Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

cali

(114,904 posts)
Sat Nov 29, 2014, 04:47 AM Nov 2014

Meet the house that inequality built: 432 Park Avenue

“There are only two markets, ultraluxury and subsidized housing.” —Rafael Viñoly, architect of 432 Park Avenue

Along a stretch of New York City’s Park Avenue, between 56th and 57th Street, soars a tower so jaw-droppingly altitudinous that King Kong himself would likely think twice before scaling it.

Its rooftop, roughly a quarter of a mile high, makes it the tallest building in New York and the highest residential tower in the western hemisphere.

At 96 stories (1,396 feet), it has no company in the space it occupies atop Manhattan’s skyline. The Empire State Building tops out some 150 feet below that. Absent its spire, the newly built World Financial Center—itself a giant—is 28 feet shorter than this new cathedral to uber-wealth. 432 Park Avenue can be seen from all five boroughs of New York City, from inbound Metro-North trains coming in along the Harlem River, from the Meadowlands in New Jersey, and from several vantage points on Long Island. Its lone silhouette dominates the skyline from every angle. It demands your attention in a way that no residential building ever has.

The most remarkable thing about 432 Park, however, is not just its sheer size. It is the fact that, in a building so tall and imposing, with over 400,000 square feet of usable interior space, there are only 104 units for people to live in. 432 Park Avenue is, in short, a monument to the epic rise of the global super-wealthy. It is the house that historic inequality built.

<snip>

http://fortune.com/2014/11/24/432-park-avenue-inequality-wealth/?xid=nl_termsheet

24 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Meet the house that inequality built: 432 Park Avenue (Original Post) cali Nov 2014 OP
For people that have that kind of money, SheilaT Nov 2014 #1
I have been in a lot of buildings like this Sen. Walter Sobchak Nov 2014 #7
Interesting - Tonight's Bill Moyers show was on these residential towers putting Central Park progree Nov 2014 #2
How New Skyscrapers Are Forever Changing Central Park progree Nov 2014 #3
Recommend the Moyers Show...goes well with Fortune Article... KoKo Nov 2014 #19
Ironically, it was Jackie Onassis who stalled development there for years, as soon as she bettyellen Nov 2014 #21
"This will be a city only for rich people" dixiegrrrrl Nov 2014 #12
What an ugly piece of shit! DeSwiss Nov 2014 #4
a tad bit pricey, I must say Douglas Carpenter Nov 2014 #5
yeah, that's a great paragraph. glad you posted it. cali Nov 2014 #6
You nailed it, thanks CanonRay Nov 2014 #10
All we need is plague and widespread illiteracy. dixiegrrrrl Nov 2014 #13
How about Ebola and Texas schoolbooks? CanonRay Nov 2014 #16
Yep. Plus the "teaching to the test" focus on education. dixiegrrrrl Nov 2014 #18
Obviously, money doesnt' equal class. FLPanhandle Nov 2014 #8
If yhey are so rich olddots Nov 2014 #9
Gilded Age 2.0, here we are.... steve2470 Nov 2014 #11
Speaking of... dixiegrrrrl Nov 2014 #14
excellent quote, thank you ! nt steve2470 Nov 2014 #17
Weird building greytdemocrat Nov 2014 #15
IF I had that kind of money, I'd much rather be living in a house on the coast somewhere. jillan Nov 2014 #20
Revolting, obscene, unconscionable. woo me with science Nov 2014 #22
I'd want to stay as far away from there as possible - hedgehog Nov 2014 #23
Well, someone is trying to compensate AwakeAtLast Nov 2014 #24
 

SheilaT

(23,156 posts)
1. For people that have that kind of money,
Sat Nov 29, 2014, 05:37 AM
Nov 2014

who can afford a space like that, they simply don't live in the same reality that the rest of us do. And I'm not even thinking about the poor and the struggling. I happen to be doing okay, thank you very much, meaning I do not live from paycheck to paycheck. I live frugally, but I have more or less everything I need. But there is no way I am within any kind of shouting distance of the sort of place that this property represents. And, as I think about it, this is a very good way of showing how very different the 1% is from the rest of us. Even people who are vastly better off than I am can't possibly afford to buy in a building like this. And the really scary thing is that they just don't get how far removed they are from us.

I'm removed from the homeless. I also do volunteer work at my local homeless shelter, which helps remind me of how very well off I am. Someone who buys a place at 432 Park Avenue? I doubt they do volunteer work with the homeless. It's possible they donate money, but they never come into even brief contact with those at the very bottom.

And that, in a nutshell, is what's wrong. The very rich are very isolated from the very poor. They simply haven't a clue -- heck, I barely have a clue and I at least do my volunteer stint.

 

Sen. Walter Sobchak

(8,692 posts)
7. I have been in a lot of buildings like this
Sat Nov 29, 2014, 08:17 AM
Nov 2014

Everything about them reminds me of the North Korean traffic cops directing traffic on empty streets.

Doormen, security guards and concierges stare blankly at their cell phones, elevators are always on the ground floor at the ready. Parking garages are nearly empty with only a few dusty Audi's and BMW's with expired tags. Furniture, floors and fixtures in the suites are sun bleached. Some of them have a musty rotting smell from forgotten flowers stewing in a vase of brown water. Comparatively ancient electronics are a common sight. Old projection TV's and CRT computer monitors are a sign the unit hasn't been occupied in years.

