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 12-11-2016, 05:20 AM
 
18,311 posts, read 11,700,635 times
Reputation: 11948

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by wawaweewa View Post
The NYT just keeps writing these great troll pieces.

Did you even read the article? I never said transplants were the problem. Just that the transplants in this piece are total asshats.

Read the article. It's hilarious.

Why are they "total AHs"?


Why don't you just live and let live, in other words mind your business.


It isn't for you to say how anyone else should spend their money/their living situations. Is anyone coming to you each month and asking for anything?


Recent college graduates/young adults have been living in roommate situations for decades. It was the same in the 1920's, 1930's, 1940's, 1950's.... By the 1990's there was even a famous sitcom on television (Friends), about the thing.


Face it unless you have lived in NYC all your life *and* have some juice (family connections or just plain luck), you need to earn > 75k to find an apartment in Manhattan. Going by the 40x rule one needs to earn about $150k per to qualify for that apartment mentioned in NYT.


Yes, one of those young adults probably could find *something* in Yorkville on Third Avenue or east for around $2,100 or so. Such an apartment would likely be a small studio (perhaps renovated recently) in a tenement walk up or small elevator building. Ditto goes for things further north above 96th street onto Harlem, Morningside Heights, Inwood, etc...


But here is a news flash for you; not everyone wants to live "uptown". Besides as the article makes clear these young adults aren't "rent poor"; they just do not seem willing to blow 3/4 or more of their monthly income on rent, a very wise decision IMHO.


Right now Manhattan below 14th Street and certainly from Houston Street to the Financial District is *HOT*. So much so the NYT did a huge piece on the area last Sunday. In short the vibe and all things young people like are now downtown.


As for "rents going up", again you don't know what you're talking about.
http://ny.curbed.com/2016/12/8/13882...klyn-manhattan


Market rents are a fact of supply and demand. Right now there is plenty of supply (and more coming online) but demand is slowing (a bit). Thus landlords are offering concessions or whatever that reduce the rent. The fact landlords are offering concessions instead of just lowering rents proves your theory wrong; these "transplants" or others taking market rate housing aren't having any affect on rents going "up".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-11-2016, 06:11 AM
 
Location: Manhattan
20,162 posts, read 26,460,446 times
Reputation: 9039
Too few landlords are murdered in their sleep.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2016, 08:55 AM
 
563 posts, read 464,488 times
Reputation: 502
Subway..thats like $300 a month in suburb with car. comes out to same..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2016, 09:17 AM
 
Location: Brooklyn, New York
3,244 posts, read 3,482,438 times
Reputation: 2856
Quote:
Originally Posted by l1995 View Post
I think two of the reasons rents are so high are

1. Such a high acceptance of living with roommates

2. People getting priced out of expensive neighborhoods overpaying in formerly less expensive neighborhoods.
Those are effects not causes. People are choosing to live with roommates because rents are expensive, people are getting priced out for the same reason. These two are not driving the rents higher, they are just a reaction to higher rents.

The real reason is simple supply and demand. You restrict new housing supply through zoning and regulations, while the demand for housing is high... the rents will go through the roof. NYC permits something like 60k of new construction units per year (in a good year!), yet city's population goes up by 70k per year. The result is rents are going higher and higher.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2016, 09:40 AM
 
Location: New Jersey
4,440 posts, read 2,277,144 times
Reputation: 4905
^ Very true. And it also makes a big difference how those 60K new units are distributed. For example, if they are built on 6,000 different sites (10 units per site) instead of 1,000 different sites (60 units per site), then that means that an extra 5,000 older buildings had to be razed just to build the same amount of new units.

That's 5,000 buildings where people had to be displaced and because new construction always costs more, the housing costs increases. Additionally, the people that were living in those 5,000 units are now forced to compete with others for apartments, further driving up the demand and higher rents elsewhere.

It's like a dominos effect.

And that is the point I have been trying to make all along. The city's restrictive zoning is a big reason for the high cost of housing. Relaxing zoning and increase densities/FAR's (allowing more units to be built per site) will help a lot.

Also, get rid of unions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2016, 09:53 AM
 
373 posts, read 327,682 times
Reputation: 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by wawaweewa View Post
How can you blame the landlords? These fools do this to themselves. This is not "just trying to get by" behavior. These are asshats who don't want to let go of the college lifestyle.

Call a spade a spade. They're morons.

Compare what the general outlook is on immigrants who live multiple families to a unit to these asshats.
Don't get caught up in the white hype.
Who is the moron?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2016, 09:54 AM
 
373 posts, read 327,682 times
Reputation: 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by wawaweewa View Post
The NYT just keeps writing these great troll pieces.

Did you even read the article? I never said transplants were the problem. Just that the transplants in this piece are total asshats.

Read the article. It's hilarious.
troll pieces?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2016, 10:20 AM
 
Location: Brooklyn, NY
2,285 posts, read 1,277,260 times
Reputation: 1050
Quote:
Originally Posted by antinimby View Post
^ Very true. And it also makes a big difference how those 60K new units are distributed. For example, if they are built on 6,000 different sites (10 units per site) instead of 1,000 different sites (60 units per site), then that means that an extra 5,000 older buildings had to be razed just to build the same amount of new units.

That's 5,000 buildings where people had to be displaced and because new construction always costs more, the housing costs increases. Additionally, the people that were living in those 5,000 units are now forced to compete with others for apartments, further driving up the demand and higher rents elsewhere.

It's like a dominos effect.

And that is the point I have been trying to make all along. The city's restrictive zoning is a big reason for the high cost of housing. Relaxing zoning and increase densities/FAR's (allowing more units to be built per site) will help a lot.

Also, get rid of unions.
There are more and more open-shop construction sites nowadays. It used to be that any building large enough to need a crane would usually be a union job site. That is no longer the case.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2016, 10:42 AM
 
Location: New Jersey
4,440 posts, read 2,277,144 times
Reputation: 4905
Are you sure about that? Not that I don't believe you--because if that is true, that is good news--but the only large and well known project which chose to go non-union that I've heard about is 111 W 57.

http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article...shatter-record
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2016, 11:06 AM
 
Location: Brooklyn, NY
2,285 posts, read 1,277,260 times
Reputation: 1050
Quote:
Originally Posted by antinimby View Post
Are you sure about that? Not that I don't believe you--because if that is true, that is good news--but the only large and well known project which chose to go non-union that I've heard about is 111 W 57.

http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article...shatter-record
That is the largest one. The next largest project I'm aware of is 1 Wall Street Union Construction NYC | Gilbane Building | 1 Wall Street Most are 20 to 30 story towers that don't make the news.

Some of the large NYC construction firms are not renewing their union agreements Construction Unions

This link has a graph that shows the distribution of projects between union and non-union. https://commercialobserver.com/2016/...union-workers/
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