Bacon's Rebellion

Democracy Thrives in Sunlight

UNBELIEVABLE OBLIVIOUSNESS

—

by

James A. Bacon
in

The comments on Peter’s post on Commonwealth’s information technology “Behind the Northrop Grumman / VITA Scandals”) spit into two themes. In addition there is a sub-theme dealing with MainStream Media. Let us examine the sub-theme:

TMT called our attention to a 2 July item on POLITICO re WaPo lobbyist ‘sponsored’ dinners.

EMR printed it out and shared it with several folks. They were OUTRAGED. It seemed to EMR like Business-As-Usual but they were talking about un-subscribing.

WaPo printed a weak explanation on 3 July to cover their tracks. If one does not understand THE ESTATES MATRIX, it is easy to see WaPo as the villain rather than just an Enterprise playing out their Second Estate Role.

Today WaPo is back with a ‘we are making sure we are doing NOTHING wrong’ story titled “The Post Begins Reviews of Events to Avoid Ethics Conflicts. The first paragraph reads:

“The Washington Post yesterday initiated internal review to ensure that its business practices do not compromise it journalistic ethics WHEN THE NEWSPAPER ORGANIZES CONFERENCES OR PRIVATE EVENTS FUNDED BY SPONSORS. (Emphasis added)

WHAT???

How can they even DREAM there is not a blatant conflict that arises by just talking about such events?

Stop the Journalist charade, WaPo is an Enterprise, it is in business to make money. If it makes money from anything except those who buy its news services – including advertising by Agencies, Enterprises or Institutions that it reports on – it is prima facia CONFLICT.

These actions just document that the Organization has left the Fourth Estate and moved to the Second Estate. There is nothing ‘wrong’ with making money from providing access to speical interests so long as the Enterprise admits what they are doing and that they are in the Second Estate AND they do not try to hide behind a charade of ‘fourth estate journalism.’ It died in the 20th century.

It helps if one has a Comprehensive Conceptual Framework (THE ESTATES MATRIX or another one of your choosing) otherwise one ends up with impenetrable claptrap such as that by Clay Skirky who is ‘excerpted’ in the July-August 2009 Utne Reader.

Until there is robust, diverse CitizenMedia in the Fourth Estate, citizens will not have the information they need to make intelligent choices in the marketplace or in the voting booth.

EMR

Share this article

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

Comments

34 responses to “UNBELIEVABLE OBLIVIOUSNESS”

  1. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    EMR is right to condemn the Post for its "sponsorships" and his observation of the Estate Moves.
    However, a word about such "sponsorships" in these days of woe.

    (1) They aren't new. For years, top journalists who have written best-selling books and/or win Pulitzers have been free to charge a handy nickel for speeches and appearances here and there. Tom Friedman, George Will, Brooks, Paul Krugman and others come to mind. Bob Woodward has for years used the Post as little more than a hitching post for his extracurricular and for-profit activities such as books and speeches.

    (2) The trade press has long used "sponsored" conferences as a quick way to make money. A few years ago I was Washington Editor of Directorship which covers corporate governance. I participated at a conference in New York at the Union Club. Everyone from Playboy's Christie Hefner to former SEC bosses Harvey Pitt and Breeden were there. My job was to introduce Breeden and I had my throat cut because he thought I went on too long. Bottom line: a successful two-day conference like that one with a couple hundred or more in attendance can be worth an issue of ads or several. The Wall Street Journal does this all the time.

    (3) As advertising falters, more publications are going to turn to "premium" electronic newsletters or private briefings by marquee name journalists, academics and corporate types.

    (4) Facing widespread layoffs at BusinessWeek, one of my former colleagues in Europe jumped ship to a Paris firm that does nothing but line up conference speakers. I bet he makes a lot more money.

    Will this hurt journalistic ethics. You bet! But the old model of running ads and keeping an arms length of integrity just doesn't pay the bills any more.
    FYI, my journalistioc colleagues in places like Europe and Asia see nothing wrong with working PR on the side. I should be shocked, but if our system still worked that allows us to make a living and keep our skirts lily-white, I have to hedge my judgments.

