@W6KME that's what I've always felt - beautifully summarized, btw - and I still believe it. I guess I had just hoped that it might have, you know, averted more disaster than it did.
@AbandonedAmerica Why is it that some places disappear completely and others somehow linger on as ruins? If there's a "specialness index", I think it influences that. Failed places that weren't special just get built over. No one notices; no one cares. It's the weird stuff that lives on in decay. It's harder to erase. It's life force still has influence.
I don't know how to put that into words any more effectively, but you probably understand what I'm trying to say.
@W6KME I do! Although special places get erased every day and boring ones can linger for years unnoticed. I think the determining factor is money. If money can be made paving over a great place, it will happen instantaneously. If a less significant one is in an unprofitable spot it will sit there forever.
@AbandonedAmerica @W6KME
See Henry George's land value tax. There are lots of bad incentives that cause property owners to:
- let structures decay,
- tear structures down and never rebuild,
- tear down great old structures and replace with rent generating dreck.
https://youtu.be/2595abcvh2M
@RunRichRun @AbandonedAmerica @W6KME There’s also the problem that ”property owners” feel they can unilaterally control our culture, and that they have the threat of deadly violence to back that up.
If they decide to do something, no one is allowed to object, and if they decide to do nothing, everyone else is also prohibited from doing anything.
Sometimes people do things anyway, like squatting or guerrilla gardening, but that threat of deadly violence is always present.
@ahltorp @RunRichRun @W6KME I agree, and I wish there were more ways to strip ownership from people neglecting properties although then that would be abused too. People find a way to abuse any system, I think.