools, somebody paid somewhere for Dreaming to go to a public school, so it isn't unfair for him to pay into the public schools where he owns a home, whether he livee there full-time or not, or whether or not he has school age children. I NEVER had any children, but I gladly pay school taxes because having public education available for my friends' and neighbors' kids is important to me. That is part of BEING A MEMBER OF A COMMUNITY, and not outsider that just happens to roost there for a few months of the year.
Ask a lot of locals to say frankly what they think of part-time residents, and the frequent answer you will get is, "Well, at least they're only here six months of the year!"
Last edited by jazzlover; 05-05-2014 at 05:26 PM..
Geez, talk about twisting what someone says. I NEVER said that I thought that paying for schools was unfair. Please quote where you read that in my post. What I said was that my property taxes pay for schools, which is true, and then I said that I don't use those schools because my kids are grown. Completely different than what you tried to turn it around to say!
I'm not going to lower myself to get into a pissing match with you. You never listen anyway, and you've never ever responded to my challenges to your ridiculous rants in the past.
All I hear is complaining about all the people that move in to these small communities, which is understandable. However, what I don't hear much about on c-d and what I'd like to hear more about is what can be done about some of these issues. If growth is inevitable, which it seems to be in most of Colorado, what can we do in our small towns to keep that community vibe alive while trying to promote a healthier economy?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
mountain town economics