    Peter Galuszka

  2. Car Reviews Avatar
    Car Reviews

    I read this post and think this is interesting.

  3. Car Reviews Avatar
    Car Reviews

    I have read this post and found it very interesting.

  4. Car Reviews Avatar
    Car Reviews

    I have read this post and found it very interesting.

  5. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    "Car Reviews" is probably addled by reading "the news."

    The feature story and the six top listed stories on CNN are about the funeral of some "MJ" who cannot even play basketball.

    If you want a quick summary of what to worry about today, try BBC or NPR.

    As Dr. Risse says, Enterprise media (aka, MainStream Media) have abandoned the Fourth Estate and are just pandering to advertisers by trying to dredge up potential cunsumers.

  6. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    Yes, the mainstream media leaves a lot to be desired? What's the antidote? Grass roots blogging I guess. And forcing the weasel-y politicians to take a stand on the issues. To wit:

    http://grovetonsvirginia.wordpress.com/2009/07/08/daffy-ducker-deeds/

  7. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    Update – my full URL may be too wide for this narrow column blog format. Here is a shortened version of the same URL:

    bit.ly/8zUiQ

  8. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    the thing about the reputation for an organization is that many people working hard over many years can painstakingly develop a well-earned reputation only to have one or two smart-ass types who are current in charge to destroy it.

    this goes for many different organizational entities….

    and it's really a shame because you can have 99% of the people who work there do their job professionally and responsibly only to have one of these hot shot types damage it severely – and the really bad thing?

    these guys (and gals) usually are anonymous …. before, during and after – except to the folks actually working with them.

    WaPo deserves the ridicule and rage but just remember – a lot of folks do try to do the right thing… and by little bits and pieces they help build a credible organization… but they sometimes cannot control the scofflaws.

  9. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    I think you have to do your own research and analysis – especially when it comes to Virginia politics. If you read all the relevant articles from various newspapers and magazines you would have a good start. But, of course, just hunting down these articles is very time consuming.

    I have discovered a great site for following Virginia politics:

    http://www.virginiatomorrow.com

    Here is the blogmaster's bio:

    http://virginiatomorrow.com/bio/

    His daily "Virginia in a Hurry" roundup of articles about Virginia politics is fabulous.

  10. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Christie Went to college with one of my buddies and she showed up at his wedding. She is a piece of work and a class act. On the other hand Playboy hasn't got to worry too much about jounalistic ethics, I don't suppose.

    RH

  11. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    One of my more conservative friends was bemoaning the loss of newspapers and even major newspapers. When I told him I get all the news I need from NPR, I thought he was going to have apoplexy. His response was so hysterical it brought an entire luncheon to a screeching halt.

    The table was laughing too hard to eat.

    RH

  12. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Despite its ethical problems the Poast Did report on the latest traffic congestion study:

    "Kirby and Lomax agreed that once the economy picks up, so will traffic congestion.

    "The solution isn't to have high unemployment forever," Lomax said."

    The article verfies my argument that you cannot blame traffic congestion on location alone. Jobs are a key driver to congestion. congestion is too many cars in one place. Move (some of) the jobs someplace else and you will relieve the congestion. No new roads required.

    Or, you can have unemployment: that seems to work, too, but it isn't free. Once again the study shows that we pay for traffic congestion, therfore we may as well pay at least that much NOT to have traffic congestion. But whehter we have traffic congestion or not, we are going to pay for it.

    It is up to the legislature to decide who pays and how much: we should not allow them to fool themselves into thinking that doing nothing is equivalent to costing nothing.

    RH

  13. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    Note to Groveton:

    About the narrow column; use the "Links to Post" link and get the old wide column for copying URLs, etc.

    About Holisworth. Good writer, inside observations but he has nothing to say about Fundamenal Transformation.

    Like all other pundits, he favors Business-As-Usual because that is what he knows. Wipe out the hacks and the arcane governance structure and he would have nothing to write about. This sort of stuff is entertainaing, like watching a horse race.

    But you know what the result will be — one of those nags on the track will win.

    Who cares if they are all duds beholden to a broken system?

