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)
View Poll Results: In your opinion is crime citywide up or down since 2005?
Up 89 47.85%
Down 97 52.15%
Voters: 186. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 01-02-2010, 03:40 PM
 
Location: Newark, NJ/BK
1,271 posts, read 2,177,416 times
Reputation: 662

Advertisements

Murder in general is a horrible thing, but when it involves kids...SMH.

Looks like another homicide is reported on Gothamist, this time in Williamsburg.

 
Old 01-02-2010, 03:55 PM
 
461 posts, read 1,767,647 times
Reputation: 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rayarena View Post
I agree with you 100%. By the way, I just found this website, so I'm responding to your comment a long time after you originally posted it, but my response is as valid today as it would have been if I had responded back then.

It's impossible for an average professional [I have a Master Degree] to afford housing in NYC without making terrible sacrifices. Oh, there are those lucky few who can find that exceptionally low-priced apartment, but the average rent even in the outer boroughs is now hoovering at around $1200 [add to this utility bills, groceries, transportation, etc... and you see how fast your paycheck goes]. Its not uncommon now for Queens apartments in certain areas like Astoria to even go for $2000 and over. And I ask, in the outer boroughs? In Queens? The housing stock is simply not measurable to the property values. For the most part, housing stock in Queens was made for working class people and it is poor housing stock. This is reflective in the size of the apartments and the lack of amenities in the buildings: no elevators, tiny vestibules, cheap materials: i.e. sheet rock walls that you can't even hammer a nail in, stark building facades and interiors, etc..

The sad thing is that the plummeting property values that have hit other cities have not really affected NYC. Or let me put it another way, the property values were so way out there in the first place that even if they went down 10 to 30 percent in NYC, they are still too high for the average person. As you say, a Notre Dame graduate with a trust fund can afford it, but not your average native New Yorker!

Well, you can blame the Rent Stabilization Laws for the cause of these ARTIFICIALLY high rents. We wouldn't have these problems had it been a free market environment from the get go. Supply and demand people...economics 101.

When are politicians and the clueless liberal NY voters that put these politicians in office going to realize that Rent Stabilization/Control does not work and will NEVER work. Do your homework and research it carefully and you will see that RS does a disservice to NYers. Only the LUCKY few (older tenants) benefit from the system (cheap rent)...everyone else pays through the nose. Thank you NY Democrats...job well done!
 
Old 01-02-2010, 03:57 PM
 
Location: Wellsville, Glurt County
2,845 posts, read 8,933,937 times
Reputation: 1373
Quote:
Originally Posted by SobroGuy View Post
3-Regarding the "scary" headlines: When you post a scary headline and say "see crime is going up" that is incorrect. The scary headline is meant to sell a paper/get you to read. When you READ the article, you get the ENTIRE story, and not just "Mom shot execution style in front of kids." What was the real story? So far, they believe it was a jaded/jealous former boyfriend who was thrown out. This does NOT indicate an increasing crime rate, it is indicative of a crazy/jealous/off-balance boyfriend and happens everywhere. But when you simply post "Mom shot execution style in front of kids" then pose an argument about crime growing in NYC based on that headline, that is completely wrong and purposely fooling people.
SobroGuy, I just started reading this thread and I think you have made some amazing, logical arguments. I admire your resilience defending your opinion amongst so many dissenting points of view.

I don't live in NYC so I can't say for sure whether or not crime has increased or decreased. I do a lot of work there, especially in Brooklyn and Queens, but I don't venture off the main thoroughfares enough or have enough friends across the boroughs to say for sure...plus I wasn't around for the 70s/80s/early 90s.

