The Veritable Quandary to Close - say it ain't so?!?!?!

Discussion in 'Blazers OT Forum' started by BLAZINGGIANTS, Jan 19, 2016.

Moderators: 6

Moderators

  1. BrianFromWA
  2. Chris Craig
  3. Darkwebs
  4. Ed O
  5. PtldPlatypus
  6. SlyPokerDog
Page 2 of 6
  1. barfo

    barfo triggered obsessive commie pinko boomer maniac Staff Member Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    34,380
    Likes Received:
    25,435
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Blazer OT board
    LOL. You literally have no idea what you are talking about.

    barfo
     
    barfo, Jan 20, 2016
    #21
  2. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,978
    Likes Received:
    10,673
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    The facts are in black and white.

    Government killed this business.

    Fuck the People.
     
    Denny Crane, Jan 20, 2016
    #22
  3. UncleCliffy'sDaddy

    UncleCliffy'sDaddy We're all Bozos on this bus.

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2015
    Messages:
    7,506
    Likes Received:
    15,298
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Dammit Denny. You're forcing me to agree with you....
     
    UncleCliffy'sDaddy, Jan 20, 2016
    #23
    riverman likes this.
  4. oldmangrouch

    oldmangrouch persona non grata

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2008
    Messages:
    12,403
    Likes Received:
    6,325
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If "government" had sold that land 30 years ago, the VQ would have been out of business 29 years ago. Your argument is out-of-step with the reality of the local market.
     
    oldmangrouch, Jan 20, 2016
    #24
  5. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,978
    Likes Received:
    10,673
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    You and barfo must use crystal balls. We know for sure what happened recently. You have no clue if your assertion is true. You would have to go back in time to somehow prove it.

    I had an office below a restaurant. They wanted to expand so they paid us to move. I think that is more likely - a deal between two private parties.
     
    Denny Crane, Jan 20, 2016
    #25
  6. The Professional Fan

    The Professional Fan Big League Scrub

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2008
    Messages:
    9,851
    Likes Received:
    6,746
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    The West Coast Portland
    I barfed hefeweizen off that patio.
     
    The Professional Fan, Jan 20, 2016
    #26
    blue32, riverman and UncleCliffy'sDaddy like this.
  7. barfo

    barfo triggered obsessive commie pinko boomer maniac Staff Member Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    34,380
    Likes Received:
    25,435
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Blazer OT board
    You still aren't understanding the situation then. The government did not take VQs building or land, nor would a private party need to acquire their building or land in order to build on the adjacent lot. A private party would have no reason to make a deal with the restaurant owner, they'd be free to build a tower on their own land just as the government was free to do so. Property rights, y'know?

    barfo
     
    barfo, Jan 20, 2016
    #27
  8. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,978
    Likes Received:
    10,673
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    Crystal ball? There you go again.

    Property rights means you get to charge rent if you want.

    At the very least, the government destroyed a viable business, putting people out of work needlessly, destroyed a local landmark of sorts, and now you're going to have to tax 10 people to pay salary for each government worker that works in the new building.

    None of it makes sense.

    The government simply has no compelling interest in owning the land or many years later using it to destroy this business. If they needed the land to build, they should have done so in the first place. The restaurant would have established itself for 45+ years somewhere else.
     
    Denny Crane, Jan 20, 2016
    #28
  9. riverman

    riverman Writing Team

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2013
    Messages:
    68,348
    Likes Received:
    67,402
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sometimes I think Government offices shouldn't even be in permanent buildings, they should be in RVs. Give the money to Oregonian RV builders in the valley who've suffered and laid off folks for awhile now. Then all they'd need would be parking spots
     
    riverman, Jan 20, 2016
    #29
    Denny Crane likes this.
  10. barfo

    barfo triggered obsessive commie pinko boomer maniac Staff Member Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    34,380
    Likes Received:
    25,435
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Blazer OT board
    You really don't get it, do you. The restaurant is NOT on the land the government is building on. They were NOT forced to vacate. They chose to, probably because the construction noise next door would be a detriment to business. But that's a risk every business that doesn't own all neighboring land runs.

