Discussion in 'Disney Rumors and News' started by crazy4wdw, Apr 27, 2007.
Disneyland housing dispute deepens
Log in or Sign up to hide this advert.
What a jerk! "We mean more then those people who can't afford homes any other way - because we have more money!"
Huh - to quote Rent "You can't just wipe out an entire tent city and then watch It's a Wonderful Life on TV."
Uhhh, he wasn't saying "We mean more because we have more money", he was saying "We mean a lot because we pay generate lots of tax revenue."
Subsidized housing might be a good use of some of that tax money.
Paying more on taxes just means you have more money at your disposal then the other guy anyway. Just because you have more money coming and thus you pay more taxes you should be more important? You already have money and a way to take care of yourself and your family - shouldn't we focus on the little guy who doesn't pay a lot of taxes because he doesn't have a lot of money and can't take care of himself and family?
You're missing the point entirely. Opposing this particular condo development, with it's very limited number of low-income housing units, does not equal opposing low-income housing in general. I'm sure Disney would not object if this project were just moved out of the designated tourist use zoning area.
In this case, the revenue generation discussion is not just about the wealth of Disney, but about the amount of taxes generated by all of the folks that come to Disneyland and the surrounding hotels and such.
And, again, those taxes could be used for good things like subsidized housing.
First, Disney is not some evil corporation that rubs its hand together and laughs at the struggles of low income families. They simply felt that this land would be better suited to tourist type facilities and they are probably right.
Everything from gas to groceries is going to be more expensive in the area around these condos. Also, I haven't seen the exact location of these condos, but if Disney did decide to use that land to open a park the traffic might be a problem.
How would you feel if they built a Wal-Mart right next to your house? While Wal-Mart is not bad, it wouldn't fit right in the middle of most residential communities.
Low Income Housing Good.
Low income housing in tourist Mecca, bad for everyone.
Actually, Disney really is an evil corporation that laughs at the need for low income hosing that it generates.
The entire Tourism Zone is Anaheim is a recent invention of Disney and designed solely to give Disney more control over the area around the park its certainly not for the benefit of the City of Anaheim.
Disney got the Anaheim to condemn huge amounts of lands when they promised the $4 billion WESTCOT Center expansion. Disney bought up huge amounts of land for parking structures, the second entertainment center, the amphitheater, the monorail and train station and then cancelled the project and gave Anaheim the flaming mess they call California Adventure.
There are massive chunks of Anaheim that Disney has allowed to rot in the sun. The entire area between Harbor and I-5 (where Disney was to build its transportation hub and parking structures) feels like Baghdad instead of a resort town. Disney owned buildings a vacant, filled with homeless and gangs. The site of the third gate is nothing but a parking lot. Traffic remains a disaster because Disney refuses to complete the road improvements and build infrastructure they promised.
And Disney shows no signs that its going to fix any of the messes it created. There is no Disney Resort and pretending theres a resort district is just a way to keep the values of Disneys unused land higher than it would be normally. Disney isnt going to expand in Anaheim, and certainly not a third theme park.
Its time that Anaheim faced the fact that they were swindled by Disney during the WESTCOT / Port Disney affair and start to repair the damage. I think its perfectly within Anaheims right to put its land to good uses.
My god, your right.....I see it now.....
Gilles De Rais - France 1439
Vlad Dracula - Turkey 1462
Grigori Rasputin - Russia 1913
Adolf Hitler - Germany 1942
Disney Corporation - California 2007
Evil is a bit strong, maybe we can meet half way and call them greedy.
I agree with you!
Low income housing in the area will be very very bad. The CM's wont get to use it becaue it will be WAY above what they can afford. Along with that, visitors will low down even more than they already have.
That is so very true!!!
Do you work for Disney? How do you know they are a evil company? Did they fire you?
All in all Disneyland is good for the area.
MONEY MONEY MONEY for all of Orange County.
2) What do you call a company that pays $6.80-$7.50 to start for full-time CM's. *
3) I know families who have both husband and wife working for Disney.
4) With two kids, these families
. . . get food stamps
. . . get federally subsidized housing (apartments)
. . . get federal cheese
4) Is this a benevolent corporation?
5) Maybe Disney needs to give some of its profits back.
6) After all, the parks are the cash-cow for Disney-ABC.
* Florida is tough enough for this pay, but California is terrible.
2. A smart Company.... see we live in a free market country.
3. That is there choice.
4. The number of people in this country in the condition is very very very low.
4. (4 again?) Corporations will pay what the market demands.
5. Ahhh...now the Socialist comes out in the light.
6. Yes they are a cash-cow and as much as I hate Disney using them this way the only thing I can do about it is by not going to Disney. Now when you start your own Theme Park you can pay whatever you want.
I don't think A-V would disagree that Disneyland is good for the area. He makes some pretty good points about why artificially putting development on hold in this designated district is bad for the area.
One that maybe should raise its pay to fill the open jobs and get better-quality employees, but for those reasons and not because they have some sort of duty to pay more.
Separate names with a comma.