I'm inclined to believe the stats, though - and I'll tell you why. I agree with you and pretty much everyone else that the numbers are fudged, hell - like others have mentioned the cops have been caught fudging them and documented in mainstream media outlets. However, I think that even if they are fixed, the law of averages says that they have ALWAYS been fixed and they are fixed everywhere else in the country as well! I think it's safe to assume that for as long as crime records have been kept, crime records have been fudged. In the olden days it could be done through paperwork, looking the other way, etc. - nowadays there is more oversight so things have to be reclassified, documented creatively....in any case, like most statistic evaluation done on a large scale, we shouldn't be focusing on the actual numbers themselves, they mean nothing. What is significant is the percentage decrease over time, fudged or not it should still be an accurate indicator. I'm sure someone will post "oh, but they were honest back in the good old days. My pops worked the beat and blahlblahlblah" as soon as I hit reply....but yeah right, that's just a bunch of nostalgia. If anything, the police and city government were more corrupt back in 1964 or whenever they started keeping track of these things because it was so much easier to get away with.

If you wanna let the headlines scare you then the newspapers are doing their job all too well. I'm much more inclined to believe the data, even if it is intrinsically flawed.
 
Old 01-02-2010, 04:06 PM
 
461 posts, read 1,767,647 times
Reputation: 361
If I'm not mistaken, last year (2009) around the same time 5 murders were committed within the first week of the new year. Despite the quick murder start, homicides balanced out throughout the year which lead to the lowest murder rate ever recorded in NY in 2009.

So don't stress it, murder rates almost always spike during big holidays like Christmas and new years. These people don't know how to act when they have liquor in their system and use the holidays as an excuse to act like animals. Combine liquor and drugs and you have the perfect storm for a murder rate spike.
 
Old 01-02-2010, 06:37 PM
 
Location: Chinatown, New York City
68 posts, read 261,085 times
Reputation: 34
The first crime of the new year was a brawl in East New York after a Years Eve party, one guy was shanked by a blade.
 
Old 01-02-2010, 08:34 PM
 
139 posts, read 176,477 times
Reputation: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by victorfox View Post
Well, you can blame the Rent Stabilization Laws for the cause of these ARTIFICIALLY high rents. We wouldn't have these problems had it been a free market environment from the get go. Supply and demand people...economics 101.

When are politicians and the clueless liberal NY voters that put these politicians in office going to realize that Rent Stabilization/Control does not work and will NEVER work. Do your homework and research it carefully and you will see that RS does a disservice to NYers. Only the LUCKY few (older tenants) benefit from the system (cheap rent)...everyone else pays through the nose. Thank you NY Democrats...job well done!

What are you a landlord or something? The problem with NYC first and foremost is greed not the Rent Stabilization Laws. There is a SAVAGE free market environment in NYC. For instance, Astoria, Queens has a large private housing stock and since most of it is composed of less than 6 apartment-units, they don't qualify for any form of Rent Stabilization. So that greedy landlords who paid their mortgages off years ago [and therefore have no need to charge so much] can and do raise their rents to their hearts desire.

As for Rent Stabilization, there are all types of loopholes that Landlords use to raise the rent constantly. All that they have to do is what is called MCI [Major Capitol Improvements] on the building [even if it doesn't need it] and Voila, they got an instant rent increase in perpetuity.

The idea is that if they do some sort of improvement in the their building, say put in a new intercom system or something, they pass the cost of the improvement on to the tenant, yet, even after the tenants finish paying off the cost of the MCI, the rent increase stays on in perpetuity. And let's not even factor in the tax write-offs that he gets and that his property values increase on the backs of tenants.

Also, it is quite common for landlords to do [er, uh] "improvements" in apartments when a tenant moves, [put in a new toilet that the apartment doesn't need, a new bathtub to replace the perfectly good former bathtub, etc..] so that they can jack up the price of the apartment in question and skirt the Rent Stabilization laws.

If anything, the free market system works to well in NYC and that's why rents are going up so much, because native New Yorkers,[i.e. the working class], can't afford to compete with the outer towners with the Ivy League Education and the rich daddy that is helping them pay the higher rents.

If NYC continues like this, its going to become like Paris where the poor live in the outskirts and only the well-to-do live inside the city.
 