A security guard once told me their most frequent visitors were process servers.

progree

(10,911 posts)
2. Interesting - Tonight's Bill Moyers show was on these residential towers putting Central Park
Sat Nov 29, 2014, 05:39 AM
Nov 2014

in the shade, and how they are evading taxes

http://billmoyers.com/episode/full-show-long-dark-shadows-plutocracy/

This week Bill points to the changing skyline of Manhattan as the physical embodiment of how money and power impact the lives and neighborhoods of every day people. Soaring towers being built at the south end of Central Park, climbing higher than ever with apartments selling from $30 million to $90 million, are beginning to block the light on the park below. Many of the apartments are being sold at those sky high prices to the international super rich, many of whom will only live in Manhattan part-time – if at all — and often pay little or no city income or property taxes, thanks to the political clout of real estate developers.


Video of the show (only 23 minutes) at the above link.

progree

(10,911 posts)
3. How New Skyscrapers Are Forever Changing Central Park
Sat Nov 29, 2014, 05:46 AM
Nov 2014

Here's a bit of it. See the link for the images before and after the new developments (the below image is after the new developments)

http://billmoyers.com/2014/11/28/new-skyscrapers-forever-changing-central-park/

The Municipal Art Society of New York conducted a study last year on what effects a number of new high rises will have on Central Park, which is visited by over 40 million people each year. This includes a series of shadow studies that show how the new buildings will change the park’s light. The illustrations below show what the park would like before and after a new series of skyscrapers are erected (shadows across the park are at 4 pm on September 21st). To learn more, see Bill’s special show this week, The Long, Dark Shadows of Plutocracy.


 

bettyellen

(47,209 posts)
21. Ironically, it was Jackie Onassis who stalled development there for years, as soon as she
Sat Nov 29, 2014, 05:36 PM
Nov 2014

passed away and could not advocate against it, they started issuing permits. It is just awful there now.

dixiegrrrrl

(60,010 posts)
12. "This will be a city only for rich people"
Sat Nov 29, 2014, 10:17 AM
Nov 2014

San Francisco is like that.
Hellaciously expensive, as indeed all of Cal. is.

Douglas Carpenter

(20,226 posts)
5. a tad bit pricey, I must say
Sat Nov 29, 2014, 06:02 AM
Nov 2014

these are pied-a-terres that begin at $7 million each and include several full-floor parcels in the $75 million range.


In the Medieval era, towers were erected to separate royalty and feudal overlords from the rest of the population during times of plague and suffering. It was an effective barrier, both physical and symbolic. A 1,400-foot skyscraper, in America’s most populous city, in which fewer than 100 people will reside, is perhaps the perfect present-day parallel to such behavior.


http://fortune.com/2014/11/24/432-park-avenue-inequality-wealth/

CanonRay

(14,112 posts)
10. You nailed it, thanks
Sat Nov 29, 2014, 09:34 AM
Nov 2014

I've been saying for years we're slipping back into medieval times; paid private armies staffed with professional soldiers, complete separation of rich and poor, people working for less that it takes to maintain life, Religious zealotry abounds, yes, we're getting the whole shitty deal back.

dixiegrrrrl

(60,010 posts)
18. Yep. Plus the "teaching to the test" focus on education.
Sat Nov 29, 2014, 11:26 AM
Nov 2014

And people like Palin who show by example you do not have to have a brain to become famous.

FLPanhandle

(7,107 posts)
8. Obviously, money doesnt' equal class.
Sat Nov 29, 2014, 08:50 AM
Nov 2014

What a ugly building. If I had wealth, I'd be in one of those old classy buildings near the park instead.

dixiegrrrrl

(60,010 posts)
14. Speaking of...
Sat Nov 29, 2014, 10:27 AM
Nov 2014

"By the time of the 1801 census, England had a population of just over 8 million living in a country of some 32 million acres
– and about 80 to 90 per cent of this land was owned by the aristocracy or landed gentry.
Some of them had estates of thousands of acres, including large kitchen gardens, lawns, shrubberies and other landscape features,
as well as orchards for fruit, woodlands for fuel, rivers and lakes for fishing, and huge swathes of land for farming and shooting wild animals and birds.They received ever-increasing income from their tenant farmers, mines and other industrial concerns, as well as from urban developments.

Jane Austen's England: Daily Life in the Georgian and Regency Periods

excellent fun read, btw.

jillan

(39,451 posts)
20. IF I had that kind of money, I'd much rather be living in a house on the coast somewhere.
Sat Nov 29, 2014, 04:35 PM
Nov 2014

Some of us prefer to see nature when we look outside of the window.

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
22. Revolting, obscene, unconscionable.
Sat Nov 29, 2014, 05:43 PM
Nov 2014


Symbols of predation, theft and greed, metastasizing right past the monuments of the great cities we once had at least some reason to think of as our own.

hedgehog

(36,286 posts)
23. I'd want to stay as far away from there as possible -
Sat Nov 29, 2014, 05:49 PM
Nov 2014

it looks like nothing more than a big target for people enraged at "Middle Eastern oil magnates, Chinese billionaires, Russian oligarchs, and the Latin American aristocracy "

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Meet the house that inequ...