    Larry:

    You are right, a lot of hard working, good people are going down with the MainStream Media ship.

    Most of them do not see an alternative and it is 'in their blood.'

    Moreover, almost all of them are under the delusion that MainStream Media is still in the Fourth Estate OR that there is a way for an Enterprise to get into the news business.

    EMR

  14. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    This item should be edged in Black — Peter or Jim would know how to do that but EMR does not have time to learn.

    Warren Brown is dropping his "Car Culture" column and keeping his new car review column.

    They (or perhaps he) will say he is just scaling back after years of great insights into the reasons Detroit is headed for the dumpster.

    Want to bet that the real reason is that Autonomobile Industrial Complex advertisers do no like him pointing out they have no clothes?

    EMR

  15. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    EMR –

    http://www.virginiatomorrow.com has two thrusts – almost everyday "Dr. Bob" publishes a series of articles about Virginia from a wide variety of newspapers and magazines. He call this "Virginia in a Hurry". I think it's a very valuable resource to read a lot of different things indexed in one place. I have not seem virtually any commentary on these entries. His second thrust is to provide commentary on the political landscape in Virginia. He doesn't address fundamental transformation (from what I've seen). However, he as a pretty keen sense of Virginia politics. His theories on the Democratic primary were pretty much "on the money".

    The subject of this article is the main stream media and it's lack of effectiveness. I agree with the points. So, what's a poor boy to do? I think you have to be more self-educated when the big papers are folding (pun intended) or won't address core issues. I thin BaconsRebellion is on way to stay educated. I think http://www.virginiatomorrow.com is another, non-competing tool to stay educated on issues facing Virginia.

  16. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    re: traffic congestion

    for the most part – the only folks who suffer from traffic congestion – are the ones who cause it.

    when we say that "we" lose so many hours a day, week, month, year to traffic congestion – it is not "we" but the folks who choose to drive during congestion.

    there is no entitlement to be able to drive anywhere at anytime in uncongested conditions.

    we just spent the last 3 days "threading" our way between Pittsburg and Columbus .. Toledo, Flint and Detroit – specifically, in each case, taking a different route to avoid the congestion.

    People who work every day and have congestion every day also have choices. Very few actually have "no choice" but to drive solo every day at the height of rush hour.

    and the only folks who have "responsibility" to do "something" about it – are the folks who cause it – not the folks who have chosen to do something other than cause it.

    Our problem is that our policies encourage and incentivize solo driving at rush hour and until they actually incentivize and encourage alternatives to solo driving at rush hour – we'll continue to hear the plaintive whining from those who feel that someone else should pay to make their commuter easier and faster.

  17. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    LarryG writes …

    "for the most part – the only folks who suffer from traffic congestion – are the ones who cause it."

    Congestion, in the majority, is caused by the incompetence and graft of the Virginia General Assembly. Many American cities have larger populations than Northern Virginia. Few (to none – perhaps LA) have the same level of congestion. The residents of those cities do not work at night, they do not work from home (any more than the people in NoVa work at home. No, they have two things we don't have:

    1. Competent state government which allocated transportation funds (especially for maintenance) based on road usage, not just linear miles.

    2. Some form of home rule which dilutes the power of the state in favor of localities – especially with regard to transportation.

    There are rush hours in New York, Chicago, San Francisco, Philadelphia, Miami, Denver, Dallas and Houston (among others). I believe that the reasons the rush hours in those locations are less onerous is because their state and local government is more competent.

    Yesterday, I saw a classic example of Virginia's transportation mis-management. VDOT decided to close one of two lanes on RT 7 (in both directions) during the end of rush hour. The signs telling motorists that one lane was closed were set up far to close to the lane closing creating a a serious bottleneck. When I got to the construction site 75% of the VDOT employees / contractors were standing and chatting, leaning on shovels and in one almost comical case holding a push broom upside down and leaning with his head on his forearm while holding the broom. At one end of the mess was a Virginia state trooper sitting in his cruiser, parked on the blocked off lane, with his lights flashing. He was apparently enjoying the cool, refreshing air conditioning from his car. Contrast this to New York. A lot of construction is done at night so as not to create bottlenecks. Uniformed traffic control personnel routinely take control of bottlenecks – both regularly occurring and sporadic (construction caused) bottlenecks. They build and run an effective mass transit system. Finally, they raise taxes for transportation in conjunction with the rising cost of transportation.

