Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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 12-20-2016, 03:58 PM
 
25,556 posts, read 23,882,269 times
Reputation: 10119

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by NYer23 View Post
Only 40% of rental market is market rate apartments. The majority of renters live in a government regulated housing program that provide additional protection. Market rate renting by it nature is paying a premium on temporary housing. I would venture to guess the majority of people who can't make it in NYC are people living in market rate rentals who are unable to transition to permanent housing.
Yes. That's why there is such high turn over among transplants, and such low turnover in the housing projects. You have people making six digits ON THE BOOKS who still don't give up their apartments in NYCHA in desirable parts of the city, because they get cheap parking and cheap rent.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-20-2016, 04:16 PM
 
31,735 posts, read 26,686,195 times
Reputation: 24603
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYer23 View Post
Only 40% of rental market is market rate apartments. The majority of renters live in a government regulated housing program that provide additional protection. Market rate renting by it nature is paying a premium on temporary housing. I would venture to guess the majority of people who can't make it in NYC are people living in market rate rentals who are unable to transition to permanent housing.

Well there is that, but there are other factors.


Those of us born, raised and or for other reasons love NYC for all its faults remain. OTOH you have people from other parts of the country that having had the *experience* of living in the City don't want to live the rest of their lives here.


Blame it on many factors; the HCL, dirt, filth, crime, lack of community feeling, missing home, etc... whatever, some just get fed up and go back to what they know.


Native New Yorkers who have not lived/experienced for long periods life outside of NYC much less the Tri-State area have no idea things we consider normal are absurd elsewhere.


From high cost of housing, retail prices for food and everything else, New Yorkers are jacked all the time.


The other big reason for moving is when people decide to marry and or start a family. Public schools in NYC by and large aren't that good. Nor does everyone want their children exposed to this or that which is common place in NYC. All this doesn't even touch the high cost of having kids in NYC.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2016, 11:25 AM
 
Location: New York, NY
12,751 posts, read 8,216,242 times
Reputation: 7054
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
homeowners are homeowners because they have the resources to buy, it is a wealthier group .

renters are a very mixed group ranging from very wealthy to very poor
I'm glad someone gets it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NyWriterdude View Post
I'm not holier than though.

You were the one looking down at people in public housing, and claiming that they should be embarrassed. But the reality is things aren't really that much better for the average renter in NYC, and that tells you who is renting in NYC long term. Wealthier people live in the suburbs, OR they own condos or co-ops in the city. If seeing true statements SHATTERS your EGO, then it is you who have the problem. I made no judgements here, but I did state FACT. Wealthier people are OWNERS. Poorer people RENT.
People living in the projects that have the means to live elsewhere should be embarrassed. They are taking away housing from people that actually need it. Living in housing projects should always be a temporary situation, as one should strive for better.

As for my ego being shattered, I think you're referring to yourself. It's funny how you change things to suit your agenda. Before you would go on ad nauseum about how so many wealthy people lived in Manhattan, parts of Brooklyn and hip parts of Queens because those were the happening areas. I don't recall you making a distinction as to whether they owned or rented, but rather that they had high incomes and could afford to pay high prices (be it rent or mortgage) for where they resided, and now suddenly you look up to the people in the suburbs and those who own? Really? You've made it a point to stress (on numerous occasions I might add) how you reside in Manhattan even though you've been renting (ironically) and you're shattering my ego? I can't help but to laugh at such foolishness.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NYer23 View Post
Only 40% of rental market is market rate apartments. The majority of renters live in a government regulated housing program that provide additional protection. Market rate renting by it nature is paying a premium on temporary housing. I would venture to guess the majority of people who can't make it in NYC are people living in market rate rentals who are unable to transition to permanent housing.
While that may be true, that still has nothing to do with why a large amount of people rent in NYC. Yes, some people can't afford to purchase, but given how many transplants come here, it shouldn't be that much of a surprise. In other words, it isn't all due to economics.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2016, 12:29 PM
 
25,556 posts, read 23,882,269 times
Reputation: 10119
Quote:
Originally Posted by pierrepont7731 View Post
I'm glad someone gets it.

