U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Los Angeles
 [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)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 05-19-2008, 01:43 PM
 
27,076 posts, read 54,292,960 times
Reputation: 21277

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by mommabear2 View Post
Believe it or not, there's a psychological market cap on rents. Landlords can't charge ridiculous amounts on rent if the population can't afford it... it's bad business. Not to mention the fact that if rents get too high, renters have the option of buying or moving out of the city completely if the rents are equivalent (or exceed) a mortgage payment.
Exactly... Rents are market driven, except in the 15 cities with Rent Control.

If it costs more to rent than buy... the shift will be away from Rentals and towards Home ownership.

Even with Rent Control, the City-Data.com Forums are full of Posts from people leaving because CA is a "High Cost" State... this is because Rent Control makes no distinction based on income...

 
Old 05-19-2008, 02:10 PM
 
81 posts, read 311,721 times
Reputation: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by laysayfair View Post
I just read that Allistair Cooke, Kim Alexis (supermodel) and Carly Simon all had rent-controlled apts in New York in the same building. Carly Simons' was 2 floors and 11 rooms and her last rent was 3000.00 a month and she'd had it for more than 20 years.
They said its market price in 1996 would have been $15,000 a month. What a racket!
I think it is a little much to believe that anyone would pay only $3,000 a month for that much space in New York, even if they bought it 20 years ago. $3,000 a month is what single apartments in Manhattan are renting for these days.
 
Old 05-19-2008, 02:49 PM
 
Location: CA
2,464 posts, read 5,927,355 times
Reputation: 2606
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultrarunner View Post
Exactly... Rents are market driven, except in the 15 cities with Rent Control.

If it costs more to rent than buy... the shift will be away from Rentals and towards Home ownership.

Even with Rent Control, the City-Data.com Forums are full of Posts from people leaving because CA is a "High Cost" State... this is because Rent Control makes no distinction based on income...
I've read about people leaving CA all the time because of the cost. Rent control helps SOME people but like you said... it applies to everyone, whether a renter is making 120K or 20K. Whenever the government tries to help one segment of the population, unintended consequences ALWAYS happens.

I can see how people would be irritated w/ getting nicked w/ a double digit rent increase and I believe in renter's rights but I don't believe in a system that allows people to legally sponge off others for DECADES. When a single family home is more valuable than a rent controlled apartment building (that's filled with tenants paying below market rates) there's something wrong with that picture.

btw, Ultrarunner. I like your style I can't give you anymore reps... I have to spread it around...

Last edited by mommabear2; 05-19-2008 at 02:54 PM.. Reason: giving props to ultrarunner...
 
Old 05-19-2008, 04:30 PM
 
3,413 posts, read 6,559,096 times
Reputation: 1430
Quote:
Originally Posted by xyzxyz View Post
I think it is a little much to believe that anyone would pay only $3,000 a month for that much space in New York, even if they bought it 20 years ago. $3,000 a month is what single apartments in Manhattan are renting for these days.
Yes, that's the whole point. Just google "Carly Simon" and "rent control". All the New Yorkers know about it. It was a big scandal. John Stossel did an investigative report on it.

Last edited by laysayfair; 05-19-2008 at 04:32 PM.. Reason: typo
 
Old 05-19-2008, 05:46 PM
 
11,715 posts, read 36,670,103 times
Reputation: 7522
Quote:
Originally Posted by mommabear2 View Post
I've read about people leaving CA all the time because of the cost. Rent control helps SOME people but like you said... it applies to everyone, whether a renter is making 120K or 20K. Whenever the government tries to help one segment of the population, unintended consequences ALWAYS happens.
So true. Any socialist program helps some, hurts others, and hurts society as a whole because the normally efficient market economy isn't allowed to work. Rent control is a wealth redistribution plan, plain and simple.
 
Old 05-19-2008, 05:52 PM
 
81 posts, read 311,721 times
Reputation: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by laysayfair View Post
Yes, that's the whole point. Just google "Carly Simon" and "rent control". All the New Yorkers know about it. It was a big scandal. John Stossel did an investigative report on it.
Well, I have heard of landlords cutting deals for celebrities so they can stay in the building. It is great advertising to prospective tenants. I live in West Hollywood and the building next to me has two high-profile people living in it. The landlord uses it as selling point, but they have to sign some sort of confidentiality thing that they won't talk to tabloids about it or something.

Remember folks, the rich never pay for anything...that is how they stay rich...
 
