Theory

January 17th, 2007 News

I said I was mulling a post about it, and figured instead that I’d solicit your comments about a theory that I have.

All too often, people in Buffalo mistake “would be nice” for “must be done“.

Example:

1. It would be nice if Pano kept the Atwater House around and incorporated it into his expansion plans; vs.
2. Pano must keep the Atwater House around and incorporate it into his expansion plans.

Discuss.

del.icio.us Reddit Slashdot Digg Facebook Technorati Google StumbleUpon Yahoo Bloglines

RSS 2.0 Respond Trackback

8 Responses to “Theory”

  1.  

    peter scott Says:
    January 17th, 2007 at 2:05 pm

    I think you’ve put it well. Because of Buffalo’s economic position…not quite vibrant, but showing signs of a rebound, we’re put in a unique position in which we all want to control each and every aspect of development.

    The every aspect part of the last sentence is the what hurts preservation efforts in the city. Its imperative to offer suggestions to developers…but its also imperative to recognize boundaries and promote growth.

  2.  

    Pauldub Says:
    January 17th, 2007 at 5:11 pm

    What you WANT and What you NEED are not necessarily the same thing. We would cry bloody murder when the politicians dictate what we can do with our property but sometimes are more than willing to do the same with businesses due to emotional attachments to beautiful buildings. ‘Tis a fine line we must tread…

  3.  

    KevinP Says:
    January 18th, 2007 at 1:38 am

    1. = most rational people

    2.= hipster doofuses (or is it doofi?)

    Speaking on a grander level and not necessarily about Pano’s here.

  4.  

    WIGS Says:
    January 18th, 2007 at 3:11 am

    BP, you’ve hit the nail on the head.

  5.  

    Rocco Says:
    January 18th, 2007 at 3:19 am

    You’ve got a guy that wants to expand his business in the City of Bflo….let him knock down the house. It is old and quickly becoming an eyesore. It is his house, let him knock it down.

  6.  

    Joe Blow Says:
    January 18th, 2007 at 11:17 pm

    If Pano was running a business that actually paid middle class wages and truly offered economic benefits to the community as a whole, I would say bring in the bulldozers.

    But this is a freaking restaurant. It’s not General Motors here. These are minimum wage jobs that can be had at any McDonalds in the area. This is not true economic growth.

    If his restaurant is that good, it will survive with the house. If he starts paying his employees 35K a year plus benefits, then let him tear the shit up.

    Until then, he’s just another Louie’s Hot Dogs that doesn’t deserve any further consideration.

  7.  

    BuffaloPundit » Blog Archive » Pano’s Says:
    February 7th, 2007 at 6:43 pm

    […] It would be nice if Pano kept the Atwater house and incorporated it into his plans. It is by no means a necessity that he does so. […]

  8.  

    realist Says:
    February 7th, 2007 at 7:08 pm

    Pano owns the house and should be able to do what he wants with it. I get sick of people telling others what they can or can’t do with what they own . I’m not sure what Pano’s employee’s wages have to do with anything …

Got something to say? Drop it here.

WNYM seeks to provide a forum for snarky opinions and open discussion. However, we do need to have some ground rules around this joint. In order to make our comments useful and interesting, the following guidelines have been established for comment users. In short; don't act like a libelous or hate-filled tool and we'll get along just fine.