31–40 of 79 posts
I fully support landmarking buildings -- it's in the public interest, for future generations, and I still lament the loss of the old Penn Station. And many times (usually?) it's uncontested -- current owners find value in its historical authenticity, and any future buyer is well aware they can't change it. BUT -- in the case of a functioning business that has no need for the status and finds it harmful for business r…
Every year around a certain date, the meaning of which is opaque to me, I receive a package sent from the Strand bookstore containing a very nice expensive book. First couple years I called to ask who the sender was, they read back my name to me. I asked them to describe the purchaser, it took a bit of doing but indeed someone remember them and described what I look like. I've never been to New York or the Strand, bu…
Is it weird that my first thought reading this article was the episode of Freakanomics where they talked about how putting animals on the endangered species list caused the price for their hides/mounted heads to go through the roof, and indirectly increase the demand and likelihood of poaching? It's very sad that so many ways we go about trying to preserve history end up promoting it's destruction.
I think they found that areas that were going to be designated as protected areas experienced accelerated development over a one year time horizon.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We gave up that right when building permits became a thing. They were meant only to prevent city-wide fires. As with everything government, once the process was established, the purpose for using it could be stretched and expanded easily.
A city-wide fire is a negative externality created by irresponsible management. I'd rather such issues be resolved by courts, but can absolutely see the case. A historical building is effectively a positive externality provided by the owner. The state cannot ethically force you to provide such a thing, nor can it do so without just compensation (Constitution.) The takings clause is very clear on this; you are preserv…
Some courts have ruled the way you describe, but more have ruled that it's not a legal taking, since no real-property rights are actually lost via conveyance (in the legal, non-moveable property sense). The value of those rights might be reduced, but the right is still yours; it wasn't a legal taking. They view it as being not much different than a bad neighbor bringing down property values.
Personally, I don't think they should even be able to do it via the takings clause. If implemented at all, it should be strictly opt-in, similar to how zoning is initially adopted in new or annexed jurisdiction.
(Also it's not "public benefit", it's "public use". It's often interpreted by courts as public benefit now, but that's something else I disagree with.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The requisite posting of the Cobra effect whenever something like this comes up https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobra_effect
Didn’t know it had a name, thanks!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactance_(psychology) Another example is where a product is banned like phosphate containing detergents which causes the market to go out and buy it all up.
> He will argue that the city’s actions are unconstitutional under the fifth amendment, which states “nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation”, and the 14th amendment, which says “nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws”. I have a strong suspicion that's been tried unsuccessfully before.
Is The Strand being compensated? It would be one thing if the the public were purchasing the building or paying for it's use. It doesn't seem like eminent domain or the like where the government compensates for seizure.
Every year around a certain date, the meaning of which is opaque to me, I receive a package sent from the Strand bookstore containing a very nice expensive book. First couple years I called to ask who the sender was, they read back my name to me. I asked them to describe the purchaser, it took a bit of doing but indeed someone remember them and described what I look like. I've never been to New York or the Strand, bu…
Clearly you from the future with an encoded message in the book.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is The Strand being compensated? It would be one thing if the the public were purchasing the building or paying for it's use. It doesn't seem like eminent domain or the like where the government compensates for seizure.
But it is eminent domain or seizure in its own way. Their autonomy has been stolen. I think the bookstore could make a compelling constitutional case out of it—if they can find a spare million or two behind the sofa.
> He will argue that the city’s actions are unconstitutional under the fifth amendment, which states “nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation”, and the 14th amendment, which says “nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws”. I have a strong suspicion that's been tried unsuccessfully before.
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/438/104/#tab-opi...
The Strand used to be fantastic when it was just a gigantic used book store, but ever since it started focusing more on new books its become a shadow of its former self. So I can't say I'd miss it nearly as much now as I would have 20 years ago. That said, it's a sad day when any bookstore goes out of business, especially one with a rich history like The Strand (despite most of that history being behind it now).
I've found that while the inventory on a given day might not be super stellar, the sheer volume of books that flow through their hands is the true value they provide to the ecosystem. I see them as more of a used book broker than a museum for used books.
As an example to explain what I mean, 2 years ago I added to my wishlist some obscure book, last printed in the 80s by a small midwestern university publisher. Two weeks ago, I received an email saying that they had just put it on the shelf! That evening, I walked in, found it more or less immediately, and wandered about looking for particular fiction authors, before finding a marvelously-illustrated classic in two volumes, that was printed in the 1940s. I left maybe $40 poorer. This story repeats itself every month or two.
While you might be able to find such things on Amazon, I find that the Strand both beckons you to search and rewards you for that search. I don't think anything in New York competes with them, pound for pound.
While, I agree that their branding and marketing focus has shifted a lot towards "trendy", newer material (i.e. where the real money is), I'm skeptical of the notion that the quality or range of their used goods have declined proportionally, if at all.