[tijlover]

Originally Posted by Willy702

Retiree market was good many years ago, but I think both LV and Phoenix have kind of driven it away. People were moving because of the nature of the cities, but now that both are chasing business and working age residents more than retirees, even cheap real estate isn't enough to draw them like it used to.

Many of the retirement communities here and in AZ have HOA's, and little did seniors give much thought to their kids and grandkids coming home to live with them during this relentless mega-recession, problems which were highlighted in the Las Vegas Review Journal recently pertaining to Sun City West in Phoenix, which is making these seniors-only communities less attractive in case of contingencies.

And some seniors are probably thrilled to death that they're in one of these restrictive communities.

"I'm sorry, you, your wife and 3 kids can't stay here, our HOA won't permit it!
Here's a big fat check, now get back in the U-Haul truck! Good luck!"

[MomMom]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

Yikes... Whodathought this would ever happen.

As a long timer and remembering the "old" days, I really hope this is true, IMO.

I could do with less people moving to/living here. Keep the touristas coming and keep them happy, but let's hope they go home and choose to remain there after they make their wonderful Vegas memories.

[Willy702]

Originally Posted by Buzz123

I wasn't asking that or any other question. I was merely pointing out something I heard that makes sense. There has been a lot of discussion about diversifying the economy and enticing new businesses to set up shop in Nevada. I've heard this for going on 47 years, and I've heard all the arguments for why we can't seem to diversify, and for how we need to go about it. It's nothing new, but new or fairly new people on this forum talk about it like we Nevadans never thought about it before.

Whatever, it sometimes seems like our big ace in the hole has been the lack of corporate income tax that is supposed to cause corporations to fall all over themselves to come here. The point one State legislator was trying to make is that it has never worked. In the meantime, an objection we hear from outsiders all the time is how poorly funded our education system is here.

I don't know about corporate income tax, but casinos are corporations, and they pay taxes. But, as everyone knows by now, they pay only a small fraction of what casinos in other states pay, and that is because they own the law makers here.

If we are going to get the economy moving, there is a good argument around here that we need to provide a more educated work force, as well as all the other good that comes from our people having better educations. I have never believed that throwing money after a bad product will improve it, but let's say education needs more money to improve. I also don't like taxes, but for years having a business in Nevada has been almost a lock for making big profits. Maybe those that do should give at least a fair share back.

The state cannot move forward when the knee-jerk reaction from many of its politicians and population to a budget deficit is to cut teacher and school spending. Letting teachers go and crowding the schools more is a sure fire losing strategy.

Forget about it though. Nevada shows zero vision when it comes to a long-term strategy. Everything has to be done in 2 years or less. Its election cycle thinking. Where else in the country do they build every road only after its stands overcrowded since that is when the funding is fully there? Where else do people whine about taxes being spent on anything which might improve the city's future prospects?

Totally short-term, what can we do and get today thinking. No politician or local seer seems to even care about what the place will look like in 10 years, heck why bother if you might not even live there then.

[RCCCB]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

Yikes... Whodathought this would ever happen.

As soon as the state forms an income tax to pay for others to not work the numbers will sky rocket IMO.

[Robustus]

Originally Posted by Willy702

Where else in the country do they build every road only after its stands overcrowded since that is when the funding is fully there? Where else do people whine about taxes being spent on anything which might improve the city's future prospects?

Ummm....everywhere! Short-term election-cycle thinking is not a problem unique to Vegas or Nevada. In my opinion, it's a fundamental flaw in a democracy.

[Willy702]

Originally Posted by Robustus

Ummm....everywhere! Short-term election-cycle thinking is not a problem unique to Vegas or Nevada. In my opinion, it's a fundamental flaw in a democracy.

Sure to some level it does, but other cities build mass transit to handle needs for the next 50 years. Las Vegas responds with a slightly changed bus line. That tells it all.

[Robustus]

Originally Posted by Willy702

Sure to some level it does, but other cities build mass transit to handle needs for the next 50 years. Las Vegas responds with a slightly changed bus line. That tells it all.

I do not agree. Most cities that actually experience non-trivial growth are *constantly* upgrading a huge portion of the infrastructure because it's reached (super)critical mass.

70 years ago many cities across the country built infrastructure to last for 50 years.

[Willy702]

Originally Posted by Robustus

I do not agree. Most cities that actually experience non-trivial growth are *constantly* upgrading a huge portion of the infrastructure because it's reached (super)critical mass.

70 years ago many cities across the country built infrastructure to last for 50 years.

So why is Vegas touting an upgraded bus line as the answer to its problems? Its an absolute joke. I moved to an area where rapid transit is going to be expanded many fold from where it stands now and it will cost $7 billion. This is a 50-year plus solution which will help guide development and at least attempt to remediate traffic in the area (of course many more people might move here and just make it bad all over again). The local voters agreed to raise taxes to do this. In Las Vegas you can't even get voters to agree to carpool lanes! When it comes to transit you get all the locals stating a train would be a waste, a nicer bus would be a waste, heck the buses they have would be a waste. Maybe just maybe if it didn't take an hour to get across town including a 15-20 minute wait in the cold or the heat people would use the bus. But don't try asking most Las Vegans to spend a dime on this or even to raise a dime for it by taxing the tourists.

People are surely entitled to their opinion and I don't quibble if someone doesn't want to spend money on transit because they won't use it, but that is the collective attitude of Las Vegas and just further evidence of the short-term thinking and the reason why the city will never be ahead of the curve on anything going forward. It will always be a crisis before action comes and people will still complain about trying to solve the crisis because solving problems almost inevitably requires money.

So to the people who say Las Vegas should diversify its economy or do anything else which requires planning and spending money before getting an economic result, study what you are dealing with first.

[radraja]

I think a big component of the public transportation issue is the stigma attached to it. In other more urban cities, public transportation is considered cool and hip and green. Here in Vegas, people like their cars, they like their comfort, and they like their personal space. Having to take public transportation has a negative association in people's minds.

Given this mindset, I don't know how much of a demand there would be for new public transport.

[MR77]

Originally Posted by radraja

I think a big component of the public transportation issue is the stigma attached to it. In other more urban cities, public transportation is considered cool and hip and green. Here in Vegas, people like their cars, they like their comfort, and they like their personal space. Having to take public transportation has a negative association in people's minds.

Given this mindset, I don't know how much of a demand there would be for new public transport.

Thats so true and its too bad. Here around NYC lots of people take the bus or the trains and there is zero stigma. So much different in Las Vegas. Same thing with renting. Out here everyone rents, but when I was living in Vegas I got the impression that if you told someone you were renting, they'd look at you like you were a scumbag. But arent those who were renting the last few years having the last laugh now?