People living in the projects that have the means to live elsewhere should be embarrassed. They are taking away housing from people that actually need it. Living in housing projects should always be a temporary situation, as one should strive for better.

While that may be true, that still has nothing to do with why a large amount of people rent in NYC. Yes, some people can't afford to purchase, but given how many transplants come here, it shouldn't be that much of a surprise. In other words, it isn't all due to economics.
Really I don't care what those people in housing projects do, I don't live in them or intend to. So if they want to stay there though they have the means to live somewhere else, that is between them and NYCHA. NYCHA is more than happy to have them pay additional rent, which is still below the market rent of the neighborhood. NYCHA is actually happy to have them because with declines in federal subsidies NYCHA has to get money from somewhere, and renting out just to people on government programs clearly is not profitable.

Living in the housing projects for decades has often been a life long thing, unless one truly moves up tremendously. It isn't temporary, nor is it meant to be. It takes years to get into NYCHA btw, so if it takes years to get in, it isn't someone that someone is going to do for a few months or a year. That's what shelters and halfway houses are for.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2016, 01:28 PM
 
31,735 posts, read 26,686,195 times
Reputation: 24603
Quote:
Originally Posted by pierrepont7731 View Post
I'm glad someone gets it.

People living in the projects that have the means to live elsewhere should be embarrassed. They are taking away housing from people that actually need it. Living in housing projects should always be a temporary situation, as one should strive for better.

As for my ego being shattered, I think you're referring to yourself. It's funny how you change things to suit your agenda. Before you would go on ad nauseum about how so many wealthy people lived in Manhattan, parts of Brooklyn and hip parts of Queens because those were the happening areas. I don't recall you making a distinction as to whether they owned or rented, but rather that they had high incomes and could afford to pay high prices (be it rent or mortgage) for where they resided, and now suddenly you look up to the people in the suburbs and those who own? Really? You've made it a point to stress (on numerous occasions I might add) how you reside in Manhattan even though you've been renting (ironically) and you're shattering my ego? I can't help but to laugh at such foolishness.

While that may be true, that still has nothing to do with why a large amount of people rent in NYC. Yes, some people can't afford to purchase, but given how many transplants come here, it shouldn't be that much of a surprise. In other words, it isn't all due to economics.

Renting has always been the top choice for many New Yorkers, especially in Manhattan at least. Hence the reason for creation of rent control laws that mainly benefit downstate and in particular the City.


There is no harm in renting all one's life. Long as someone has invested/saved and or otherwise planned for their retirement/old age.


Need I remind some people here that not all RS or RC tenants are poor or anywhere near; quite a few own property elsewhere from second homes to vacation places. Also not all renters in general are or near poverty. Again people save/invest and so forth; there are rental buildings on Fifth Avenue for goodness sakes (Mr. Elliot Spitzer lived in one with his family), which shows not even the "one percent" are adverse to renting.


People like to rent because it relieves them of homeownership burdens. It also allows freedom to pack up and move when the fancy takes them without the burden of disposing of current property.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2016, 01:33 PM
 
Location: New York, NY
12,751 posts, read 8,216,242 times
Reputation: 7054
Quote:
Originally Posted by NyWriterdude View Post
Really I don't care what those people in housing projects do, I don't live in them or intend to. So if they want to stay there though they have the means to live somewhere else, that is between them and NYCHA. NYCHA is more than happy to have them pay additional rent, which is still below the market rent of the neighborhood. NYCHA is actually happy to have them because with declines in federal subsidies NYCHA has to get money from somewhere, and renting out just to people on government programs clearly is not profitable.

