Quote Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch View Post
Behavior such as choice of where you live is not something to 'break down'. People can choose any day of the week to live in one place or another.
What part of my post suggests telling people where to live? Your response is a non-sequitur detached from market reality. Of course people choose where they want to live. This is a discussion about the government's role in creating and fostering neighborhoods. Here, it's about Seward St. The government, representing the people, is playing a role through furnishing public funding to developers. Meanwhile the City government, by and for the people, might also have some say, under its basic land use powers. The discussion is whether tax credits should be furnished in an unlimited fashion, or perhaps limited [[if that is even possible under relevant regulations). If they are, then the developer is likely to build a building that does not permit socioeconomic and/or age diversity. If they are limited, i.e. a condition of their availability is that the developer is capped at, say, 60% subsidized unit, then the building does permit people who aren't poor or aren't old to live there. If you've read closely, you'll know that I am in favor of the later. So I am in favor of giving people more options as to where they may choose to live.

Thanks for mischaracterizing. Read closer.