Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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)
 
Old 07-11-2012, 01:30 PM
 
Location: Wasilla, Alaska
17,823 posts, read 23,462,250 times
Reputation: 6541

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7 View Post
Not in Florida!


But I do believe a pool up north is silly. It's ugly and closed up all winter.
Use it for a hockey rink during the winter, the neighborhood kids will love you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-11-2012, 01:53 PM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,882 posts, read 33,285,332 times
Reputation: 4269
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaimuki View Post
This whole plan reeks of Agenda 21 if you ask me.
My God, 75 posts and finally someone posts what I thought of with the OP. I guess some of those who have been in so far haven't been exposed to Agenda 21 although it is their fault as plenty of us have given them chances. Maybe some of the ICLEI captives we have here saw it and just ignored hoping nobody else would see it. Obiously Bloomberg has been to UN headquarters getting info about Agenda 21.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2012, 01:56 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,830,565 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by roysoldboy View Post
My God, 75 posts and finally someone posts what I thought of with the OP. I guess some of those who have been in so far haven't been exposed to Agenda 21 although it is their fault as plenty of us have given them chances. Maybe some of the ICLEI captives we have here saw it and just ignored hoping nobody else would see it. Obiously Bloomberg has been to UN headquarters getting info about Agenda 21.
And the Agenda 21 squad is here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2012, 02:01 PM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,882 posts, read 33,285,332 times
Reputation: 4269
Quote:
Originally Posted by KUchief25 View Post
Agenda 21 at work. Stack em and rack em in beehives.
A poster mentioned the stink of Agenda 21 as the 76th poster in this thread and not one soul saw that, I guess, That one was at 10:02 pm, just 2 hours from you. I think some of those answers that followed that one were done to cover up that one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2012, 02:03 PM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,882 posts, read 33,285,332 times
Reputation: 4269
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt View Post
Where do you think burger flippers should live?
Why, of course, they should live in Agenda 21 type of units. You do know about those, don't you?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2012, 02:04 PM
 
Location: Humboldt Park, Chicago
3,501 posts, read 3,138,224 times
Reputation: 2597
What's funny is, if the laws currently said it was OK to build 300 sq ft apts, or heck, even 200 sq ft and Bloomberg was trying to pass a law that said the minimum size had to be 400 sq ft, the conservatives here would be flipping out about it. It's a pretty good illustration about how rampant hyper-partisanship is on C-D.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2012, 02:05 PM
 
Location: Where they serve real ale.
7,242 posts, read 7,910,626 times
Reputation: 3497
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW View Post
This proposal is an attempt to create affordable housing for people just starting their careers in one of the financial capitals of the world. Not a bad idea. BTW I think this only applies to Manhatten Island.
Yeah, it's designed to deal with the dire shortage of affordable housing on Manhattan. Basically, smaller is cheaper ergo more low to medium income people can afford it. It's not an attempt, as some loonies have claimed in this thread, to force people into houses they don't want and instead it is simply to give people another option, one which they can actually afford yet still allow them to live in Manhattan.

This isn't a new trend either as places like Hong Kong, Tokyo, and Singapore have been doing this for decades. It allows people who don't make much money but who are vital to the city (like the waiters, the cooks, the house keepers, the college students, the young people, the folks working at the stores in the mall, the kid selling you tickets to the movies, etc...) to actually be able to live in the city they work in. That means it will be easier to find people willing to work those low income jobs in the city so people who are better off actually end up paying lower prices. Such long term city planning is actually good for the city's economic health and vitality.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2012, 02:06 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,830,565 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by quigboto View Post
What's funny is, if the laws currently said it was OK to build 300 sq ft apts, or heck, even 200 sq ft and Bloomberg was trying to pass a law that said the minimum size had to be 400 sq ft, the conservatives here would be flipping out about it. It's a pretty good illustration about how rampant hyper-partisanship is on C-D.
I don't think hyper-partisanship is necessarily an issue, but all-out stupidity we see around here surely is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2012, 02:07 PM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,882 posts, read 33,285,332 times
Reputation: 4269
Quote:
Originally Posted by gallowsCalibrator View Post
10 feet by 10 feet? I can't even begin to picture living in that. Even with just a Full size bed, there'd be barely even room for a dresser and/or TV.
Maybe the people who developed flat screen TVs were thinking about those monstrous 100 sf apartments.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2012, 02:08 PM
 
1,182 posts, read 1,140,277 times
Reputation: 439
First of all nobody is FORCING anybody to live anywhere they do not wish. But the fact is that Americans should be able to choose the size of where they live. If 300 sq ft is OK with you, why should the city or the county tell you that you can't have it? If you own land and a trailer is what you desire, then you should be able to have one. That is just the way I see things.
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:


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 > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:03 PM.

© 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