Living in the housing projects for decades has often been a life long thing, unless one truly moves up tremendously. It isn't temporary, nor is it meant to be. It takes years to get into NYCHA btw, so if it takes years to get in, it isn't someone that someone is going to do for a few months or a year. That's what shelters and halfway houses are for.
Yes it was because people often had no choice and couldn't escape poverty. Plenty of New Yorkers have grown up in the projects and moved on and pulled themselves up, so it certainly isn't meant to be a permanent thing unless people can't do any better, or don't want to. Of course it takes years to get into NYCHA because there are plenty of poor people that can't do any better, as well as some who can't and prefer to stay in the projects. Shouldn't come as a surprise... For someone that brags about how they graduated from Columbia University constantly, you sure don't seem so well versed on certain issues.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2016, 01:37 PM
 
106,212 posts, read 108,191,934 times
Reputation: 79749
Quote:
Originally Posted by BugsyPal View Post
Renting has always been the top choice for many New Yorkers, especially in Manhattan at least. Hence the reason for creation of rent control laws that mainly benefit downstate and in particular the City.


There is no harm in renting all one's life. Long as someone has invested/saved and or otherwise planned for their retirement/old age.


Need I remind some people here that not all RS or RC tenants are poor or anywhere near; quite a few own property elsewhere from second homes to vacation places. Also not all renters in general are or near poverty. Again people save/invest and so forth; there are rental buildings on Fifth Avenue for goodness sakes (Mr. Elliot Spitzer lived in one with his family), which shows not even the "one percent" are adverse to renting.


People like to rent because it relieves them of homeownership burdens. It also allows freedom to pack up and move when the fancy takes them without the burden of disposing of current property.
ELLIOT'S father , BERNIE was my investment partner in the central park building up until he passed away . now his holding company is our partner .
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2016, 01:40 PM
 
Location: New York, NY
12,751 posts, read 8,216,242 times
Reputation: 7054
Quote:
Originally Posted by BugsyPal View Post
Renting has always been the top choice for many New Yorkers, especially in Manhattan at least. Hence the reason for creation of rent control laws that mainly benefit downstate and in particular the City.


There is no harm in renting all one's life. Long as someone has invested/saved and or otherwise planned for their retirement/old age.


Need I remind some people here that not all RS or RC tenants are poor or anywhere near; quite a few own property elsewhere from second homes to vacation places. Also not all renters in general are or near poverty. Again people save/invest and so forth; there are rental buildings on Fifth Avenue for goodness sakes (Mr. Elliot Spitzer lived in one with his family), which shows not even the "one percent" are adverse to renting.


People like to rent because it relieves them of homeownership burdens. It also allows freedom to pack up and move when the fancy takes them without the burden of disposing of current property.
Exactly. I know of several people that choose to rent even though they can afford to buy. One lives in Yorkville and has a rent stabilized apartment. They have considered purchasing on several occasions and have opted to continue renting. They like the area they are in and since they aren't paying market rent I guess why not?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2016, 02:02 PM
 
31,735 posts, read 26,686,195 times
Reputation: 24603
Quote:
Originally Posted by pierrepont7731 View Post
Yes it was because people often had no choice and couldn't escape poverty. Plenty of New Yorkers have grown up in the projects and moved on and pulled themselves up, so it certainly isn't meant to be a permanent thing unless people can't do any better, or don't want to. Of course it takes years to get into NYCHA because there are plenty of poor people that can't do any better, as well as some who can't and prefer to stay in the projects. Shouldn't come as a surprise... For someone that brags about how they graduated from Columbia University constantly, you sure don't seem so well versed on certain issues.

Actually yes, the "projects" were meant to be permanent housing in most instances. However you also had some housing that went up around WWII that was meant to be "temporary" housing for either military and or their families as well as those working in defense related industry.


No small amount of public housing in NYC (as elsewhere) was built for two purposes; part of slum clearance/urban renewal during the post war period which ran through the 1970's, and or to provide housing for WWII veterans and their families.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Yo...sing_Authority


While not public, Stuyvesant Town/Peter Cooper Village was largely built as housing for *white* WWII veterans and their families.


