Freedom Tower - WTC replacement

I don't live in NYC, so this is just my 2 cents from 3,000 miles away, but IMO, this is a terrible idea.

Build another tall building - 1776 feet high. Why not just put a target on the workers backs? It looks to me like this is our idea of saying a big FU to the terrorists... and they may just do something about it back.

Imagine being a 28k a year file clerk - is it worth it to go work on the 80th floor of that building?

Opinions?

 

I have absolutely no idea how I feel about this. On the one hand, I see 'dexter's poin (t). OTOH, do we just build small places on the off chance they might get blown up?

 

If you're making $28K in New York . . . you're better off dead.

 

I read the U.S. Government is renting out a bunch of floors.

 

Is it just me, or does that skyline look like we're giving the rest of the world the finger?

 

I agree that it shouldn't be built, but not for the reasons Poin suggests. We can't be cowering like a bunch of babies every time we want to build a building.

I think the site should have a proper memorial. Building on that site is essentially a defiant gesture of a different sort from the one I illustrated above, one I kind of find obscene in a way. Just the way I see it.

I wonder how the families of the victims see it? I can see opinions going both ways.

 

The US Government had some offices in the old WTC building. I interviewed on the 102nd or 103rd floor for a job there. You had to take three elevators to get there - they moved in sync, but it was still three elevators.

I think rebuilding shows that we won't be intimidated, and that is a reason for putting another structure there. The tower may be 1,776 feet, but I don't think you will have people regularly working in offices at that height.

Now if you are saying it doesn't have to be 100 stories high, that is a legitimate point. I recall reading about super skyscrapers once, and the article said that you really didn't get much econmoic benefit from a building over 70 stories high. As I understand it, the construction cost of building each floor is less per floor, but that benefit doesn't take effect after the 70th floor. The commentator said anything over 70 floors is pretty much for ego gratification.

 

Fine guys, I understand that "we won't be intimidated". That's why it's 1776 feet high and called the "freedom tower".

Your new job starts July 1, 2009 (or whenever) on the 81st floor at that building. Do you feel any hestitation about going there? If you are the HR director or office manager, do you feel any responsibility bringing over the secretarial pool there?

 

I get your point, but what about the other countless skyscrapers in NYC and elsewhere where you could make the same point?

I mean, shit, how many other 40-plus story buildings are in the NYC downtown area alone? With a daily reminder right outside their window of 9/11? Somehow, those people manage to work.

 

poindexter... if you're going to say that, it might apply to any tall building or any airport. Or the Pentagon. Or the White House. Or the United Nations. I would think you would face a lot more danger from a fire than a terrorist attack.

As far as the human relations aspect, some people would probably be excited about working in a new building. I would think people like to be around a lot of people would like the atmosphere, no pun intended. If someone didn't like that, they probably would seek a job in a smaller community.

 

The other places mentioned aren't on the grounds of the WTC and have F-U type accessories like a name called the "Freedom Tower"... Hey no problem, I was just throwing it out there.

 

But what about working at a site where so many people died?