    barfo
     
    barfo, Jan 20, 2016
    #30
    JFizzleRaider likes this.
  11. riverman

    riverman Writing Team

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2013
    Messages:
    68,348
    Likes Received:
    67,402
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Unfortunately there are only 2 cities left in California protected by the Historical Society from destroying old architecture and installing neon signs, etc..Nevada City and Santa Cruz...if they build on that site in Portland, it is obviously not protected for any historical reason. I watched old town Sioux City Iowa get destroyed when I was young...beautiful architecture and cobblestone streets, sculptures, street cars, etc. all built by Capone in his heyday...now it's steel and glass high rises. Sad but it happens.
     
    riverman, Jan 20, 2016
    #31
  12. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,978
    Likes Received:
    10,673
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    Again with the crystal ball. You're a mind reader.

    The government is doing harm. Get it?
     
    Denny Crane, Jan 20, 2016
    #32
  13. riverman

    riverman Writing Team

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2013
    Messages:
    68,348
    Likes Received:
    67,402
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Somebody has to take care of the crystal ball, barfo is a logical choice..they'll never find it
     
    riverman, Jan 20, 2016
    #33
    Denny Crane likes this.
  14. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,978
    Likes Received:
    10,673
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    [​IMG]

    Looking at the crystal ball.
     
    Denny Crane, Jan 20, 2016
    #34
    ripcityboy and riverman like this.
  15. riverman

    riverman Writing Team

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2013
    Messages:
    68,348
    Likes Received:
    67,402
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'd have at least taken off the tie first
     
    riverman, Jan 20, 2016
    #35
    UncleCliffy'sDaddy likes this.
  16. barfo

    barfo triggered obsessive commie pinko boomer maniac Staff Member Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    34,380
    Likes Received:
    25,435
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Blazer OT board
    Well, I suppose your position is that the government shouldn't build a courthouse. Anywhere. Ever. Because no matter when and where they build it, it might have a negative impact on someone.

    And that would be bad. Government bad. Bad government.

    So we don't need courthouses. By extension, we don't need post offices, or roads, or military bases, or really anything else. Because they might inconvenience someone.

    But private enterprise does not inconvenience anyone when they build things. So that's ok.

    Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

    barfo
     
    barfo, Jan 20, 2016
    #36
    UncleCliffy'sDaddy, Further, ripcityboy and 2 others like this.
  17. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,978
    Likes Received:
    10,673
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    Straw man - Your position must be that all we need is courthouses everywhere. One on every lot in the city. Or maybe roads or military bases. See how silly you are?

    My position is they should have sold or leased the land to the restaurant, or used it to make a park or something. Government is supposed to serve the people (I don't mean serving food), not doing harm (put restaurants out of business, people out of work).

    If the government needs a courthouse, it should buy the land and build it, not own ridiculous amounts of land for no purpose. Where and how they build it should have no negative impact on the people. Like maybe they should build that courthouse next to the dump.

    "Government good, restaurant evil!"
    -- barfo
     
    Last edited: Jan 21, 2016
    Denny Crane, Jan 21, 2016
    #37
  18. Further

    Further Guy

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2008
    Messages:
    11,099
    Likes Received:
    4,039
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Stuff doer
    Location:
    Place
    If I remember correctly, the govt. owned that land for over 100 years because it was necessary when building the Hawthorne bridge after the Morrison bridge burnt down. It was an awkward lot because of the bridge on/offramps. But as the city built up, and space became more precious, even awkward lots became more desirable.

    It's too bad the VQ is shutting it's doors, but I don't think that the restaurant could have afforded to lease the adjacent lot long term as you suggest, knowing downtown costs that would have been prohibitive for a porch. But I don't know that to be the case, it's just conjecture.
     
    Further, Jan 21, 2016
    #38
  19. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,978
    Likes Received:
    10,673
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    What did the government charge for the porch all along?
     
    Denny Crane, Jan 21, 2016
    #39
  20. SlyPokerDog

    SlyPokerDog Woof! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2008
    Messages:
    125,463
    Likes Received:
    145,690
    Trophy Points:
    115
    Does anyone know what will happen to all the art and stone work in the old courthouse?
     
    SlyPokerDog, Jan 21, 2016
    #40
Page 2 of 6

Share This Page