Re: [UC] A pause in the debate for an important, if trashy, announcement

[UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

   4. The proposal will return more on Penn's investment than would be
  represented by what they put into it, the difference being a cost
  borne by the people in the area who will have their pleasant
  residential neighborhood destroyed by a 12-story hotel and
  restaurant with live entertainment.





interesting. so, in this case, we are all 'tenants' who pay 
for the actions of penn's 'rent seeking'.


surely then that means all of us -- homeowners and renters, 
parents and students, natives and transients -- we all have 
an equal standing, an equal voice.




!!
..
UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN













































You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] A pause in the debate for an important, if trashy, announcement

[Krfapt]

In a message dated 2/20/2008 12:31:12 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

is this  what you meant, al? how does it apply to the 
proposed  hotel?
 
The concept is often (but not exclusively) applied when someone  purchases 
property then lets it lie fallow or allows it to  deteriorate, counting on 
extraneous factors to raise the value -- so it produces  income 
disproportionate to 
the investment (in money and other "costs") needed to  create the wealth.
 
The underlying economic theory -- first developed by Gordon Tullock and  Anne 
Kreuger (acting independently) -- see 
_http://www.thelockeinstitute.org/journals/luminary_v1_n2_p2.html_ 
(http://www.thelockeinstitute.org/journals/luminary_v1_n2_p2.html)  --  is that 
the difference between the fair return on the 
investment and  effort does not arise spontaneously but is a cost paid for by 
society.  This is why economic rent seeking is viewed from a negative  
perspective.
 
In the case at hand, the rent seeking may be de facto rather than de jure  
(but it's rent-seeking nevertheless). That is, the Nobel Laureates in the  Real 
Estate Dept at Penn somehow convinced the University to part with -- what  -- 
$1.5 million from their $6 billion endowment, presumably as an  investment. 
Then:
1.  They spend nothing to improve and as little as possible to maintain 
the  property. 
2.  It turns out, according to Esaul Sanchez, they have entertained 20  
proposals for what to do with it but none seemed worthwhile -- which is to say  
they bought it without any reason to do so. 
3.  One of their own comes along with a proposal that will take their  
little tuchasses out of the line of fire by those who might criticize them for  
buying this pig in a poke. 
4.  The proposal will return more on Penn's investment than would be  
represented by what they put into it, the difference being a cost borne by the  
people in the area who will have their pleasant residential neighborhood  
destroyed by a 12-story hotel and restaurant with live  entertainment.
As bad as this is, it's better than them getting paid off in some overt or  
covert way to advocate this project on behalf of their former colleague --  
which would be another explanation ... of which I'm not accusing them because  
that would be slander since there's no evidence of any such thing at the  
moment.
 
Al  Krigman
Left of Cornelius Vanderbilt



**Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living.  
(http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-duffy/
2050827?NCID=aolcmp0030002598)

Re: [UC] A pause in the debate for an important, if trashy, announcement

[UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Where were we... I believe it was at Esaul 
Sanchez' mendacity about Penn neither having any appropriate uses not enough 
money to fix up the property it bought at 400 S 40th. One wonders how the Nobel 
Laureates in the R.E. Dept at Penn came to the decision to buy property they 
apparently now say they can't justify application- or dollar-wise. Oh, yes. 
Economic rent seeking.




economic rent seeking:

from wikipedia :



"In economics, rent seeking occurs when an individual,
organization, or firm seeks to make money by manipulating
the economic and/or legal environment rather than by trade
and production of wealth."

...

"Rent seeking generally implies the extraction of
uncompensated value from others without making any
contribution to productivity, such as by gaining control of
land and other pre-existing natural resources"



is this what you meant, al? how does it apply to the 
proposed hotel?



..
UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN





























You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

RE: [UC] A pause in the debate for an important, if trashy, announcement

[KAREN ALLEN]

> Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 16:49:26 -0500> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: 
> UnivCity@list.purple.com> Subject: Re: [UC] A pause in the debate for an 
> important, if trashy, >announcement> so, in the case of the proposed hotel, 
> the IRON TRIANGLE is:> > - city hall's zba (legistlature)> > - lussenhop/penn 
> (interest group, constituency)> > - shca zoning committee (bureaucracy, 
> regulatory agency)> > > and we the citizens (the public, the consumers) can 
> get > shortchanged as a result of that dynamic, which works to > benefit the 
> interest group, to empower the legislature, to > sustain the bureaucracy...> 
> > yes?
 
YES!!!  Thanks for a thought-provoking lesson!

