Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Artist faked being a billionaire to photograph New York City’s best views

architecturaldigest.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 260 posts

Re: Artist faked being a billionaire to photograph New York City’s best views

#71

Post by wolverine876 »

mburst wrote: post #40
chasedehan wrote: post #4

Wouldn’t these listings with pictures be available somewhere? This doesn’t sound too interesting to take pictures of homes listed for sale.

I thought the same thing, but I found it hard to find views of inside of the apartments I sampled from the article. A lot of the apartment websites just talked about the amenities. Some had a floor plan, but no pictures of what the inside actually looked like. For a $7mil+ condo I was expecting a little more, but I'm also not really the target audience of those condos either

Perhaps exclusivity is important to these customers. The real estate agent isn't posting images on the web for the mass market to see.

Re: Artist faked being a billionaire to photograph New York City’s best views

#72

Post by alpha_squared »

theonething wrote: post #70
LimaBearz wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can’t tell if that’s sarcasm or not so I’ll just remind everyone of Adam Smith: "A power to dispose of estates for ever is manifestly absurd. The earth and the fulness of it belongs to every generation, and the preceding one can have no right to bind it up from posterity. Such extension of property is quite unnatural." In this country there was a time yes where inheriting it is shady and it’s something I fear our c…

I don't get it. What business is it of ours if a wealthy person passes their wealth to their progeny?

Wealth is finite, despite how much some like to claim it's not zero-sum. Not everyone can be wealthy, so by definition there will be those who aren't. Inherited wealth allows the inheritors to start further along in wealth accumulation and widens the gap between the wealthy and those who aren't. That then locks up wealth into the hands of fewer and fewer people.

Re: Artist faked being a billionaire to photograph New York City’s best views

#73

Post by [deleted] »

theonething wrote: post #70
LimaBearz wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can’t tell if that’s sarcasm or not so I’ll just remind everyone of Adam Smith: "A power to dispose of estates for ever is manifestly absurd. The earth and the fulness of it belongs to every generation, and the preceding one can have no right to bind it up from posterity. Such extension of property is quite unnatural." In this country there was a time yes where inheriting it is shady and it’s something I fear our c…

I don't get it. What business is it of ours if a wealthy person passes their wealth to their progeny?

[deleted]

Re: Artist faked being a billionaire to photograph New York City’s best views

#74

Post by Dyac »

cheriot wrote: post #27
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #8

> They’re investments, not really meant for living in. They cast these huge shadows and block views—really change the skyline—just so they can stand empty. That is definitely one of the saddest parts for me. These billionaires (many of whom got their wealth in shady circumstances) are just using these condos to park their money. I may think NFTs are insane but at least when people with too much money park their wealt…

Well, if you want to ruin their investment then issue building permits for more of them. > They cast these huge shadows and block views Talk about first world problems. Expecting a city skyline to never change is ridiculous. The only problem is that so few people use these buildings. The best kind of density regulation requires _more_ density.

In London there are "protected vistas" - it's the reason why the shard and the walkie-talkie buildings are odd shapes.

https://mappinglondon.co.uk/2011/londons-protected-vistas/

Re: Artist faked being a billionaire to photograph New York City’s best views

#75

Post by jimmyed »

juskrey wrote: post #48
peteretep wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So do? Plenty of companies hiring remote, and you will be far (far far far) from the first tech worker to move to South East Asia. Bangkok in particular has world class (and affordable) health care, food, and night life, and you’re only ever a couple of hours from the beach

Thailand is fine until you get into trouble which requires authorities of any kind. It is what "3rd world" is all about.

I haven't researched much about this but India seems like a better fit for tech workers? There I'll find folks who share my interest and the culture is good too.

Re: Artist faked being a billionaire to photograph New York City’s best views

#76

Post by IG_Semmelweiss »

LimaBearz wrote: post #55
peteretep wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> many of whom got their wealth in shady circumstances Like inheriting it, which is the shadiest of shady ways to make money

I can’t tell if that’s sarcasm or not so I’ll just remind everyone of Adam Smith: "A power to dispose of estates for ever is manifestly absurd. The earth and the fulness of it belongs to every generation, and the preceding one can have no right to bind it up from posterity. Such extension of property is quite unnatural." In this country there was a time yes where inheriting it is shady and it’s something I fear our c…

there's no problem with inheritance.

What matters is the turnover of inheritance.

If you have the same 200 families holding all the wealth for 500 years, you have a problem (like several countries in europe).

There is nothing wrong with a hardworking person to reach wealth, and for heirs to keep it, if its properly managed. The issue is they should be able to lose it thru squander. Bail outs, lobbying, regulatory capture, prevent that natural ineptitude from taking place (securing thru connections what heirs couldn't do like their predecessors....that is, satisfying customers or creating shrewd innovation).

Re: Artist faked being a billionaire to photograph New York City’s best views

#77

Post by dbt00 »

zapdrive wrote: post #68
juskrey wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thailand is fine until you get into trouble which requires authorities of any kind. It is what "3rd world" is all about.

So, like California DMV?

When's the last time you went to one? I had three different reasons to go to one in the last 3 years and each time I was in and out in under 30 minutes with almost no wait time. This meme is garbage.

Re: Artist faked being a billionaire to photograph New York City’s best views

#78

Post by IG_Semmelweiss »

this is a huge argument for a real estate tax on non-primary residential property. Then, triple the tax its not rented during the year.

do we want to allow wealthy princes to have a pied a terre on park ave ? OK. Let them pay in blood for the privilege.

Of course, neither "progressives" or "conservatives" will be willing to threaten upper classes, real estate lobby, and political donors, with such a tax.. despite that the people that stand most to gain from this would be lower income AND first time owners ...who are voters in their own district!

Re: Artist faked being a billionaire to photograph New York City’s best views

#79

Post by cigaser »

ragle wrote: post #10

Off topic, but perhaps of interest to anyone in Thailand who would like to experience similar views firsthand: https://www.booking.com/hotel/th/thirty-nine-boulevard-execu... The room my wife and I booked in 2019 offered a panoramic, bird's eye view of Bangkok's skyline from one of the higher floors in the building. Not bad at ~$90 / night at the time.

I get similar view for $400/month. I really do not get this Stockholm syndrome for expensive cities.

Re: Artist faked being a billionaire to photograph New York City’s best views

#80

Post by JumpCrisscross »

LimaBearz wrote: post #56
paxys wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. Staged apartments are supposed to be dull. Prospective buyers should see a blank canvas, something as neutral and inoffensive as possible. And this applies to all sales, not just new apartments. There's a reason your realtor wants you to move all your stuff out before starting showings, no matter how much you think looking "homely" will help.

I can’t speak for the artist but I find these places quite drab because of the material choice and color. Grey/white marble, satin paint, light flooring, etc all make it dull to me. The problem I see though is to sell a unit at that those asking prices it’s not Home Depot marble or $2/f flooring it’s the crap Davis was sculpted from or whatever. That’s cool and all but yawn…

> material choice and color

If you’re buying a $70mm apartment and living in it, you’re renovating it before moving in.

Post reply on HN