NYC Apartment Buyout Strategy (Madison, Jasper: transfer, purchase, to live) - Page 11 - City-Data Forum

Kefir King · 06-19-2012, 06:45 AM

I offer no apologies for my position. I am a leftist progressive, and I support the goal of a roof over everyone's head as a matter of RIGHT. I am very much a proponent of controlled rents but have never been a part of any "lobby."

Quote:

But what is astounding is how you baldly characterize the destruction of the quality and quantity of NYC's housing as "irrelevant".

If NYC housing stock is being destroyed it is being destroyed by those who bought it with eyes open, own it, milk it and fail to repair it sucking every bit of blood out of the bricks and tenants before they sell it at a high profit to someone who will demolish it.

Paying them EXTRA to treat it nicely seems the height of societal stupidity...they are paid well ENOUGH. But of course to building owners there is no such thing as ENOUGH, only MORE.

Okay, a builder has two choices: to built a stately well constructed building and charge market prices, or to put up shoddy junk and charge market prices. So tell me how ANY consideration of rent controls enters this decision.
Tell me also how having rent control on an ancient building will keep it shoddy. Will it not instead fall more quickly to the wrecker's ball to be replaced by some modern RELATED skyscraper? So how are rent controls keeping the housing stock shoddy?

Of course they are NOT, but the boilerplate mantra SOUNDS good so the landlord-developer-building lobby spouts crap like that.

"End Rent Stabilization and NYC will become beautiful." Yeah, right, when pigs fly!

So perhaps a better word for me to use than
"irrelevant" would have been "nonsensical."

SobroGuy · 06-19-2012, 09:38 AM

I also believe every person should have a roof over their head as a right, as well as food, healthcare, and education. Where we differ is in two major areas:

1. Private landlords should not be the ones shouldering the responsibility to house everyone as a right, government should.

2. Rent controls were at one time a good thing, however it is now 100% political, and wielded simply for votes. It is completely detached from the reality of NYC, and simply used for political points at the expense of Landlords, market rate renters, and ultimately neighborhoods.

If you cannot acknowledge those two points, then there isn't much else to talk about.

Green Explorer · 06-20-2012, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kefir King

I offer no apologies for my position. I am a leftist......

I never asked for an apology.

You have no need to apologize for being a leftist "in the extreme" (as you put it yourself).
You have no need to apologize for ignoring the broad consensus of housing experts, of all political stripes, that rent control "is destructive to the quality and quantity of housing".
You have no need to apologize for taking a position of total and unrelenting support of rent control.
You have no need to apologize for supporting a policy which has been proven to raise market rents and raise taxes.

Listen pal, let's just agree to disagree. We're on different planets. You simply continually repeat your personal opinion based on your personal observations. The positions of all the housing economists in the world won't influence you one iota. Let's call it quits.

SobroGuy · 06-20-2012, 12:37 PM

Amen. Now beers for everyone...7th is paying!

mathjak107 · 06-21-2012, 02:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kefir King

I offer no apologies for my position. I am a leftist progressive, and I support the goal of a roof over everyone's head as a matter of RIGHT. I am very much a proponent of controlled rents but have never been a part of any "lobby."

If NYC housing stock is being destroyed it is being destroyed by those who bought it with eyes open, own it, milk it and fail to repair it sucking every bit of blood out of the bricks and tenants before they sell it at a high profit to someone who will demolish it.

Paying them EXTRA to treat it nicely seems the height of societal stupidity...they are paid well ENOUGH. But of course to building owners there is no such thing as ENOUGH, only MORE.

Okay, a builder has two choices: to built a stately well constructed building and charge market prices, or to put up shoddy junk and charge market prices. So tell me how ANY consideration of rent controls enters this decision.
Tell me also how having rent control on an ancient building will keep it shoddy. Will it not instead fall more quickly to the wrecker's ball to be replaced by some modern RELATED skyscraper? So how are rent controls keeping the housing stock shoddy?

Of course they are NOT, but the boilerplate mantra SOUNDS good so the landlord-developer-building lobby spouts crap like that.

"End Rent Stabilization and NYC will become beautiful." Yeah, right, when pigs fly!

So perhaps a better word for me to use than
"irrelevant" would have been "nonsensical."

i guess you can say the same thing about union workers too

Lilly232 · 07-11-2012, 05:57 PM

Actually, with a hefty number of landlords caught in RICO scandals and opening up brothels in stabilized buildings for a monthly cash tax-free payout, rjrsm is entitled to as great a buyout as he can conjure. Please keep us posted on what that is when it happens and good luck to you. Once reno'd, a landlord makes their money back and then some on our homes. If I ever leave, my landlord will make his buyout back in two years and is able to charge 4 times what I pay. Don't feel sorry for the landlord. Or are some of the people on this forum landlords and there within lies the problem?

mathjak107 · 07-11-2012, 06:52 PM

boy i wish you were my tenant. i would exercise my right to take an apartment for my own use and boot ya out for nothing.

Green Explorer · 07-11-2012, 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lilly232

Actually, with a hefty number of landlords caught in RICO scandals and opening up brothels in stabilized buildings for a monthly cash tax-free payout, ....

So this "Lilly232" suddenly appears on this forum reviving old threads with the most wild and provocative statements. Now, in addition to the usual evil, rich, and greedy, she adds BROTHEL owners to the mix!

Look, for twenty years you've been taking advantage of a corrupt and destrucive system to live at a rent which doesn't even cover the maintenance expenses of your apartment in Manhattan. And you've been living cheap at the expense of other people, including market rent tenants.
SO WHAT THE HECK ARE YOU WHINING ABOUT?

Quote:

Originally Posted by mathjak107

boy i wish you were my tenant. i would exercise my right to take an apartment for my own use and boot ya out for nothing.

Airborneguy · 07-11-2012, 11:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mathjak107

boy i wish you were my tenant. i would exercise my right to take an apartment for my own use and boot ya out for nothing.

What are the conditions on this? Seems like an easy out. Why don't more landlords do this on a regular basis to get rid of RS leaches?

mathjak107 · 07-12-2012, 02:39 AM

"According to the Rent Stabilization Law, only one of the individual owners of a building can take possession of one or more dwelling units for personal or immediate family use and occupancy, even if the building has joint or multiple ownership.

If after an owner recovers possession of the apartment, the owner does not use the apartment(s) as the owner's or an immediate family member's primary residence for three years, the owner may lose the right to any rent increases for other apartments in that building for three years."