Re: [UC] A pause in the debate for an important, if trashy, announcement

[UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN]

Glenn wrote:
I think the "iron triangle" concept explains the relationships being 
created between the local special interests and city agencies as well as 
the use of civic associations.  It's the expedient method (what some at 
Penn would call the corporate model for community engagement) to reach 
the goals of rent seeking by shortchanging common citizens and 
democratic processes.  I found the following guidance for policymakers:



fascinating. I've never heard of that term before -- IRON 
TRIANGLE


here's IRON TRIANGLE explained on wikipedia:

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_triangle



so, in the case of the proposed hotel, the IRON TRIANGLE is:

   - city hall's zba (legistlature)

   - lussenhop/penn (interest group, constituency)

   - shca zoning committee (bureaucracy, regulatory agency)


and we the citizens (the public, the consumers) can get 
shortchanged as a result of that dynamic, which works to 
benefit the interest group, to empower the legislature, to 
sustain the bureaucracy...


yes?



..
UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN















































You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] A pause in the debate for an important, if trashy, announcement

[Glenn]

"the R.E. Dept at Penn came to the decision to buy property they apparently now 
say they can't justify application- or dollar-wise. Oh, yes. Economic rent 
seeking."

It is economic rent seeking.  The local process I see to accomplish these goals 
is the creation of  "iron triangles" or subgovernments.

I think the "iron triangle" concept explains the relationships being created 
between the local special interests and city agencies as well as the use of 
civic associations.  It's the expedient method (what some at Penn would call 
the corporate model for community engagement) to reach the goals of rent 
seeking by shortchanging common citizens and democratic processes.  I found the 
following guidance for policymakers:

Guidance for Policymakers.
Ideally, policymakers are guided by core principles. Four examples follow.

  1.. Politicians and public servants are accountable to the public. 
  2.. Elites, in politics and the private sector, do not have the right to 
pursue their interests without constraints. 
  3.. Government bureaucratic and decision processes must be open, accessible, 
and transparent, as well as being responsive to public concerns. 
  4.. Individuals and communities affected by projects have the right to 
information regarding proposed developments; the right to challenge the need 
for, and the design of, projects; and the right to be involved in planning and 
decision-making processes. 

  - Original Message - 
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  To: UnivCity@list.purple.com 
  Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2008 12:08 PM
  Subject: [UC] A pause in the debate for an important, if trashy, announcement


  Now, a brief pause in the one-sided debate (everybody "against," nobody 
"for") Lussenhop's Folly, to bring you an important announcement.

  Monday is Presidents day. No trash pickup -- and it will be one day late the 
rest of the week. Also, no mail, banks are closed, etc.

  All right. Back to the debate. Where were we... I believe it was at Esaul 
Sanchez' mendacity about Penn neither having any appropriate uses not enough 
money to fix up the property it bought at 400 S 40th. One wonders how the Nobel 
Laureates in the R.E. Dept at Penn came to the decision to buy property they 
apparently now say they can't justify application- or dollar-wise. Oh, yes. 
Economic rent seeking.

  Left of Sam Rappaport and apparently further so of Ed Datz and Craig 
Carnaroli,
  Alan Krigman





--
  Delicious ideas to please the pickiest eaters. Watch the video on AOL Living.


--


  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
  Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.7/1283 - Release Date: 2/16/2008 
2:16 PM

Re: [UC] A pause in the debate for an important, if trashy, announcement

[UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One wonders how the Nobel 
Laureates in the R.E. Dept at Penn came to the decision to buy property they 
apparently now say they can't justify application- or dollar-wise. Oh, yes. 
Economic rent seeking.





Do you think Penn should practice economic rent
seeking?

   ___ yes

   ___ hell yes

   ___ can we please not call it that



..
UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN

























































You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

[UC] A pause in the debate for an important, if trashy, announcement

[Krfapt]

Now, a brief pause in the one-sided debate (everybody "against," nobody 
"for") Lussenhop's Folly, to bring you an important announcement.
 
Monday is Presidents day. No trash pickup -- and it will be one day late the 
rest of the week. Also, no mail, banks are closed, etc.
 
All right. Back to the debate. Where were we... I believe it was at Esaul 
Sanchez' mendacity about Penn neither having any appropriate uses not enough 
money to fix up the property it bought at 400 S 40th. One wonders how the Nobel 
Laureates in the R.E. Dept at Penn came to the decision to buy property they 
apparently now say they can't justify application- or dollar-wise. Oh, yes. 
Economic rent seeking.
 
Left of Sam Rappaport and apparently further so of Ed Datz and Craig 
Carnaroli,
Alan Krigman



**Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living.  
(http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-duffy/
2050827?NCID=aolcmp0030002598)