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.
Statement from Speaker Silver on the Rent Guidelines Board Vote to Allow Increase for Rent Stabilized Tenants
June 25, 2010
I am very disappointed that the New York City Rent Guidelines Board ignored the pleas of tenants and elected officials, including myself, to freeze increases this year on hard-working New Yorkers who are already struggling in a difficult economy. Passing this additional financial burden onto tenants is unfair and will likely result in many families being priced out of their neighborhoods. New York City’s board should have followed the example of the Nassau and Westchester county boards, which voted to protect their affordable housing by not raising rents this year.
The rest of the country has long eliminated rent controls, it is long, long past time NYC did as well.
What's baffles the mind about rent stabilization is, how is it OK for Landlords to pay MARKET prices on heating oil, utilities, supplies, etc. but it's NOT OK for Landlords to collect MARKET rents??? What sense does that make??? Don't politicians and everyone else with a brain see a discrepancy here??? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that paying MARKET EXPENSES while collect BELOW MARKET RENTS (due to RS restrictions) is a recipe for disaster.
Bingo.
A rational adult can now understand why the rest of the country long ago ceased rent controls...
Yes, housing experts across the board have blasted rent controls as being a disaster for housing. The only group in the country that still supports it is NYC politicians, for political reasons that are obvious. To oppose rent control is political suicde in NYC. They would never get past the primary.
But the terrible damage that the rent regulation system has done over the decades, and is still doing, is not the point of this thread. The point is that the liberal Democratic establishment in the State legislature is putting forth a bill which is pitching for the wealthy. And doing it with government funds extracted from your taxes and mine.
Furthermore, they're doing it with the support of their liberal base. Or at least it seems so from the public reaction and reaction on this forum, or lack of it. I'm a registered Democrat and I'm appalled. The Silver-Lopez liberal (and corrupt) clique in Albany certainly doesn't represent me.
It's shocking....but even moreso it's sad.
Why should our tax dollars be used to pay for the administrative monstrosity called rent stabilization so that our government can force rent subsidies for the rich? Anyone with this income or anyone who can afford a $2700 apartment doesn't need government help. I'm writing my state senator to oppose this craziness.
Why should my tax dollars be used to subsidize rent for anyone? I don't care how poor or rich they are. I have worked hard in life, paid for a lot of education, etc to get to where I am today and be able to afford my $2300 apartment. Like everything else any type of rent subsidies should be temporary to encourage people to raise their living standards. People have no incentive to improve their situation when my tax dollars are paying for their rent, their food, welfare, their kids healthcare, and getting them $5,000 tax refunds. What if I want a $4,000 apartment and cannot afford it? Should someone be helping me pay for it?
Do not mis-interpret me. I know that anyone can go through hard times in life- some of my relatives have been through it. I don't mind my tax dollars going to help out someone in need due to circumstances beyond their control while they try to improve their situation, but it should not be permanent.
Why should my tax dollars be used to subsidize rent for anyone? I don't care how poor or rich they are. I have worked hard in life, paid for a lot of education, etc to get to where I am today and be able to afford my $2300 apartment. Like everything else any type of rent subsidies should be temporary to encourage people to raise their living standards. People have no incentive to improve their situation when my tax dollars are paying for their rent, their food, welfare, their kids healthcare, and getting them $5,000 tax refunds. What if I want a $4,000 apartment and cannot afford it? Should someone be helping me pay for it?
Do not mis-interpret me. I know that anyone can go through hard times in life- some of my relatives have been through it. I don't mind my tax dollars going to help out someone in need due to circumstances beyond their control while they try to improve their situation, but it should not be permanent.
I agree with you 100%.
The rent regulation monstrosity, with its hugh consequences for our tax dollars, should be abolished. How that should happen, and what methods should be used to accomplish it, is a matter for debate and for another thread.
My purpose in creating this thread was to point out the sheer hypocrisy of the Democratic establishment in New York. They are always railing against the use of government to aid the rich, ascribing that trait to Republicans, and here they are, blatantly doing what they claim they staunchly oppose. What gaul!
Why are they pushing rent control for the rich? Well, the low rent pro-regulation lobby is very powerful in many NYC legislative districts, especially in Manhattan and including Silver's district. Many of these Manhattan tenants are quite well-off. They are important contributors to the campaigns of the politicians and to the lobby.
In addition, there are activists who are so far ideologically to the left that they would like to see complete government control of housing. Some parts of Manhattan make San Francisco seem right wing.
The pro-regulation push for the rich is being led by Manhattan Dems with a few others like the crook Lopez.
My hope, and even expectation, was that traditional Democrats would be incensed by such a clear diversion from, and violation of, Democratic principles. I still have that hope.
Why should our tax dollars be used to pay for the administrative monstrosity called rent stabilization so that our government can force rent subsidies for the rich? Anyone with this income or anyone who can afford a $2700 apartment doesn't need government help. I'm writing my state senator to oppose this craziness.
Unfortunately, this needs to be updated:
"It would raise the thresholds for so-called high-income decontrol to $3,000 in monthly rent and $300,000 in annual income."
Yup. It's now official. A quarter mil wasn't high enough. Silver and his corrupt Housing Committee chairman, Vito Lopez (currently under indictment), backed by their large clique of liberal Democrats, passed an omnibus bill of absolutely Draconian measures which will in effect kill the gradual process of decontrol. Expanding rent controls to more of the rich is just one of many parts of the bill. Another would revert the status of decontrolled apartments and bring them back into the regulation system.
In other words, the bill would turn the clock back 20 years. We can only hope that those with sanity will block it.
HCR also oversees approximately 34,000 rent controlled units, primarily in New York City. However, the owners of rent controlled apartments are not required to register with the agency, and so that figure represents a best estimate.
OK, a correction. The Democrats did not pass legislation to extend the reach of government to endow the benefits of rent controls to those bringing in a $quarter million. They officially upped it to $$$300,000! That,s right, your tax dollars and mine paying for our government to extend price controls to those among the wealthiest in this city.
A question for the libs: Why is it that when it comes to increasing taxes, these people are the filthy "rich", but when it comes to rent control they're just little ol' middle class folks struggling to get by? They're part of the battle against those mean, greedy wolves called landlords, most of whom make less income than these sponging tenants.
What hypocrisy! Will there be even one attempt to rationalize this?
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.
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.
The point of the thread
I agree with you 100%.
