U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Massachusetts > Boston
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-25-2017, 07:16 AM
 
32,752 posts, read 22,697,194 times
Reputation: 29792

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by bjimmy24 View Post
Yep and that is only one very narrow part of the process. This type of inane pointless regulation exists in EVERY aspect of what it takes to build any kind of building. It's just crazy. I'm shocked by the amount of red tape around just running a food truck (looked into it a while back, punted on it due to extreme high costs and complicated processes that you'd probably need to hire a lawyer for, screw it). The reason why everything is luxury is because once you've spent a fortune on building this stuff, you need people with fortunes to get it back. Not advanced economics.


There we go. That's the total BS side. That completely rejects economics.


They're going to maximize their rent ANYWAY. If you cut construction costs 20%, the result will not be a reduction in rental costs. They'll still maximize the rental prices based on the market. The term "luxury" is just a marketing term, the stuff that is being built is pretty basic, it is just that the market can handle the heft price tags. Reducing the costs aren't going to result in ANY retail savings for the consumer. It just does not work like that. Even someone having taken the very first microeconomics class understands that.


Cutting the costs just results in reduced regulatory oversight, reduced revenue for communities, and more profit for developers (who are doing very well). That is all. Believe it or not, creating a regulation is a quite the process. It isn't done for bleeps and giggles. It is done because there is a problem needing addressing. It's always the business owners (I was one) crying that the regulations are unnecessary, but these regulations came about because companies down right messed up and created problems in the first place. Changing, for example, a state regulation can take years. I've been involved in it. Its a long and onerous process. It isn't something taken up just for fun.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-25-2017, 11:36 AM
 
Location: East Coast
2,771 posts, read 1,577,248 times
Reputation: 4004
Quote:
Originally Posted by bjimmy24 View Post
Did I say that?

Very little sympathy for people who aren't wealthy. Some of us don't have 10s of thousands of dollars sitting around to navigate idiotic bureaucracy. You've obviously never seriously looked into opening any kind of business, yet here you are judging and defending pointlessness!
You said
Quote:
complicated processes that you'd probably need to hire a lawyer for, screw it)
This has nothing to do with having sympathy or not having sympathy for people who aren't wealthy. Just because a process is complicated doesn't necessarily make it an "idiotic bureaucracy." Yes, opening a business entails a lot of complications -- there are many issues that a lot of people haven't thought of, because they're not immediately obvious.

Most people don't have tens of thousands of dollars laying around. Many entrepreneurs get started through loans, from getting investors, from mortgaging their homes, from family and friends, and even by putting insane amounts of money on credit cards. Sometimes it works out great for them if the business becomes successful. Sometimes it sends them into bankruptcy. It happens all the time. But it's not because the government or some other entity set it up so they would fail.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2017, 10:06 PM
 
486 posts, read 361,236 times
Reputation: 801
Rents would go down if there's enough supply to satisfy demand, and developers would build more if they could make higher profits via higher volume at lower rents instead of much lower volume at ridiculously high rents. But as we all know, NIIIIIMMMMMBBBBYYYYY!!! Shame on %developer% who didn't hire 100 union thugs at $150/hour to renovate a triple-decker!!! Take those shadows and stick them where the sun don't shine!!!

Hope everyone's enjoying their $2000/mo basement rat traps that will be $3000 a few years from now...

Quote:
Originally Posted by timberline742 View Post
Reading comprehension total fail. I never said you said it, I said don't say it, it's the normal idiotic comeback people retort with. I also never said it was EASY to build here. Never said it. Never implied it. Read what I actually wrote, not what you want to read.


Yeah, so you believe that if a developer has lower costs, that apartment they can rent for $2500 they'll rent for less even though they can get $2500. They'll out of the goodness of their hearts take less money because the project cost less is the notion you're promoting.


Whether the unit costs X or 2X to construct, they'll maximize their return in the marketplace. That's reality. All that cutting the red tape does is increase profits, and reduces regulatory oversight.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2017, 07:12 AM
 
32,752 posts, read 22,697,194 times
Reputation: 29792
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigfatdude View Post
Rents would go down if there's enough supply to satisfy demand, and developers would build more if they could make higher profits via higher volume at lower rents instead of much lower volume at ridiculously high rents. But as we all know, NIIIIIMMMMMBBBBYYYYY!!! Shame on %developer% who didn't hire 100 union thugs at $150/hour to renovate a triple-decker!!! Take those shadows and stick them where the sun don't shine!!!

Hope everyone's enjoying their $2000/mo basement rat traps that will be $3000 a few years from now...




And yet everywhere is being developed, or is developed, or places are being torn down to build bigger places. Construction is at full speed with no end in sight, the developers I've spoken to are working at full capacity plus some (one reason why rates are so high is the high demand), so no, changing what people aren't complaining about WILL NOT change retail prices.


THEY CAN'T BUILD MORE ANY FASTER. Stuff is being thrown up left and right, high volumes of it, shoddy construction, and still charging top dollar. Anyone know any significant developers that are sitting out of the market because they don't think they can make money? Yeah, I didn't think so.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Massachusetts > Boston
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top