Old 01-02-2010, 09:30 PM
 
461 posts, read 1,767,647 times
Reputation: 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rayarena View Post
As for Rent Stabilization, there are all types of loopholes that Landlords use to raise the rent constantly. All that they have to do is what is called MCI [Major Capitol Improvements] on the building [even if it doesn't need it] and Voila, they got an instant rent increase in perpetuity.

And let's not even factor in the tax write-offs that he gets and that his property values increase on the backs of tenants.
No I am not a landlord however let's just say, I know the system very, very well. More than you will ever know. Believe me. As a matter of fact, I'm about to make you eat your own words because the comments you made about Rent Stabilization are totally incorrect and goes to show how little you know about the RS system. What you are doing is basically repeating the same BS that all Rent Stabilization advocates use to convince (brain wash) the public about so-called "greedy" landlords or slumlords.

Reading your comment, a landlord is labeled greedy for renovating an apartment that according to you didn't need to be renovated but in the same breath, a landlord is labeled a slumlord if he doesn't do any renovations to his apartments. Damned if you do, damned if you don't right? LOL!

OK, first off, explain yourself, what write offs do landlords get from property value increases????? Please explain.

No such thing. I would love to hear what you come up with.

Oh, FYI, landlords DO NOT get tax breaks just for being a Rent Stabilized building and for no other reason. They must SPEND MONEY on their building up front first to get a tax discount like J-51. The bigger the expense of the upgrade, the bigger the tax discount which is spread out for 7-12 years so it is not a lump sum of a discount. So you're looking about about a $3K-$4K discount on your yearly property tax bill. (WOW.. a whole 4K yearly discount on a 160K property tax bill...what a bargain!!!) BUT future property tax increases pretty much offset or wipes off any so-called discount the landlord was getting anyways so why even bother if you ask me.

Second, not all upgrades or renovations qualify for MCI. The upgrade has to qualify as an MCI to get approved. It must be a building wide upgrade that effects every tenant in the building. Everything has a life expectancy, the building's roof, windows, boiler, plumbing, gas lines, and yes even mailboxes.

If a landlords spends $10,000 in brand new mailboxes for the building, in a 100 unit building, that translates into a $1 increase per room or a $5 rent increase on a 3 bedroom apartment, less for smaller apartments. Yet you complain of a $5 increase when the landlord has to dish out $10K up front for the mailboxes. And the tenants that cry like little babies and complain about the increases are the ones paying $500 for a 2 bedroom apartment....lol. Are you kidding me? Come on...the nerve of them to even open up their mouths.
 
Old 01-02-2010, 09:47 PM
 
Location: Parkland, FL
416 posts, read 1,478,262 times
Reputation: 267
Rent stabilization is a huge reason that overall rents are so high in NYC. If you take the thousands upon thousands of unit that are RC/RS and turn them into regular rentals, you increase the supply dramatically and drive down the overall rent.

There is always a space for the working class in every city, you just have to look further out. Think of the thousands of immigrants that come into NYC every year with just the shirt on their back. They move to some isolated part of the Bronx and ride the bus, they don't live in Astoria or any other trendy part of Brooklyn or Queens.
 
Old 01-02-2010, 10:10 PM
 
461 posts, read 1,767,647 times
Reputation: 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by HowGoesIt View Post
Rent stabilization is a huge reason that overall rents are so high in NYC. If you take the thousands upon thousands of unit that are RC/RS and turn them into regular rentals, you increase the supply dramatically and drive down the overall rent.

Exactly and well said. When are NYers going to wake up and realize that Rent Stabilization does not work.
 
Old 01-02-2010, 10:57 PM
 
139 posts, read 176,477 times
Reputation: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by victorfox View Post
No I am not a landlord however let's just say, I know the system very, very well. More than you will ever know. Believe me. As a matter of fact, I'm about to make you eat your own words because the comments you made about Rent Stabilization are totally incorrect and goes to show how little you know about the RS system. What you are doing is basically repeating the same BS that all Rent Stabilization advocates use to convince (brain wash) the public about so-called "greedy" landlords or slumlords.

