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.
Why re-rehearse the same silly and reactionist arguments (on both sides) that have already appeared 1.9 billion times here ?
Oh, I forgot, people have little more, and nothing meaningful, to do. Definitely let's feed that.
On the other hand ... you gotta LOVE the Colorado commenter. It always makes me laugh - at their expense - to see people who live elsewhere pontificating about issues in New York. Dumb and dumber and I am sure there is much more to come.
My take: It depends who you are. If you've been in a rent regulated apartment for the last 30 years, your going to take a big hit. Welcome to reality.
If you're looking for a new apartment, you'll probably do better than you would currently. Those million rent regulated apartments going up to market rate in a relatively short period of time will have the effect of rationalizing the market. A lot of apartments will end up empty and on the market at the same time. Not many people alive now remember the last time this was the case. So marginal rates (rates on empty, available apartments) will come down from what they are now.
Overall total average rents will go up, but not by as much as many people think.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Ryu
OP - By having no rent regulated apartments, do you feel the rent will become cheaper or more expensive??
Rents will not come down but they may go up slower in the future. Older people living in rent regulated apartments for 20 to 30 years will suffer the most. I think the study can be summed up by saying, for those 44% rent burdened New Yorkers, tough luck!
Why re-rehearse the same silly and reactionist arguments (on both sides) that have already appeared 1.9 billion times here ?
Oh, I forgot, people have little more, and nothing meaningful, to do. Definitely let's feed that.
Two reasons:
It's worth posting because it's a new article.
It's worth posting because there are always new people here for whom the discussion is news.
I don't know about you, but I like having articles brought to my attention.
initially rents will likely go up . boston saw construction and work permits soar as old ratty apartments were renovated. and updated and new cost money..
I would like lawmakers to phase out rent regulation in NYC. If that isn't possible, it should at least be reformed. Possible ideas for reform:
- strict income and asset limits, verified annually
- no inheritance of stabilized leases
- periodic resets to prevailing market rate
- fines for tenants who abuse the program (i.e. live out of town most of the time and use their stabilized apartment as a pied-a-terre or rent it out for profit)
It's time to get rid of this absurd, antiquated system.
It probably wouldn't matter since the vast majority of regulated apartments are already renting at less than their maximum allowable stabilized rents because the true market rents are lower. It's called "preferential rent" and it is quite common in most of the city. Landlords are in affect already able to legally raise the rents if they could get the maximum allowable rents but they can't.
It is only a tiny percentage of regulated apartments that are actually renting for less than market rate and most of them are in Manhattan.
In reality,rent regulations are already well on their way to a natural death.
Also,Boston and Cambridge had rent controls similar to NY's but abandoned them in the mid 90's. Rents soared across the board and are still among the highest in the US. Rent deregulation did nothing to lower rents or stop their upward trajectory.Sure increased property values though !
It probably wouldn't matter since the vast majority of regulated apartments are already renting at less than their maximum allowable stabilized rents because the true market rents are lower. It's called "preferential rent" and it is quite common in most of the city. Landlords are in affect already able to legally raise the rents if they could get the maximum allowable rents but they can't.
It is only a tiny percentage of regulated apartments that are actually renting for less than market rate and most of them are in Manhattan.
But that can't be true ! I mean ... isn't it the case that there are droves and droves of trust-fund folk, literally millions of greedy natives, who hang onto their $75 a month rentals ? While they count their riches and visit their luxury homes in the Hamptons ?
'Cos that's what I always heard and I just believe it because it's easier. I moved here last month from Dead and Dusty Brook, Wyoming (right next to the mall) and I think it is outrageous that I cannot find one of these places. Those rich lease-holding anti-American deadbeats are driving up my rent and I am as mad a hell. I am entitled to better and I demand an invisible hand to help me out.
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.
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.
