Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Pittsburgh
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-09-2014, 11:48 AM
 
Location: Pittsburgh
6,782 posts, read 9,595,436 times
Reputation: 10246

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by doo dah View Post
Not sure I get your point, I don't think we have a problem with absentee condo owners? The problem with luxury condos is that they are pursuing a limited demographic here, where we *could* use non-luxury condos and rentals. And that is what I mean by cannibalizing, do they think that someone who moved into The Carlyle last year will move to The Fairmont (or whatever they call the condo part) this year?
It's the chart in the article I was looking at, not the part about the billionaires. The chart shows Pittsburgh's housing supply went down about 5% from 2000 to 2010. I don't think that the luxury condo market is that separate from the rest of the housing market. The Carlyle has many units for about $350,000 and the square footage on them is huge. With the tax abatement and rising rental rates, I think those are going to be able to compete with people who might have otherwise rented.

Quote:
Originally Posted by doo dah View Post
Getting back to the casino, I just don't think that there are enough potential customers for another casino, almost within walking distance of the Rivers, setting aside licensing issues.
I agree with you there. I was mentioning the ones in the other states because a hotel-casino would presumably be trying to get people coming in for a day or two.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-09-2014, 05:42 PM
 
7,112 posts, read 10,133,686 times
Reputation: 1781
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moby Hick View Post
Given that it is currently illegal to open an unlicensed casino and that all the licenses are in use, I think they have a very good legal argument.
I suppose that was a problem for the Rivers casino at one time, but politicians can fix that. It is an artificial limitation after all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-10-2014, 11:23 AM
 
Location: Philly
10,227 posts, read 16,821,015 times
Reputation: 2973
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathmanMathman View Post
They can fight all they want, but unless they have a legal argument or political clout, I don't see a problem.
they have both which is why it won't happen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-10-2014, 12:18 PM
 
Location: Marshall-Shadeland, Pittsburgh, PA
32,617 posts, read 77,614,858 times
Reputation: 19102
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluecarebear View Post
Nobody goes to casinos under 60. They aren't a cool place to hang out. The average age of a gambler is 46. It would be a waste of tax dollars to have two casinos in town.
I won $30 the other night playing my Wolf Run penny slots, and I'm in my mid-20s. Speak for yourself.

A more accurate generalization may be nobody who doesn't smoke patronizes casinos, considering I always leave Rivers reeking like an ashtray.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-10-2014, 12:20 PM
 
Location: Marshall-Shadeland, Pittsburgh, PA
32,617 posts, read 77,614,858 times
Reputation: 19102
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathmanMathman View Post
It should, like many cities do, have a rail line from the airport, past the stadiums, to the convention center and hotels. Maybe bring back the trollies for getting around the city.
A decent mass transit system costs money. Money comes from taxes. Yinzers (sorry, "angry natives"?) hate taxes. It will never happen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-10-2014, 02:57 PM
 
Location: Manchester
3,110 posts, read 2,917,912 times
Reputation: 3728
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelCityRising View Post
A decent mass transit system costs money. Money comes from taxes. Yinzers (sorry, "angry natives"?) hate taxes. It will never happen.
I love taxes, I just can’t seem to get anyone to propose new ones.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-10-2014, 09:02 PM
 
Location: Marshall-Shadeland, Pittsburgh, PA
32,617 posts, read 77,614,858 times
Reputation: 19102
Quote:
Originally Posted by PghYinzer View Post
I love taxes, I just can’t seem to get anyone to propose new ones.
YAY! I'm glad I'm not the only one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-11-2014, 05:49 AM
 
Location: Pittsburgh
7,541 posts, read 10,260,125 times
Reputation: 3510
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelCityRising View Post
A decent mass transit system costs money. Money comes from taxes. Yinzers (sorry, "angry natives"?) hate taxes. It will never happen.

Most folks in this area would rather use their money to send their children to quality schools or save for their retirement, and are willing to put up with a little bit of inconvenience in their daily commute in exchange.

Further, most people in the Pittsburgh area, live in places where decent mass transit isn't even being discussed, so they wouldn't even benefit from it. No one is even proposing extending the T to Shaler or Penn Hills and their are no proposed gondolas to Lincoln Place and Kennedy.

Maybe in the future, the outlying areas will be the minority in influence, but that's where the majority of the tax dollars and votes come from today.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-12-2014, 11:12 AM
 
7,112 posts, read 10,133,686 times
Reputation: 1781
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelCityRising View Post
A decent mass transit system costs money. Money comes from taxes. Yinzers (sorry, "angry natives"?) hate taxes. It will never happen.
Nothing like this seems to happen unless it is federally funded. Wish a more ambitious plan was in place beyond the North Shore for LRT. Obama was looking for "shovel-ready" stuff, so if planned, maybe the feds would have funded it all the way to the airport if a plan was in place.

I doubt a tax could be put in place to fund it locally. Pittsburgh might have blown it by dragging its feet over Skybus years ago. Pete Flaherty probably thought he would be well-remembered for blocking it.

Last edited by MathmanMathman; 10-12-2014 at 11:21 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-12-2014, 08:31 PM
 
Location: Marshall-Shadeland, Pittsburgh, PA
32,617 posts, read 77,614,858 times
Reputation: 19102
Quote:
Originally Posted by I_Like_Spam View Post
Most folks in this area would rather use their money to send their children to quality schools or save for their retirement, and are willing to put up with a little bit of inconvenience in their daily commute in exchange.

Further, most people in the Pittsburgh area, live in places where decent mass transit isn't even being discussed, so they wouldn't even benefit from it. No one is even proposing extending the T to Shaler or Penn Hills and their are no proposed gondolas to Lincoln Place and Kennedy.

Maybe in the future, the outlying areas will be the minority in influence, but that's where the majority of the tax dollars and votes come from today.

1.) Traffic congestion in this region is already worse than it is in many comparably-sized metropolitan areas (I actually find our gridlock to be worse than Greater Cleveland, which is larger than our area). As our economy and population grow, it's only going to continue to worsen in the coming years if we're not going to start planning ahead NOW to accommodate that growth appropriately. Look at Northern Virginia, where I moved here from. It exploded in growth seemingly overnight to where it now houses a few million people, and nobody properly planned for it. Now it has a booming economy, massive wealth, but very stressed out people who sit in a half-hour of gut-wrenching traffic on six-lane roads just to get to the grocery store. Just because people would rather NOT spend taxes NOW to plan ahead doesn't mean it's not a good idea.

2.) Shaler and Penn Hills wouldn't exist if it wasn't for Pittsburgh. I'm tiring of suburbanites holding all of the political clout in this region. At one point people actually cared about the host city that fed their suburb and kept it chugging along. Now in America people just wall themselves off in their own exclusive enclaves. It needs to stop. It's so selfish. Too bad if someone in Ross Township thinks a tax increase to fund a light rail expansion from the North Shore to the airport is a bad idea because they personally wouldn't use it. I just read an article today where PennDOT is spending $10,000,000 to build new pedestrian walkways and ramps to make it easier for Steelers fans to get to and from the "T". I don't go to football games. Guess what? It's still a worthy project to help relieve congestion, even if it doesn't PERSONALLY benefit ME! Gee, imagine that!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Pittsburgh

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top