    Our state government is incompetent. The failure of the GA to raise the gas tax (in cents per gallon) for over 20 years (despite a growing population and, more importantly, skyrocketing road construction costs, is emblematic of that incompetence.

    Blaming the tax paying citizens who are going to and from their jobs (during rush hour) is a thought so bizarre that is hard to contemplate. I think all the retired and under-earning citizens of Virginia better think long and hard about the source of the state's tax revenues. Blaming the job holders and employers who pay virtually all the taxes for the state's transportation incompetence is really demonstrating a lot of political spin. Nobody sits in rush hour traffic because they like it – they sit there so they can go back and forth to and from their jobs. Then, they lose between 1/3 and 1/2 of everything they make so that Virginia's "welfare state" can subsidize those who, largely by choice, are retired, unemployed or under-employed. LarryG's argument blames the wrong people.

  18. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    "for the most part – the only folks who suffer from traffic congestion – are the ones who cause it."

    Some people argue that drivers are not paying their true cost because they don't consider the congestion they cause everyone else. this is an external cost, they claim.

    Larry's arguement supports my own arguement which is the congestion they sufer is equal to what they "cause".

    Groveton is correct. To think that they are the only "cause" is shallow thinking. Sure, it is a case where individual good decisions lead to bad collective decisions. But in this area it is also a case where good individual decisions (and luck) on the part of government jurisdictions lead to bad collective decisions.

    As for the shovel pushers doing nothing: just try pushing a full shovel nonstop all day and see how long you last. You will quicly learn to fill that shovel half or a third full. Yes, there is slacking and bad management, but there is also a reason why there are three guys with shovels and one working.

    "Nobody sits in rush hour traffic because they like it – they sit there so they can go back and forth to and from their jobs. Then, they lose between 1/3 and 1/2 of everything they make so that Virginia's "welfare state" can subsidize those who, largely by choice, are retired, unemployed or under-employed."

    Wait a minute, what have you got against retired people, haven't they earned their retirement?

    I agree that we shouldn't "blame" people who just want to work. I agree that those who are able to sit at home should not feel that they are somehow subsidizing those that still do go to work, and happen to work regular hours.

    But now it isn't bad enough to waste time going to work, lately I notice you also have to run the guantlet of speed traps. Apparently jurisdicitions are so hard up for money they are increasing traffic enforcement: the abusive driver law is back, only now it is even less discriminatory. I recently saw four successive speed traps set up on one stretch of road in Loudoun County, and these wer set up to catch people on their way to work.

    Rte 66 also has frequent speed traps, but they are usually set up in the opposite direction to rush hour traffic.

    Now, if you really want to talk about what is wrong with traffic planning, jost go look at the traffic circle debacle they are installing on rte 50, along with the "traffic calming" disaster they put in Uppervill and the soon to come measures to slow traffic even more in Aldie. I'll withhold judgement until the project is finished, but my prediction is that they will have spent millions for less than zero benefit. Whoever is responsible for designing that should simply be taken out and shot: it is a time wasting, gas gobbling, confusion generating horror show. The traffic circles themselves are so small indiameter that they are barely negotiable by a tractor trailer: they are barely larger than the turn around in my driveway, and smaller than many cul-de-sacs.

    RH

  19. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    "Our problem is that our policies encourage and incentivize solo driving at rush hour "

    Name one policy that actually does what you say.

    We have policies and regulations that encourage and control the separationa of work and business, if that is what you mean, but we put those in place on purpose and for good reason.

    As I see it the problem is that we have gone too far with this: too much work separated from too many homes by too much distance.

    Aside from that, name one policy that actually encourages people to drive solo. If we really wanted to encourage them to car pool, we would pay them to do that, instead we are going to allow them to pay for th eprivilege of driving solo — in the car pool lanes that we had policies to build to encourage non-solo driving.

    Where is you encouragement to drive solo, if it isn;t the HOT lanes?

