In a former warehouse on a dimly lit street in the South Bronx, developers sipping Puerto Rican moonshine listened as a local official urged them to capture a new U.S. tax break by rebuilding the decaying neighborhood.
In Alabama, a young lawyer quit his job after seeing the same tax breakās potential to help one of the nationās poorest states. He now spends his days driving his Hyundai from town to town, slideshow at the ready, hoping to connect investors with communities.
And on a conference call with potential clients, a prominent hedge fund executive pitched investments in a boutique hotel in Oakland, which he described as San Franciscoās Brooklyn. The project is eligible for the same tax break, designed to help the poor.
That title is idiotic. Nowhere does the article actually address the title or make that argument. Do they really think poor people would have the cash to buy land and develop it?
"āBoulderās teachers canāt live in Boulder,ā he said. āItās not a healthy thing to have socioeconomic divide where lower-income people have to live outside of town to serve higher-income people in town.ā
True in almost every area run exclusively by Democrats. So āprogressive.ā
Boulder has very strict planning and they donāt allow much building. Similar to California. But why canāt people live right next to boulder? I assume builders can build many houses in the county land just outside of Boulder. There shouldnāt be a shortage of land in Colorado
I think thereās certain envy from those who want to call themselves conservative and millionaires at the same time. They are none of the above, just mumbling jumbling crap while hiring those in need, you know, those āillegals or commiesā, which by the way turns them into hypocrites.
Pretty weird republicans donāt want to listen to these real millionaires, why?
Now, a real patriot and millionaire? Oh wellā¦they are commies, right?