Old 05-19-2008, 06:00 PM
 
3,413 posts, read 6,559,096 times
Reputation: 1430
Quote:
Originally Posted by xyzxyz View Post
Well, I have heard of landlords cutting deals for celebrities so they can stay in the building. It is great advertising to prospective tenants. I live in West Hollywood and the building next to me has two high-profile people living in it. The landlord uses it as selling point, but they have to sign some sort of confidentiality thing that they won't talk to tabloids about it or something.

Remember folks, the rich never pay for anything...that is how they stay rich...
You didn't google it, did you? If you had you would know that's not the situation at all. But, maybe you'd rather not know...
 
Old 05-20-2008, 07:03 AM
 
Location: Sherman Oaks, CA
6,302 posts, read 15,776,414 times
Reputation: 8384
Quote:
Originally Posted by mommabear2 View Post
SandyCo - I forgot to mention, my husband and I are actually nice people (and we're landlords... is that an oxymoron?). We have always treated our tenants well and have only raised the rent ONCE in 5 years (even in a rent controlled area). So not every landlord feels the need to price gauge or make an "extra profit."
I think that's wonderful. Do you have any apartments in the San Fernando Valley that you'd like to rent to me?
 
Old 05-20-2008, 07:12 AM
 
Location: Hot Springs, AR
5,612 posts, read 13,802,345 times
Reputation: 3759
Quote:
Originally Posted by mommabear2 View Post
Believe it or not, there's a psychological market cap on rents. Landlords can't charge ridiculous amounts on rent if the population can't afford it... it's bad business. Not to mention the fact that if rents get too high, renters have the option of buying or moving out of the city completely if the rents are equivalent (or exceed) a mortgage payment. This is not rocket science. Landlords DO NOT want a vacant unit - there's time and cost involved to get a new tenant anyway. The goal of any landlord is to make enough to cover expenses and to pay themselves (for taking the financial risk of investing and for working as a landlord) . What is wrong with that?
The problem is that most people can barely afford the rents that are currently being charged. More people have roommates simply because they can't afford the rent. How do landlords respond when they discover that the struggling people are getting together and sharing expenses? They raise the rents. I'm seeing more ads for people renting their living rooms because they can't afford the rent. The sad thing is I know people who choose to pay rent over buying food. Because greedy landlords have put them in a position to choose between eating and having a roof over thier head. And it's easy to say move but landlords have devised a system to make that difficult: make move in costs astronomical so people can't afford to pay rent and save money to move. It might be bad business but when you have people between a rock and a hard place, you can afford to practice bad business. When people are sleeping two to a room and still have to rent out the living room, they can't afford the rent. If rent control goes away, the landlords who have rent controlled units will simply raise the rents on the units they couldn't before and more people will be forced to squeeze more people into thier units. The people who will be hit hardest will be the elderly. Who do you think lives in the lowest priced rent controlled units? And they can barely make it as it is. Their children are currently struggling and now they are going to have to squeeze mom and/or dad in, too? As rents go up, we are going to see more of another growing trend: three or more generations living under one roof. Way to make a profit.
 
Old 05-20-2008, 08:32 AM
 
830 posts, read 2,618,777 times
Reputation: 381
Quote:
Originally Posted by CESpeed View Post
The problem is that most people can barely afford the rents that are currently being charged. More people have roommates simply because they can't afford the rent. How do landlords respond when they discover that the struggling people are getting together and sharing expenses? They raise the rents. I'm seeing more ads for people renting their living rooms because they can't afford the rent. The sad thing is I know people who choose to pay rent over buying food. Because greedy landlords have put them in a position to choose between eating and having a roof over thier head. And it's easy to say move but landlords have devised a system to make that difficult: make move in costs astronomical so people can't afford to pay rent and save money to move. It might be bad business but when you have people between a rock and a hard place, you can afford to practice bad business. When people are sleeping two to a room and still have to rent out the living room, they can't afford the rent. If rent control goes away, the landlords who have rent controlled units will simply raise the rents on the units they couldn't before and more people will be forced to squeeze more people into thier units. The people who will be hit hardest will be the elderly. Who do you think lives in the lowest priced rent controlled units? And they can barely make it as it is. Their children are currently struggling and now they are going to have to squeeze mom and/or dad in, too? As rents go up, we are going to see more of another growing trend: three or more generations living under one roof. Way to make a profit.

That's amazing! I didn't realize people were being forced to live in these apartments. I just can't imagine what it must be like to wake up one day and realize I have no control over my life.
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


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

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 > California > Los Angeles
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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