    RH

  20. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    "there is no entitlement to be able to drive anywhere at anytime in uncongested conditions."

    Sure there is, if you live anywhere in Virginia except NOVA or HR, and that enetitlement will be paid for largely by the people that don't have it.

    RH

  21. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    "Very few actually have "no choice" but to drive solo "

    There are always choices. people drive solo because the other choices are worse, take longer, and are even more expensive. They are choices they can make only by excluding other choices, like what to do if you have to rush home for an emergency, or trqvel someplace other than your cubicle during the day.

    There are choices, it is just that they are even worse then driving during rush hour. If we want people not to do that, then we should have policies in place to incentivize them otherwise. That is why Metro riders pay only a fraction of their true cost: it is an incentive we provide.

    It just isn't nearly enough, because the options are so bad. If we paid enough to make thos options look good, then highways would look cheap.

    RH

    RH

  22. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    "Deeds, a Democrat, said he would seek to pay for better roads by promoting business growth that would increase state revenues, but ultimately that growth depends on better roads."

    Now, THERE is an example of unbelievable obliviousness. Can no one see the faulty circular logic in this? Is anyone calling him to task on this? Anyone asking WHERE that grwoth might occur and how it will affect congestion?

    RH

  23. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    blaming the GA and VDOT is a cop out in large part – the refuge of those who don't have solutions of their own and just want "more" from the state and VDOT and not willing to pay more – or in the case of NoVa claiming that the state has given their share away.

    building substantial new roads in NoVa (or many urban areas) is a No-Go. Even if the EPA would change their minds (and they could if enough hybrids result in much cleaner air) but one mile of new road in NoVa will likely cost 100 million – due primarily to the cost of the right-of-way.

    There is no level of a competent GA or excellent VDOT that will change this fact.

    If NoVa through it's policies for land-use and employment CHOOSES to have a business environment that depends on and is based on auto-centric rush hour traffic then blaming the GA and VDOT is IMHO a cop out.

    VDOT ran out of money in large part because it was trying to pave enough roads to keep up with the growth of traffic – without an increase in funding nor advocacy (that I saw) from a strong majority of NoVa politicians and citizens to allow themselves to be taxed more to pay more for congestion relief – and let NoVa choose whether or not they want to pay 100 million a mile for new roads or perhaps reconsider some of their land-use and employment policies.

    I'm not without sympathy despite the above.

    the problem extends beyond NoVa to the burbs where many of their workers live and commute causing the daily congestion but in the end – it must be up to the folks who commute to decide if they want to pay a whole lot more for more roads..or they want to car/van/bus/commuter rail/metro or take lower paying jobs further out instead of going for the high salary and the high-end house in the burbs.

  24. RBV Avatar
    RBV

    "Now, if you really want to talk about what is wrong with traffic planning, jost go look at the traffic circle debacle they are installing on rte 50, along with the "traffic calming" disaster they put in Uppervill and the soon to come measures to slow traffic even more in Aldie."

    Classic example of snob zoning, IMO.

    They don't want the traffic so they made the commute so unbearable you will choose another route.

    I guess when enough horse trailers get jackknifed in the road things will change….stay tuned.

  25. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    We simply cannot afford to build the roads necessary to sustain the historical pattern of real estate development in Fairfax County.

    For example, the not-yet completed road projects, excluding any intersections or interchanges, needed just to permit Tysons Corner to grow to what was contemplated in the 1994 Comprehensive Plan would cost $231 million, according to VDOT using 2008 costs. Add in the intersections, interchanges, Metrorail costs, other Tysons road changes to go beyond 1994 limits, BRAC, Springfield, etc., etc. Where are these billions of dollars going to come from? Meanwhile unemployment is up; office buildings set vacant and may be foreclosed.

    We keep coming back to the need for more places. But the influential landowners don't own land in "more places." They own land in Fairfax County. The County's largely built out.

    TMT

  26. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    We keep coming back to the need for more places. But the influential landowners don't own land in "more places." They own land in Fairfax County. The County's largely built out.

