this post was submitted on 26 Mar 2025
1 points (100.0% liked)

traingang

22751 readers
14 users here now

Post as many train pictures as possible.

All about urbanism and transportation, including freight transportation.

Home of train gang

:arm-L::train-shining::arm-R:

Talk about supply chain issues here!

List of cool books and videos about urbanism, transit, and other cool things

Titles must be informative. Please do not title your post "lmao" or use the tired "_____ challenge" format.

Archive links for reactionary sites, including the BBC.

LANDLORDS COWER IN FEAR OF MAOTRAIN

"that train pic is too powerful lmao" - u/Cadende

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
top 8 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Well get ready for pretty much every building to wind up like this by 2050. The newer design is much more cost-efficient to the tune of upwards of a million dollars in maintenance and restoration savings over the long-term. It also doesn’t need inspections for ornamental elements that might fall off and hit somebody. Maintaining a historical building in its original state is a money black hole. Some condo guy isn’t shelling out extra cash so the building can look prettier.

And the reason nobody other than Hungarian fascists build buildings like that anymore is because it’s expensive as hell. The international style is just cheaper.

So until the revolution happens and so many issues get solved where we reach a point where building aesthetics are a top concern, have fun with this…

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

I wish it was brutalist instead of the architectural equivalent of corporate-art

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

Brutalism has thought and creativity behind it. This is just slop.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Extremely iconic historic building being replaced by a soulless "modern" building.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It was a pretty building but there's no point to romanticizing a relic from the Gilded Age. I sure as hell wouldn't want taxpayers to foot the bill for preserving this monument to capitalist excess.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

Not exactly a counterargument but something to consider

I think the historic value is what it is regardless of what era the building belongs to, though. I'm not from New York but this building is pretty iconic (I admit I confused it with Flatiron when I first saw the post) and it's a shame for it to be lost because it would cost a drop in the bucket to maintain the exterior. Obviously, if even after the most egregious spending on defense and subsidies for capital were cut the spending on maintaining historic buildings was getting in the way of providing healthcare and other necessities then I'd be in total agreement.