Government Program Dishonesty

[tytlyf]

The problem is that you've a tendency to bicker about peripheral things.
That doesn't interest me.

I'm interested in facts and sources. You provided none, on purpose. Do you disagree with the definition presented for 'accessory apartment?'

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm interested in facts and sources. You provided none, on purpose. Do you disagree with the definition presented for 'accessory apartment?'

Have you noticed your definition isn't even in dispute?

 

[Vinayaka]

What is the point of having a program which excludes everyone?

It looks great on paper, in theory. Isn't that what politicians do?

 

[Revoltingest]

It looks great on paper, in theory. Isn't that what politicians do?

At least sometimes programs work, & work well.

 

[Curious George]

I ran across something in the local paper today at my dentist's office.
Some years ago, my town loosened local laws to allow "accessory apartments".
This was to help alleviate a housing shortage which is leading to pretty high
home prices & rents. There was a lot of demand for this because the cost
per sq ft for such units is much lower than new construction.
It turns out that the "loosened" laws are still so restrictive that no one has
been able to do it yet. Now, some might think....those damnable Republicans!
No, we don't have any. All Democrats & one independent last time I checked.

It reminds me of the HARP program for assisting homeowners with troubled
loans. A friend applied, but it turned out that having one late payment was
a disqualifier.

What is the point of having a program which excludes everyone?
I have an answer to the first program.
I don't for the 2nd one.
I'll let others weigh in first.

Balderdash!

This is not an example of a dishonest government program. This is an example of liberals deregulating. The reason that it hasn't taken off is simple capitalism. People don't want to do it if it is not worth something for them.

The problem is in the financing, construction, and, as you mentioned, the community itself.

The government is not responsible for people choosing not to build accessory housing. The people who own the houses are responsible.

 

[Revoltingest]

This is not an example of a dishonest government program.
This is an example of liberals deregulating.

It was proffered as deregulation, but in actual effect was not,
as evidenced by no one taking advantage of the program.
If the burdens imposed by government dissuade people from
participating, then this is on government.

 

[Curious George]

It was proffered as deregulation, but in actual effect was not,
as evidenced by no one taking advantage of the program.
If the burdens imposed by government dissuade people from
participating, then this is on government.

It was deregulation. The units are allowed where before they were not.

 

[Revoltingest]

It was deregulation. The units are allowed where before they were not.

My objection is that government policies sometimes offer the appearance
of opportunity, while actually discouraging it, in this case effective denial.

I suppose you also disagree about Republicans admitting the legality of
abortion, but attempting to deny access? I call that dishonest too.

 

[Jumi]

We have a few, but fortunately they haven't emerged
in numbers large enuf to destroy capitalism...yet.

I think the socialists who don't even want to destroy capitalism are a larger group anyway...

 

[Revoltingest]

I think the socialists who don't even want to destroy capitalism are a larger group anyway...

They aren't real socialists though.
They're capitalists who want more social benefit from capitalism.
The terminology is a real mish mash these days, eh.

 

[Jumi]

The terminology is a real mish mash these days, eh.

I think that it's always been that way... socialism with Chinese characteristics is an interesting case study in that...

 

[Revoltingest]

I think that it's always been that way... socialism with Chinese characteristics is an interesting case study in that...

Aye, they moved towards capitalism, but retains
the command ability to use ad hoc.
And they also retained the social control aspects.

 

[Milton Platt]

I ran across something in the local paper today at my dentist's office.
Some years ago, my town loosened local laws to allow "accessory apartments".
This was to help alleviate a housing shortage which is leading to pretty high
home prices & rents. There was a lot of demand for this because the cost
per sq ft for such units is much lower than new construction.
It turns out that the "loosened" laws are still so restrictive that no one has
been able to do it yet. Now, some might think....those damnable Republicans!
No, we don't have any. All Democrats & one independent last time I checked.

It reminds me of the HARP program for assisting homeowners with troubled
loans. A friend applied, but it turned out that having one late payment was
a disqualifier.

What is the point of having a program which excludes everyone?
I have an answer to the first program.
I don't for the 2nd one.
I'll let others weigh in first.

I'm late to the party here. What's an "accessory" apartment?

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm late to the party here. What's an "accessory" apartment?

If you already have house on a lot, you could add on an
apartment to rent out, or install your aged mother-in-law, Bertha.

I have something like that.....a separate one bedroom house on
the same lot. Oddly, under Michiganistanian law, it adds almost
nothing to the appraised value, despite it's earning much more
rent than my property taxes. I get paid to live here.
(I live outside the city limits, so no trouble from them.)

 

[tytlyf]

If you already have house on a lot, you could add on an
apartment to rent out, or install your aged mother-in-law, Bertha.

I have something like that.....a separate one bedroom house on
the same lot. Oddly, under Michiganistanian law, it adds almost
nothing to the appraised value, despite it's earning much more
rent than my property taxes. I get paid to live here.
(I live outside the city limits, so no trouble from them.)

You're in the minority, don't be so selfish. I'm sure most people aren't complaining about this change.

 

[Revoltingest]

You're in the minority....

So you don't like minorities, eh.

 

[Stevicus]

Our town exercises great control thru zoning laws & the housing code (which is
entirely city controlled). The state is not the problem here. Moreover, the state
has had to step in at times to rein in city over-reaching in their restrictions.
On lobbyists...
It's a very liberal town, with students (even out-of state) at at a very liberal
university getting a vote. This is where the power lies.
It appears that their view on affordable housing is that it be driven solely by
government programs (as opposed to market solutions), eg, gov assistance,
gov owned housing.

If that's true, then why wouldn't they just do it? They could simply invoke Eminent Domain, buy up some property, and then rent it out at a substantially reduced rate. That would be far simpler and workable than the plan you've outlined here.

 

[Revoltingest]

If that's true, then why wouldn't they just do it? They could simply invoke Eminent Domain, buy up some property, and then rent it out at a substantially reduced rate. That would be far simpler and workable than the plan you've outlined here.

A preferred method is to require that developers of new residential
buildings donate a percentage of units to the city in exchange for
permission to build.

 

[Woberts]

We have a few, but fortunately they haven't emerged in numbers large enuf to destroy capitalism...yet.

I'll get you one day, ya old coot!

 

[Revoltingest]

I'll get you one day, ya old coot!

Get off'n me lawn!