    TMT – I just can't buy this logic. The influential landowners would have to somehow prevent building in "more places" – not just own the places they own. What stops a business from setting up shop in Southern Virginia? It's not the Tyson's landowners. It's a lot of other things – bad schools, bad airports, etc. Volkswagen NA didn't move to Fairfax County because they couldn't move to Danville. And they didn't move there because the Tyson's landowners forced them into Fairfax County.

  27. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    re: "influential landowners"

    I'm sorta with Groveton on this. NoVa just didn't somehow end up with all the "influential landowners" in Va…

    nope. they came here with money in their pockets because they knew/know that they can double/triple/quad their money with county-sanctioned land-development.

    The truth is – and Fairfax is far from alone – that you cannot designate as much land for the NoVa kind of car-centric land-use that it won't physically and fiscally bankrupt transportation.

    at the scope and scale that NoVa is doing land-use – there is not enough available land for highway "footprints" – even if it could be afforded.

    I'm not sure what folks think the GA should do about this.

    They tried with 3202 to give NoVa the right and authority to self-impose higher taxes to build more transportation infrastructure and while the Supreme Court of Va threw out that portion of 3202, I don't think I heard a general outcry of rage from NoVa citizens and their elected representatives – demanding that the GA go back to the drawing boards and find a way to do a legal version of the 3202 regional taxing.

    Nope.. I heard more folks up in arms about it than demanding that Richmond give NoVa the right to self tax – or else.

    See.. even EMR says that the government that governs best is close to the people – and Groveton rails against the evils of the Dillon-Rule but then TMT talks about how local leaders are not to be trusted very far….

    so.. which is it?

    Does NoVa (citizens) want to spend more by taxing more – on transportation infrastructure or not?

    blogging on the road from Michigan's UP on the way to Mackinaw Bridge and points beyond…….

  28. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    LarryG –

    I think TMT and I just plain disagree on this. I think the local government should be given more power and that power should come from the state. TMT worries that the locals are more corrupt than the state and wants to keep the balance of power essentially as it is. At least, that's my read of his comments.

    Right now, we seem to have the worst of two worlds. The BoS allows free lance development which pushes up the need for transportation funding. Meanwhile, the generally dysfunctional state government siphons off billions of dollars per year in Fairfax taxes and pretends that the cost of transportation hasn't gone up in the last 20+ years. Our governor has decided to spend his time on his next job (see post on Kaine-sper the Friendly Ghost – bit.ly/TNHfY).

    As a resident of Fairfax County, I understand Fairfax County. I know the differences between Clifton and Springfield, between Rt 1 and McLean. I don't have even a vague idea about Bath County or Roanoke. I imagine the state politicians are the same. They know their hometowns but not anywhere else. So, I stay committed to more local government and less state government.

    Have fun on the UP. My Grandma grew up in Escanaba. Have a meat pasty (sometimes spelled pastie). Get one with suet if you can find it. Just remember that a suet based pasty has about 1,800 calories. You may want to do some mining to work it off.

  29. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    "We simply cannot afford to build the roads necessary to sustain the historical pattern of real estate development in Fairfax County."

    Idiotic.

    the historical pattern of development is already built. Either we build the infrastructure (Roads AND Mass Transit to support it), or we tear down the development we have and start over, or we live with the mess we built.

    Pick one.

    Guess which one will be least expensive?

    RH

  30. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Ray – I think that we will be generally living with the mess we have. As I said earlier, where is the $231 million just to widen the roads around Tysons coming from? And the $139 million to add sewer capacity?

    I think many people in Fairfax County might support higher taxes for transportation, but only if they believed transportation would improve and the money not spent to enrich some developer. We turned down the sales tax increase for transportation for that reason.

    TMT

  31. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    "not spent to enrich some developer"

    Yes, I agree. But we have already enriched the developers, by buying our homes and business locations from them.

    At this point, that argument is pretty weak. The onely people we are hurting now, is ourselves.

    Living with the mess we have is probably the second most expensive option, after tearing out and staring over.

    In that respect, Greenville got lucky.

    RH

  32. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Ray – How does inducing building help Fairfax County residents when we have 15% commercial vacancies, probably heading to 20%? Or falling home prices?

