U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > New York City
 [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 10-11-2015, 12:32 PM
 
Location: Manhattan
20,182 posts, read 26,480,657 times
Reputation: 9054

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by wawaweewa View Post
Can you please preface any of your responses on this subject with the fact that you will benefit from such an action.

The only NY'ers who support this garbage are those who stand to benefit.

I would so preface if I stood to see a benefit, but as a co-op shareholder, I do not pay rent. I am just promoting a plan that would answer the question "Why no rent freeze for middle class tenants?"

Let me amend my plan: Rent freeze for all tenants except for landlords who PROVE they are making less than 5% on their equity investment. (Pretty generous these days.)

Last edited by Kefir King; 10-11-2015 at 12:40 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-11-2015, 01:36 PM
 
3,450 posts, read 3,524,576 times
Reputation: 3084
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henna View Post
To be fair, they would also have to freeze all increases in maintenance fees for coops and condos.

There are plenty of middle class people who made a sensible decision to purchase a coop apartment, but these people still have monthly bills like a mortgage and maintenance, which in some cases (if at the beginning of the mortgage) are going to add up to more than rent.

So don't punish those forward-thinking people.
As do all people who rent out their coops (if they can).
The reality is, RC/RS gives renters the same benefits of ownership without the long term commitment.

The city/state boards which choose to freeze the rent increases for those people are doing a disservice to those who are not in a RC/RS situation.

It's not just landlords, everyone who is renting at Market Rate or owns is affected by these laws geared towards benefiting an undeserving group of renters.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-11-2015, 02:44 PM
 
394 posts, read 166,670 times
Reputation: 519
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kefir King View Post
So then, how do you feel about a rent-freeze FOR ALL? That way the "middle class" won't get their noses damaged.
For anyone with the least bit of common sense, your suggestion is absolutely inane.

Quote:
Originally Posted by WithDisp View Post
It's absolutely sensible.
As difficult a pill to swallow as government regulations are- if rent control/stabilization is some necessary social program, it should have a clear application (process) and be available to all units across the board.
The fiscal hit landlords take would have to be backed up by city coffers.

The fact that some people will get slapped with a 0% increase while other's rent increases well into the double digits, only lets the mayoral board showcase the disparity between a protected class, and a non-protected class.
You responded to "Kefir King"'s rent freeze. I highlighted your statement "The fiscal hit landlords take would have to be backed up by city coffers." because KK, looking at his long history of LL-Tenant posts, had no intention of including your point in his rent freeze recommendation. That's what makes his opinion totally nonsensical.

Quote:
Originally Posted by livingsinglenyc View Post
I think it's a Great idea.
Already renewed my lease for this year so lets go for another rent freeze for next year but this time for all!
Ridiculous.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Henna View Post
To be fair, they would also have to freeze all increases in maintenance fees for coops and condos.

There are plenty of middle class people who made a sensible decision to purchase a coop apartment, but these people still have monthly bills like a mortgage and maintenance, which in some cases (if at the beginning of the mortgage) are going to add up to more than rent.

So don't punish those forward-thinking people.
As a co-op apartment owner, don't you understand the fundamental concept that you are a part OWNER OF THE BUILDING??? And as an owner of the building YOU are responsible for paying the increases in property tax, water tax, heat, insurance, repairs, etc??? If there is a maintenance fee freeze, WHERE THE HECK DO YOU THINK THE MONEY WILL COME FROM TO PAY FOR THE INCREASES IN MAINTAINING THE BUILDING???

Quote:
Originally Posted by Astorian31 View Post
How about a property tax freeze for all as well? How about a water and sewer charge freeze for all? How about we lock in low heating oil prices for all? How about we make it easier to kick out dead beat tenants and allow landlords to garnish wages for non-payment of rent? If these requirements were met, I would glady support a rent freeze for all.
Just simple common sense.



Quote:
Originally Posted by fluttereagle View Post
NY Times reported this waste of taxpayer money: "Mayor Bill de Blasio’s administration will spend $1 million on ads intended to promote the rent freeze enacted this year for New York’s rent-regulated tenants..."

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/09/ny...smtyp=cur&_r=3
Now to get back to the OP:
De Blasio (or De Boob or De Bozo or whatever derogatory name he deserves) is a socialist. His rent control policies are a throwback to the 1950's and 60's which caused wide-scale building neglect and eventual abandonment by owners, takeover of those buildings by the city, and the costs picked up by the tax payers. Those buildings are still owned by the tax payers and the tax payers are continuing to pay for the costs. It is a boondoggle. As time goes by, and De Bozo's freeze or near-freeze continues, history will repeat itself. Smaller owners will not be able to afford the cost increases, resulting in a decrease in both the quantity and quality of privately owned housing. In the mean time his rent control policies will continue to keep the apartment vacancy rate artificially low thus increasing market rents.

Spending the tax payer's money to support his rent policy is nothing new for De Boob. In 2014, he ordered his aids to fan out through NY State to support the campaigns of Democrats running for the State Senate. And he will undoubtedly repeat that for the Senate campaigns coming in 2016. Why? Because the Republicans have a bare majority in the Senate and are blocking bills very important to De Bozo. Among them are:
1) getting authority to raise the city income tax
2) totally repealing vacancy decontrol. This will greatly aggravate the housing issues I described.

