400 million spent without congress approval and its being brought to court and The National Trust for Historic Preservation has filed a lawsuit aiming to halt the Trump administration's construction of the White House Ballroom, with a judgment expected next month.

along with that a 1912 law prohibiting any construction on the White House along with the 1952 National Capital Planning Act, forms part of the regulatory context regarding the expansion. 

@TerminatorNyA0Q crucial point there would be that the judgement is expected next month, nothing is canceled yet.

i get that you think it 'should' be canceled (i agree, its a gross abuse of power) but markets here should reflect facts as they stand in the real world

@SpeaksForTrees he had no permission to tear down a historic building, which he never asked permission and congress wouldn’t give him permission anyways, that’s why he had the east wing torn down right after he announced it, usually it takes years before anything is put under construction after a announcement

@TerminatorNyA0Q i mean yea it's insane, regardless it still happened and is still happening so if you're going to make markets on it you have to understand the reality of the situation

@SpeaksForTrees reality of the situation (he tore down a historic building without permission from historic society and congress, using money that wasn’t approved to be used for it)

@SpeaksForTrees the same rules apply for buying and restoring a protected historic house, one modification still requires a permit, Because these properties are protected to preserve their historical integrity, renovations generally require specialized approval, adherence to strict guidelines, and the use of historically accurate materials. If you do get permission to add to a historic house, they’ll only allow the addition to go out straight the back, so it looks the same as it was in the front when it was built.

The review process is thorough, often taking six weeks or longer.

Modifying a home without approval can lead to hefty fines, or in extreme cases, being required to reverse the changes at your own expense.

If you fail to follow regulations, authorities can halt construction. Just like what they are doing now.

@TerminatorNyA0Q ok i'm not even betting in this market. maybe talk about it on facebook or reddit

@SpeaksForTrees then why did you complain, you seemed to be heavily invested, like you bet on this?

@TerminatorNyA0Q Following the discussion, I get the impression that there is a misunderstanding. It now seems to me that the original intent of the market was “Should the ballroom be cancelled?”—to which my answer is yes, for the reasons you already outlined.

However, in its current form, the market is a bet: “Will the ballroom be cancelled?”—to which my answer is no, because there is insufficient political will.

As such, this market should resolve only once it becomes clear that the new construction is not the envisioned ballroom, or at the close date. I suggest creating a new market in the proper poll format, with a clear description, if the goal is to gauge the community’s view on the advisability of the project.

@sortwie the same rules apply for buying and restoring a protected historic house, one modification still requires a permit, Because these properties are protected to preserve their historical integrity, renovations generally require specialized approval, adherence to strict guidelines, and the use of historically accurate materials. If you do get permission to add to a historic house, they’ll only allow the addition to go out straight the back, so it looks the same as it was in the front when it was built.

The review process is thorough, often taking six weeks or longer.

Modifying a home without approval can lead to hefty fines, or in extreme cases, being required to reverse the changes at your own expense.

If you fail to follow regulations, authorities can halt construction. Just like what they are doing now.

@mods There is no proof that the White House State Ballroom has been cancelled. I’m concerned that the market may have been resolved incorrectly and that the creator ended up with the largest profit.

@sortwie unresolved. @creator i see no evidence the WH ballroom was cancelled. if you want to resolve this, you need to cite evidence. (and given that i am very confident it has not been cancelled, don't resolve it YES again without confirming with a mod first that this is a justifiable resolution, and making your case)

@Ziddletwix 400 million spent without congress approval and its being brought to court and The National Trust for Historic Preservation has filed a lawsuit aiming to halt the Trump administration's construction of the White House Ballroom, with a judgment expected next month.

along with that a 1912 law prohibiting any construction on the White House along with the 1952 National Capital Planning Act, forms part of the regulatory context regarding the expansion. 

@sortwie 400 million spent without congress approval and its being brought to court and The National Trust for Historic Preservation has filed a lawsuit aiming to halt the Trump administration's construction of the White House Ballroom, with a judgment expected next month.

along with that a 1912 law prohibiting any construction on the White House along with the 1952 National Capital Planning Act, forms part of the regulatory context regarding the expansion. 

@TerminatorNyA0Q these are plausible arguments for why it might be cancelled. That’s why it’s a sensible market. But it cannot resolve YES until there is evidence it actually has been cancelled. If you can link to sources claiming it has actually been cancelled, then a YES resolution is possible

why yes ?

@SpeaksForTrees 400 million spent without congress approval and its being brought to court and The National Trust for Historic Preservation has filed a lawsuit aiming to halt the Trump administration's construction of the White House Ballroom, with a judgment expected next month.

along with that a 1912 law prohibiting any construction on the White House along with the 1952 National Capital Planning Act, forms part of the regulatory context regarding the expansion. 

@TerminatorNyA0Q key point there is the judgement is expected next month, nothing is canceled yet.

i get that you think it 'should' be canceled (i agree, its a gross abuse of power) but markets here should reflect facts as they stand in the real world

Doing work on the white house without permission and public opinion, making money on the construction, getting favours, overspending public funds, building a useless room for making deals with other nations

or etc?? can you explain what this market is resolving based on ?

@SpeaksForTrees Doing work on the white house without permission and public opinion, making money on the construction, getting favours, overspending public funds, building a useless room for making deals with other nations