Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community - View Single Post - Calgary eliminates sprawl subsidies for new housing

#-3 · 01-12-2016, 08:16 PM

allot of the latte sippers here are pretty funny. Their basic argument is, if you made more money, or different lifestyle choices, or just generally wanted to live like me, you could too be a latte sipping hippy living in a 600 sqft box for $1800/month.

I'm not saying it is wrong to choice that type of lifestyle, but I'm guessing us YOP gobblers don't chose that lifestyle because we don't find it remotely attractive. We want a big house and a quite park near by because we want space for our kids to to have toys, or a dog without going down 7 stories for every piss, or to have our large families over regularly, because we want to take our family to a small playground with a few people at it rather than a crowed pathway.

There are lifestyle choices people make, because it's what will make them happy. And to assume it would not be an imposition on me to live more like you is kind of funny.

This topic also makes we wonder. Who is paying for all of those water main repairs on 14th? Why do some many of you Latte sipping hippies think the CRL for east village was such a good idea? What do I care if some place a few blocks from your home is where bums like to gather and shoot up. Why should my tax dollars go towards addressing innercity problems when they could just send a bill to everyone living in those communities.

I understand that the city wants to slow outward development for many reasons. So I do understand to policy decision going forward. But to assert some tax payers should have user fees on public infrastructure is kind of crazy. I don't think that's what this policy is about, I think its about trying to steer development to where the city needs it, in the past it went the other way, because that is where the city needed development.

01-12-2016, 08:16 PM	#75
#-3 #1 Goaltender Join Date: Mar 2008 Exp:	allot of the latte sippers here are pretty funny. Their basic argument is, if you made more money, or different lifestyle choices, or just generally wanted to live like me, you could too be a latte sipping hippy living in a 600 sqft box for $1800/month. I'm not saying it is wrong to choice that type of lifestyle, but I'm guessing us YOP gobblers don't chose that lifestyle because we don't find it remotely attractive. We want a big house and a quite park near by because we want space for our kids to to have toys, or a dog without going down 7 stories for every piss, or to have our large families over regularly, because we want to take our family to a small playground with a few people at it rather than a crowed pathway. There are lifestyle choices people make, because it's what will make them happy. And to assume it would not be an imposition on me to live more like you is kind of funny. This topic also makes we wonder. Who is paying for all of those water main repairs on 14th? Why do some many of you Latte sipping hippies think the CRL for east village was such a good idea? What do I care if some place a few blocks from your home is where bums like to gather and shoot up. Why should my tax dollars go towards addressing innercity problems when they could just send a bill to everyone living in those communities. I understand that the city wants to slow outward development for many reasons. So I do understand to policy decision going forward. But to assert some tax payers should have user fees on public infrastructure is kind of crazy. I don't think that's what this policy is about, I think its about trying to steer development to where the city needs it, in the past it went the other way, because that is where the city needed development.