We can only hope that De Boob isn't re-elected. Four years gives him enough time to do great harm to the city. Eight may destroy the city. The problem is that he has two very large one-issue constituencies: voters in two million rent regulated apartments many of whom now are on a rent freeze and naturally want to keep it that way, and those who are living on the backs of tax payers. (There is of course some overlap between the two constituencies).
But there is hope. As one poster pointed out, De Bozo was elected with the votes of only 17% of the city's registered voters. For the sake of the city, the other 83% have to wake up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-11-2015, 03:55 PM
 
3,450 posts, read 3,524,576 times
Reputation: 3084
Quote:
Originally Posted by spectator11040 View Post

We can only hope that De Boob isn't re-elected. Four years gives him enough time to do great harm to the city. Eight may destroy the city. The problem is that he has two very large one-issue constituencies: voters in two million rent regulated apartments many of whom now are on a rent freeze and naturally want to keep it that way, and those who are living on the backs of tax payers. (There is of course some overlap between the two constituencies).
But there is hope. As one poster pointed out, De Bozo was elected with the votes of only 17% of the city's registered voters. For the sake of the city, the other 83% have to wake up.
Eight may destroy the city. This is a little ridiculous.

The combination of rent regulated tenants + those living on the backs of tax payers is by far the voter majority in NYC.

I'm no bigger a fan of either of the last two mayors of New York, but I do find the current to be more realistic and fair, the reality of the matter is though it's going to take a lot to get it to that point- and while unpopular, needs to come from taxes and smart budget controls.

If it's any consolation, as always, these bigger issues aren't even citywide issues.
RC/RS is a state one. One which by state referendum, can end.

The majority of states in the Union prohibit rent control.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-11-2015, 08:13 PM
 
328 posts, read 231,002 times
Reputation: 553
In terms of the advertising victory lap by De Blasio, I guess any pretense of the Rent Guidelines Board being an objective entity making decisions based on economic data is out the window. (Not that anyone actually believed that in the first place.) De Blasio stacked the deck to get the decision that he wanted and is now using taxpayer funds to promote himself.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-11-2015, 08:17 PM
 
Location: West Harlem
6,886 posts, read 7,839,277 times
Reputation: 3000
Quote:
Originally Posted by wawaweewa View Post
Can you please preface any of your responses on this subject with the fact that you will benefit from such an action.

The only NY'ers who support this garbage are those who stand to benefit.
Not true.
I might quite possibly support it and there could not be a person less impacted personally than I would be.
Basically zero impact, except on the world in which I live.
And there are many more of us.

The people foaming at the mouth is just so interesting. It must be a good thing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-11-2015, 08:22 PM
 
Location: West Harlem
6,886 posts, read 7,839,277 times
Reputation: 3000
Quote:
Originally Posted by WithDisp View Post
Eight may destroy the city. This is a little ridiculous.

The combination of rent regulated tenants + those living on the backs of tax payers is by far the voter majority in NYC.
Speaking of inanity (such a pretentious word choice), why even respond to such a ridiculous comment. Destroy what city, exactly. The city of whose experience. Reminds me of the morons who insist that the world has unequivocally improved by leaps and bounds since day one. Great march forward.

In addition, though, I wonder how many assistance people vote. I would guess not so many.
Regulated tenants are often better educated people in modest professional situations so that would be different.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-11-2015, 08:31 PM
 
3,450 posts, read 3,524,576 times
Reputation: 3084
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harlem resident View Post
In addition, though, I wonder how many assistance people vote. I would guess not so many.
Regulated tenants are often better educated people in modest professional situations so that would be different.
People with things to lose go out and vote.
Still, those things are dictated by the state- not the mayor.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-11-2015, 09:20 PM
 
9,990 posts, read 7,716,817 times
Reputation: 4702
Might as well take that money (and some) to pay off undesirable tenants to relocate out the city.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-11-2015, 11:35 PM
 
10,637 posts, read 20,778,169 times
Reputation: 8174
Quote:
Originally Posted by spectator11040 View Post
As a co-op apartment owner, don't you understand the fundamental concept that you are a part OWNER OF THE BUILDING??? And as an owner of the building YOU are responsible for paying the increases in property tax, water tax, heat, insurance, repairs, etc??? If there is a maintenance fee freeze, WHERE THE HECK DO YOU THINK THE MONEY WILL COME FROM TO PAY FOR THE INCREASES IN MAINTAINING THE BUILDING???
Yes, of course I get it. Is the italicization in your post to indicate you think I'm an idiot? I'm sorry you didn't understand my point, that if the city is going to subsidize living expenses for some, they should do it for all. So, yes, we own the building and shareholders pay the maintenance (duh). I'm saying we should get the city money too. They can reduce our maintenance fees by giving us money out of the same city coffer that's going to pay the advertising budget and for freezing rent for all those RS tenants.

That was my point. Maybe you can only understand things when posts are italicized and IN ALL CAPS. In that case, select the above paragraph and add the appropriate formatting to help you understand.
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:



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 > New York > New York City
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