Seattle: 5th and Columbia

[Rogue Linguist]

Originally Posted by shotsy

Oh come on, all Mars Hill cares about is converting the homeless. Let's see them open a soup kitchen or homeless shelter and maybe I'll change my mind about it.

In the meantime, there are plenty of churches and other nonprofits that actually practice what they preach and are more interested in caring for the poor than in ballooning their own membership ranks.

Amen to that, Sister Shotsy!

[JiminyCricket]

SIKE!

[D Green]

You got my hopes up, Jiminy.

So...damn it now I've messed everyone up too. Alright, then. Sorry guys, bursting the bubble here:

Originally Posted by Capitol Hill

Maybe if churches were all taxed, the money raised could go towards social causes.

No taxation without representation*. But if we tax churches, they become constituents and therefore are given the obligation to be represented in government. That's why there's no taxes on churches, so we can keep the separation going.

*Unless you live in DC

[LCIII]

JiminyCricket should be shot for this.

[JiminyCricket]

trolololol :-P

[Rogue Linguist]

Originally Posted by D Green

You got my hopes up, Jiminy.

So...damn it now I've messed everyone up too. Alright, then. Sorry guys, bursting the bubble here:



No taxation without representation*. But if we tax churches, they become constituents and therefore are given the obligation to be represented in government. That's why there's no taxes on churches, so we can keep the separation going.

*Unless you live in DC

Well I guess when they're obliquely represented anyway by buying elections on minority rights, that's when it makes sense to tax them.

[mSeattle]

Originally Posted by Rogue Linguist

Well I guess when they're obliquely represented anyway by buying elections on minority rights, that's when it makes sense to tax them.

Not just that, they organize through their churches and vote in lock-step on certain things.

[Rogue Linguist]

Yep that's true.

[RMacherat]

Who is they?

[Dale]

Originally Posted by mSeattle

Not just that, they organize through their churches and vote in lock-step on certain things.

Right, because (non)churchers never evidence any conformity in their voting habits.

FYI: I'd just as soon see churches renounce, yes, renounce their tax exempt status so as to be able to say 'No!' to the state. As it stands, it's hard to tell the difference between the two.

[LCIII]

Hasn't this officially strayed far enough off topic to take place in a different thread? Can we stop bumping this thread please until we have actual need for this project?

[Bond James Bond]

Yes, back on topic please.

[kangaroo1]

Originally Posted by D Green

You got my hopes up, Jiminy.

So...damn it now I've messed everyone up too. Alright, then. Sorry guys, bursting the bubble here:



No taxation without representation*. But if we tax churches, they become constituents and therefore are given the obligation to be represented in government. That's why there's no taxes on churches, so we can keep the separation going.

*Unless you live in DC

I think you need to go back to school and retake civics. Churches are organizations, usually organized as non-profit corporations, and they are not people. As they are not people and citizens of the U.S., they have no right to vote whether or not they are taxed. And, yes, churches are sometimes subject to certain local and state taxes.

The fact that they are generally not subject to federal income and state income taxes has nothing to do with the fact they have no "representation" in government. For example, for-profit corporations are taxed, and they certainly are not given the right to vote.

Our tax code, as a matter of public policy, is structured to allow ANY qualifying non-profit organization, whether it is a religious organization or not, to be exempt from federal income tax, and most states have similar tax policies. However, the trade-off is that the federal government (and state governments) do not want to subsidize political activity, so they do not allow tax-exempt organizations to engage in most political activity (there is a certain de minimis threshold of activity permitted). The way tax-exempt organizations are treated has NOTHING to do with the general idea of "no taxation without representation," rather it is simply the public policy of how Congress has decided to set up the tax code, and it could be changed tomorrow by amending the tax code if Congress chose to do so.

Now that we have cleared up the policy issues around tax-exempt entities, I think it is time to return to the true purpose of this forum, which is to discuss new urban development in Seattle (or as is the case of this specific thread, to discuss the proposed office tower at 5th and Columbia).

[Seasun]

In recent days since the Central Library was mentioned in a thread, I've been thinking about the 5th and Columbia tower as kind of a stretched out version of the library. I like both designs a lot. I had never really related the two buildings' aesthetic in my head too much.

[bgwah]

omg omg!

Fall start date announced: http://seattletimes.com/html/busines...lumbiaxml.html

[JiminyCricket]

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!RED ALERT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!BOARDS ABOUT TO BLOW UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

[Seasun]

That would be great if it really happens. The hotel revision to the plans sounds really challenging on this site in terms of vehicle access off of 5th or maybe integrated with the Rainier Club parking entrance that I understand is at the elevation of the club's current parking lot. Trying to serve office tenant parking and delivery needs along with hotel guests and delivery vehicles and taxis while not getting in the way of club members sounds like a headache.

Mhays addressed this before but the slightly changing floor plate seems like a headache for a hotel layout just as it would be for an office layout. They're not drastically different floor layouts but I can see a front desk clerk trying to reassign a frequent traveler to a different floor for noise or other reasons and she's saying "suite 801 is really similar to 1101 but kind of different. Hope you like it."

[mhays]

Honestly, can we go 45 minutes without something extremely awesome happening in this city? I can't take it.

[JiminyCricket]

I wonder which brand the hotel might be? They said new to Seattle.

[Ginkgo]

Originally Posted by JiminyCricket

I wonder which brand the hotel might be? They said new to Seattle.

I'm hoping it might be Ritz-Carlton. Now wouldn't that be something? Of course I don't know if they do only stand alones or also open properties on the lower floors of an office building. They had planned on a Bellevue property, which of course never materialized.