Meanwhile across the street Baruch Houses was built as part of slum clearance to clean out the "old law" tenements that occupied that area of LES and the squalor, crime, disease and filth largely found there: Beneath Baruch Houses, a


On the Upper West Side, the same thing with Park West/Manhattan Town: Reunion for a Vanished Neighborhood - The New York Times


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manhattantown


Ditto for what is now the Lincoln Center area: https://ephemeralnewyork.wordpress.c...incoln-center/

West Side Story Film Locations - On the set of New York.com




Now on Staten Island, the old Markham Houses in West New Brighton were built to be temporary housing (for those working at the defense related industry at the docks) that went onto become "permanent" housing. That was until the place became so run down it required major funding for renovations. At that point federal government told the city "no" citing the fact the place had been meant for temporary housing (which explains the build quality), and had served its useful life.


Poetry & Popular Culture: Boat Unloading: Edwin Markham / A Guest Posting by Joel Lewis


In short order the place was torn down and new mixed income units went up: Some former residents of Staten Island's Markham Gardens not eligible to return | SILive.com


BROADWAY in Staten Island - Forgotten New York


Places like Todt Hill, South Beach, Berry and even at one time West Brighton "houses" were solid working to middle class housing. Went to school with plenty of kids from many of them and their parents were nurses, FDNY, NYPD, USPS, and other civil servants and or hard working persons. Most all of this kids went onto become solid middle class themselves, but left NYCHA because they wanted something better (homeownership), and or saw the decline coming and got out.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2016, 02:14 PM
 
Location: New York, NY
12,751 posts, read 8,216,242 times
Reputation: 7054
Quote:
Originally Posted by BugsyPal View Post
Actually yes, the "projects" were meant to be permanent housing in most instances. However you also had some housing that went up around WWII that was meant to be "temporary" housing for either military and or their families as well as those working in defense related industry.


No small amount of public housing in NYC (as elsewhere) was built for two purposes; part of slum clearance/urban renewal during the post war period which ran through the 1970's, and or to provide housing for WWII veterans and their families.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Yo...sing_Authority


While not public, Stuyvesant Town/Peter Cooper Village was largely built as housing for *white* WWII veterans and their families.


Meanwhile across the street Baruch Houses was built as part of slum clearance to clean out the "old law" tenements that occupied that area of LES and the squalor, crime, disease and filth largely found there: Beneath Baruch Houses, a


On the Upper West Side, the same thing with Park West/Manhattan Town: Reunion for a Vanished Neighborhood - The New York Times


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manhattantown


Ditto for what is now the Lincoln Center area: https://ephemeralnewyork.wordpress.c...incoln-center/

West Side Story Film Locations - On the set of New York.com




Now on Staten Island, the old Markham Houses in West New Brighton were built to be temporary housing (for those working at the defense related industry at the docks) that went onto become "permanent" housing. That was until the place became so run down it required major funding for renovations. At that point federal government told the city "no" citing the fact the place had been meant for temporary housing (which explains the build quality), and had served its useful life.


Poetry & Popular Culture: Boat Unloading: Edwin Markham / A Guest Posting by Joel Lewis


In short order the place was torn down and new mixed income units went up: Some former residents of Staten Island's Markham Gardens not eligible to return | SILive.com


BROADWAY in Staten Island - Forgotten New York


Places like Todt Hill, South Beach, Berry and even at one time West Brighton "houses" were solid working to middle class housing. Went to school with plenty of kids from many of them and their parents were nurses, FDNY, NYPD, USPS, and other civil servants and or hard working persons. Most all of this kids went onto become solid middle class themselves, but left NYCHA because they wanted something better (homeownership), and or saw the decline coming and got out.
We are confusing two things. What the projects were built for vs. people's own personal goals are two different things. Those that wanted a true middle class life would not remain in the projects unless the quality of living was decent, otherwise they would move on to bigger and better things.
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
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top