I also worked on some of these buildings straight out of architecture school.
They were simple six or seven story concrete apartment buildings that easily fit into neighborhoods didn't cost a fortune and were easy to build. No gyms pools maybe a party room.
A program like this allows developers large and small to access pools of capital that they wouldn't otherwise be able to , to cover the front end cost of their projects. More capital means more building.
The only cost of the government is deferred or rearranged tax revenue. it has no upfront cost, no subsidies and it was actually very straightforward because there were deadlines for every year to register in the program and things got done in a hurry because of that.
Much of our now 50-year-old urban apartment buildings were built out of this program.
"Now, nobody is happy, and it has little to do with regulations or red tape."
Sorry, it is ALL about Regulations. The MURB didn't exist before until such Law/Regulations were instituted and then it was ALL about the Regulation when it was "expired" and MURBs were no more. Else this post wouldn't have a case for kvetching about it.
When people supplicate themselves before government to argue or demand for any kind of advantage either personal / corporate gain OR ideology, that is called Rent-Seeking (double-plus-good if it locks out your competition, but that's not the case here, I think). It is done by altering current Law / Regulation / Ordinances (and the "red tape" pertaining to any of that) to provide advantages to some but not others (or intentionally degrades another set of people needs or wants).
In this case, it is over a particular kind of housing, MURBs, that some prefer over other type of housing. Whether or not it is "better" or "worse" is not my concern. What it is about is government picking winners and losers in the marketplace - government directed economy (which generally ends badly - those in government usually don't understand the true results of creating incentives or disincentives and generally never worry about the secondary, tertiary, or quaternary results thereof. That is also part of Rent-Seeking.
So, Lloyd, your arguments here are ALL about Regulations and the Laws that spawn them.
Oh, before I forget about feckless and clueless elected officials, let's not forget about the usual crowd of unelected, unaccountable, and unassailable bureaucrats also interjecting Red Tape into most processes. Just look at what is happening in Palisades, California right now for a prime example.
That stated, this post's contents rails against 1) differing philosophical outlooks for how Government runs itself (e.g., whose ox is getting gored or not), and 2)
However, I will agree with you on one point: "...and that the deductions were too expensive."
This is due from the simple fact that the cost and expense of Government NEVER retreats from its current budget bottom line. What should have been done when the Deductions kicked in was to trim governmental functions - they didn't. After all, every Revenue Dollar is sacred and government always takes its vigorish off the top FIRST (re: Development Fees et al)
So yet another example of The Law of Unintended Consequences reared its head.
I also worked on some of these buildings straight out of architecture school.
They were simple six or seven story concrete apartment buildings that easily fit into neighborhoods didn't cost a fortune and were easy to build. No gyms pools maybe a party room.
A program like this allows developers large and small to access pools of capital that they wouldn't otherwise be able to , to cover the front end cost of their projects. More capital means more building.
The only cost of the government is deferred or rearranged tax revenue. it has no upfront cost, no subsidies and it was actually very straightforward because there were deadlines for every year to register in the program and things got done in a hurry because of that.
Much of our now 50-year-old urban apartment buildings were built out of this program.
Bring em back soon.
"Now, nobody is happy, and it has little to do with regulations or red tape."
Sorry, it is ALL about Regulations. The MURB didn't exist before until such Law/Regulations were instituted and then it was ALL about the Regulation when it was "expired" and MURBs were no more. Else this post wouldn't have a case for kvetching about it.
When people supplicate themselves before government to argue or demand for any kind of advantage either personal / corporate gain OR ideology, that is called Rent-Seeking (double-plus-good if it locks out your competition, but that's not the case here, I think). It is done by altering current Law / Regulation / Ordinances (and the "red tape" pertaining to any of that) to provide advantages to some but not others (or intentionally degrades another set of people needs or wants).
In this case, it is over a particular kind of housing, MURBs, that some prefer over other type of housing. Whether or not it is "better" or "worse" is not my concern. What it is about is government picking winners and losers in the marketplace - government directed economy (which generally ends badly - those in government usually don't understand the true results of creating incentives or disincentives and generally never worry about the secondary, tertiary, or quaternary results thereof. That is also part of Rent-Seeking.
So, Lloyd, your arguments here are ALL about Regulations and the Laws that spawn them.
Oh, before I forget about feckless and clueless elected officials, let's not forget about the usual crowd of unelected, unaccountable, and unassailable bureaucrats also interjecting Red Tape into most processes. Just look at what is happening in Palisades, California right now for a prime example.
That stated, this post's contents rails against 1) differing philosophical outlooks for how Government runs itself (e.g., whose ox is getting gored or not), and 2)
However, I will agree with you on one point: "...and that the deductions were too expensive."
This is due from the simple fact that the cost and expense of Government NEVER retreats from its current budget bottom line. What should have been done when the Deductions kicked in was to trim governmental functions - they didn't. After all, every Revenue Dollar is sacred and government always takes its vigorish off the top FIRST (re: Development Fees et al)
So yet another example of The Law of Unintended Consequences reared its head.
Did a bot write this comment???
What a nice try at rather insolent humor...