Reading your comment, a landlord is labeled greedy for renovating an apartment that according to you didn't need to be renovated but in the same breath, a landlord is labeled a slumlord if he doesn't do any renovations to his apartments. Damned if you do, damned if you don't right? LOL!

OK, first off, explain yourself, what write offs do landlords get from property value increases????? Please explain.

No such thing. I would love to hear what you come up with.

Oh, FYI, landlords DO NOT get tax breaks just for being a Rent Stabilized building and for no other reason. They must SPEND MONEY on their building up front first to get a tax discount like J-51. The bigger the expense of the upgrade, the bigger the tax discount which is spread out for 7-12 years so it is not a lump sum of a discount. So you're looking about about a $3K-$4K discount on your yearly property tax bill. (WOW.. a whole 4K yearly discount on a 160K property tax bill...what a bargain!!!) BUT future property tax increases pretty much offset or wipes off any so-called discount the landlord was getting anyways so why even bother if you ask me.

Second, not all upgrades or renovations qualify for MCI. The upgrade has to qualify as an MCI to get approved. It must be a building wide upgrade that effects every tenant in the building. Everything has a life expectancy, the building's roof, windows, boiler, plumbing, gas lines, and yes even mailboxes.

If a landlords spends $10,000 in brand new mailboxes for the building, in a 100 unit building, that translates into a $1 increase per room or a $5 rent increase on a 3 bedroom apartment, less for smaller apartments. Yet you complain of a $5 increase when the landlord has to dish out $10K up front for the mailboxes. And the tenants that cry like little babies and complain about the increases are the ones paying $500 for a 2 bedroom apartment....lol. Are you kidding me? Come on...the nerve of them to even open up their mouths.
No, a landlord is called a slumlord if he has a run down, rat and roach infested building in need of major repairs. These buildings can have leaky roofs, elevators that don't work, cracked plumbing, chipped paint, holes in the walls, broken doors, cracked windows and old boilers that don't give heat in the winter, etc.. these slumlords refuse to make repairs in their buildings and don't give heat or hot water in the winter. That's why they're called slumlords. They're mostly in ghetto neighborhoods and in slums, in places like the Bronx.

Now, landlords in good neighorhoods--like Astoria-- that are constantly doing unsolicited "major capitol improvements" in buildings that don't need these improvements--which is what I was talking about-- are greedy.

To start of, most buildings in NYC, don't have 100 units. The typical NYC building--those in the outer boroughs-- are five story brick buildings with 25 units, so that the MCI usually affects the tenant more severely than the scenario you depicted with the 100 unit building and the $1.00 per room increment. The terrible thing about this MCI is that even after the tenant covers the cost of the greedy landlord's expense, he continues paying the cost of the improvement--via the rent hike-- in perpetuity even after the cost of the MCI has been paid off. Nice deal for the greedy landlord, huh?

Then the greedy landlord can of course get a tax break for the MCI. Regarding property value, what I meant-- that you totally misinterpreted-- is that the landlord can then sell his property at a higher price because of the "improvement" that he has done on the building.


So, he is winning three-fold:

A] Rent hike in perpetuity even after the cost of the improvement is paid off
B] Tax break even though the tenants are covering the cost of the MCI
C] His property value goes up and he can sell his property at a higher price if he decides to sell it.

That said, besides the MCI, many greedy landlords also routinely do repairs that aren't needed in apartments that have been vacated, so that they can then raise the rent for that particular unit more than what is what is allowed otherwise.

I know of many-a-greedy landlords who have gutted perfectly fine apartments in old NYC buildings and gotten rid of wonderful and perfectly working fixtures in those apartments in order to replace them with cheap garbage from Home Depot and then have jacked up the price of said apartment, thus undermining Rent Stabilization.
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.


Closed Thread



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
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