    Why would one build more now? Why would one increase taxes to enable others to build more now?

    And the new construction is more of the same old, same old. For example, the real estate clowns have been telling us for years that Tysons Corner needs grid streets (like D.C., Rosslyn-Ballston, Bethesda). OK. But take a look at the demonstration project that the County will review as part of the process. The Georgelas project eliminates the grid streets and substitutes more curving streets that don't connect with the other planned grid streets.

    It's a joke. It's a farce. Even the developers don't believe their own rhetoric! The only ones to believe it are the Fairfax County Chamber of Commerce and the WaPo.

    As I've said a number of times, we may live in the same state, but we live on different planets. We should meet for coffee sometime.

    TMT

  33. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    "The County's largely built out. "

    EMR would disagree with you.

    TMT:

    You are stuck in thought, coming from the position that Roads Always Benefit Developers, and Development Always means Higher Taxes.

    Remember, I pay taxes in Fairfax, too.

    Even if you stopped Development in Faifax Entirely (A LA Fauquier) Fairfax would still be behind in needed transportation infratrure(s). We never paid enough tax to begin with and now we are paying the price. We are going to pay one way or another, we may as well get something for what we pay besides endless congestion, pollution, and aggravation.

    I'll say again, compare Fauquier and Loudoun 40 years ago vs today. At that time they had similar incomes, similar polulation, and similar per capita assessments.

    Today, Loudoun residents pay higher taxes, and this supports your position. But, they also earn more and own more. What they don't have is the "Fauquier Lifestyle"

    You could probably make the same argument for Fairfax, but you might have to go back 75 years rather than 40.

    What I don't understand is how we use new development as an argument Against roads but we use it as an argument FOR Metro. But you cannot very well make the argument that new residential development means taxes will have to be raised without also recognizing the fundamental problem: residential taxs were never high enough to begin with. We are free-riding on the taxes paid by businesses (and farms, in Fauquier.)

    The problem, as I have said before, isn't that development and roads cause increase in taxes, the problem is tha the benefits provided are not realized fairly. If the value of your property goes up because it becomes nearer to good shopping, ort is likely to BECOME a shopping district, you pay higher tax on the new imputed value which you have not yet received.

    There is a cash flow problem here and there is ALSO the fact that people just don't lkike change: they want to be able to control other people's property to protect their own.

    As I have said before, one way you solve this is to distribute this years building rights to residents of the community, by lottery if necessary. Developers can advertise to buy the rights they need for thei project. If they can buy enough rights, then it is ipso facto proof of what the people wsant and project approval is guaranteed (They have bought the RIGHTS.)

    People who are opposed to development can sit on their building rights and not sell them to developers if they like. But now it is THEY who have to forego the benefits of development.

    This would get developers out of the business of influencing elected officials, and now they would have to influence us, directly.

    You have a problem with development and your suggestion is that we stop it. My suggestion is that we use free markets in order to decide how much we are willing to pay to stop it: to get what we want. If the answer turns out that we are NOT WILLING to pay for what we want, and we insist on still having it, entirely at someone else's expense, then we need to recognize ourselves for waht we are: thieves.

    RH

    RH

  34. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    TMT: I think I understand where you are coming from. I don;t want excess development or wrong developement or ANY development any more than the next guy.

    But I also recognize that the usual arguments against development are faulty and self-serving. We cannot expect to "Win" with faulty arguments, and we can't even usggest there is a "winning" position without recognizing this means someone else's loss. All we can rationally argue for is "fair".

    So the True Cost or Value of development = Cost of Development + Cost of Externalities + Cost of Government (to control development). I believe that if you got paid the full price for the externalities you claim that you would be less interested in having government control development.

    But even if you got paid the full price, you might still not want anything to change. In that case, YOU become the supplicant or the applicant to government for the type of development YOU want to see. That kind of development also has external costs, and you should expect to pay them just as you would expect any other applicant to pay.

    If we are going to claim that the "Fauquier Ambiance" or Fauquier lifestyle (for example) has a superior True Value to some other development plan then we should expect to pay our externalized costs, same as any other developer.

    RH

Leave a Reply

Read More