Conservative
A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff
-
Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee's rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.
-
We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.
-
Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.
A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don't reply to it.
view the rest of the comments
Sometime it is, sometimes it isn't. It's incredibly situational.
The zoning laws need to be relaxed across the board, which is a big part of why it's hard to convert. It would also probably just be better if the government went halvsies on the cost of conversion with developers. It would be cheaper than the government funding brand new projects, and it would make it more economically viable for developers to do conversions. Because the total cost to society will almost always be higher to rebuild from scratch.
That, and quite a lot of pollution is created in the process of tearing down and rebuilding a brand new building. We already payed for the pollution for these buildings the first time around, we should avoid a 2nd round if possible.