Why do Canadians prefer huge houses squeezed together in the middle of nowhere?

[regexcellent]

Is a beltway a ring road?

And Calgary is most certainly not on completely flat land.

It's sufficiently flat that no terrain features pose even minor engineering challenges to construction of roads, or increment in expense thereof.

BTW, a quick google shows that Denver isn't exactly a good example of transportation management. They have higher taxes and higher commute times.

Number 16 in commute times, and coincidentally (or maybe not), also the 16th largest metro area in the United States.

edit: also yes, a beltway is a ring road

[Kuciwalker]

Calgary's transportation network is perfectly adequate. Our commutes are shorter than most American cities, our taxes are definitely lower.

If you were a true right-wing man, you'd be pumping your fist.

When you spend more time paying attention to government you'll understand that things are more complex than just "lower taxes". You can't just lower taxes and cut spending; there are difficult issues involved that the voters in Calgary apparently aren't prepared to deal with.

[Asher]

I like my office. I can see the Washington Monument and the National Cathedral from it.

I just don't feel like there's a signature flourish to the Calgary skyline, like the CN Tower or the Shanghai Pearl Tower or something like that.

Everyone's entitled to his opinion, though. I guess it's OK.

Well, that's what some people say Norman Foster's The Bow is:





They just finished it last month.

But you're right, it's not a city known for impractical spending for phallic imagery like Toronto is. Calgary is a city known for its practicality. The buildings downtown were built all around the same time very, very quickly due to oil booms. There wasn't time to spend years jerking off various architects to build overpriced skyscrapers. Office space was needed.

[Asher]

When you spend more time paying attention to government you'll understand that things are more complex than just "lower taxes". You can't just lower taxes and cut spending; there are difficult issues involved that the voters in Calgary apparently aren't prepared to deal with.

Care to go into detail what Calgary isn't prepared to deal with?

Calgary is a city with extremely low crime rates, very low taxes, a balanced budget, and better than average commute times. It's also a city that has some of the cleanest air and water in the world.

A city government should only do what is needed. What is the Calgary municipal government doing that indicates there are difficult issues being ignored?

You're such a bull****ter, Kuci.

[Jaguar]

I'm glad you like your curved office building. It wasn't there when I last went to Calgary. Maybe next time I'll go to the curved office building so I have something to do.

But you're right, it's not a city known for impractical spending for phallic imagery like Toronto is. Calgary is a city known for its practicality. The buildings downtown were built all around the same time very, very quickly due to oil booms. There wasn't time to spend years jerking off various architects to build overpriced skyscrapers. Office space was needed.

That's sort of what I was saying. They just built a lot of stuff and it all kind of looks the same.

[Kuciwalker]

Care to go into detail what Calgary isn't prepared to deal with?

Calgary is a city with extremely low crime rates, very low taxes, and better than average commute times. It's also a city that has some of the cleanest air and water in the world.

A city government should only do what is needed. What is the Calgary municipal government doing that indicates there are difficult issues being ignored?

Aside from the beltway, there are complicated interactions between taxes, spending, and growth, such that if you don't balance each of them right it won't be sustainable.

[regexcellent]

Hah, clean air and water, once again that's due to the geography. Prevailing winds move dirty air out of the city rapidly. There's nothing upstream of Calgary to dump crap in the water. And don't say Cochrane or some other crap, the Bow River is fed from the Rocky Mountains only 30 miles away, where nobody lives. Yes there are small towns along the Trans-Canada Highway, no they don't generate any sizable polution.

Los Angeles has crap air quality because the air gets trapped in the valley. Cities with poor water quality tend to have much more heavy industry than Calgary and also tend to be downstream of something like farms or factories, for instance Cleveland.

[regexcellent]

Jaguar, Calgary does have a pringles chip shaped hockey rink and a mediocre team that plays there.

[Asher]

Aside from the beltway, there are complicated interactions between taxes, spending, and growth, such that if you don't balance each of them right it won't be sustainable.

This is such a very deep statement.

Considering Calgary has managed everything I've mentioned above with some of the highest growth rates in North America over the past couple decades...and considering it's done it all with a balanced budget, what exactly is your objection?

By all objective measures, Calgary is:
1) Fiscally responsible
2) A very good place to live (consistently ranked as such)
3) Safe
4) In good shape, infrastructure-wise

[Asher]

Hah, clean air and water, once again that's due to the geography. Prevailing winds move dirty air out of the city rapidly. There's nothing upstream of Calgary to dump crap in the water. And don't say Cochrane or some other crap, the Bow River is fed from the Rocky Mountains only 30 miles away, where nobody lives. Yes there are small towns along the Trans-Canada Highway, no they don't generate any sizable polution.

Los Angeles has crap air quality because the air gets trapped in the valley. Cities with poor water quality tend to have much more heavy industry than Calgary and also tend to be downstream of something like farms or factories, for instance Cleveland.

A well-located city is a well-located city. There are also municipal and provincial laws to ensure our air and water remain clean.

[Asher]

Jaguar, Calgary does have a pringles chip shaped hockey rink and a mediocre team that plays there.

The Saddledome has some of the best acoustics of any major stadium in North America.
Some of the best sightlines, too.



It's actually a rather excellent example of Calgary's engineering-first architecture. It wasn't designed that way to be sexy - it was designed that way for sightlines and acoustics.

[Kuciwalker]

This is such a very deep statement.

Considering Calgary has managed everything I've mentioned above with some of the highest growth rates in North America over the past couple decades...and considering it's done it all with a balanced budget, what exactly is your objection?

By all objective measures, Calgary is:
1) Fiscally responsible
2) A very good place to live (consistently ranked as such)
3) Safe
4) In good shape, infrastructure-wise

That's exactly the problem, the growth isn't sustainable. For complex reasons, when the growth slows down (as it has to) the local economy will take a major hit and then you will have to raise taxes, making problems even worse. Low spending means that there is less buffer to cut when deficits happen, so you will need to raise taxes even more.

I wouldn't expect you to understand.

[regexcellent]

I was about to post that k.d. lang is from Calgary but it turns out she's from Edmonton. Damn.

[Jaguar]

The Saddledome has some of the best acoustics of any major stadium in North America.
Some of the best sightlines, too.



It's actually a rather excellent example of Calgary's engineering-first architecture. It wasn't designed that way to be sexy - it was designed that way for sightlines and acoustics.

Next time I go to Calgary I'll look at the engineering of the stadium and I'll visit your curved office building. Maybe there are things to do in Calgary after all.

[Asher]

That's exactly the problem, the growth isn't sustainable.

Err...?

The growth which has been sustained for decades now isn't sustainable?

For complex reasons, when the growth slows down (as it has to) the local economy will take a major hit and then you will have to raise taxes, making problems even worse. Low spending means that there is less buffer to cut when deficits happen, so you will need to raise taxes even more.

I don't want to explain economics to you, as you know everything. Since you know everything, I'm sure you know oil is boom and bust, yeah?

Calgary has seen lean times before and we've survived just fine. By lean, I mean a shrinking city with massive unemployment. I don't have time to teach you the fundamentals of the energy economy (something which in all honesty, you simply do not comprehend as we've seen in prior threads), but you should at least take a cursory look at what the Calgary economy has been through post-1970.

To be clear, though. Your objection is even though things are objectively ideal for now, for "complex reasons" it is "not sustainable".

Again, Kuci. Who do you think you're kidding?