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.
every industry has a watch dog but every agency doesnt cap things so prices dont float with markets or were so artificially manipulated that prices have fallen behind reality.
i cant think of one industry that tells you once you have a customer or client you can never get rid of them as a customer, can you?
I never said the system was perfect...I'm just against its abolishment. I believe that it can be tweaked to suit the financial concerns of LLs while provide affordable rents for tenants.
__________________
"The man who sleeps on the floor, can never fall out of bed." -Martin Lawrence
I would prefer to get rid of the system in its entirety. We can have a watchdog group..but why do we need everything else? But with the small changes I recommended, I think keeping the system would be fine.
I never said the system was perfect...I'm just against its abolishment. I believe that it can be tweaked to suit the financial concerns of LLs while provide affordable rents for tenants.
So what do you propose? You can't just say RS can stay but can be tweaked without offering HOW it should be tweaked. In my opinion, NYC in general would be a better city without Rent Stabilization for numerous reasons previously explained.
Agreed math..and I think a reasonable person would agree with those changes as well. Like I said, a 10 year maximum lease at which time a Landlord can opt not to renew. Unreasonable? Also, no cap on rents, but if you do cap rents, then LLs should get either expenses capped in some way, or credits/refunds for electric, heating oil/gas etc to offset the increases in expenses. Unreasonable?
I love it when I see people who normally complain about everything BIG GOVERNMENT does but then turn around on a dime whenever it means more money in their pockets. Too funny (and all TOO COMMON.)
Oh PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE let the Supreme Court define all City and State regualtions.
When you buy a building, you see the rent roll BEFORE signing anything. If you know the building you're interested in is under rent stabilization laws and you don't want that, then don't buy the building! You get all the tax perks that RS/RC bring you but you complain about RS/RC tenants. Please.
Wait.... do I hear it?.... Hold on.... yep, there it is: The LLs war cry: "Oh, I LOSE money every month. Every month, I come out behind." What a freaking joke that is. If you're "losing money" every month, then you are either: 1. A moron with no management skills or 2. A moron who can't keep track of his own money.
very few knowledgable people will buy rent stabilized buildings without good solid cash flow . there are very few of those deals going on because for the most part unless the building had heavy turnover and is market rate it doesnt exist.
as i said in earlier posts landlords were duped many many years ago with promises of fair rent increases and then were lied too and for those people they cant unload these buildings with poor cash flow now.. many owe more than they are worth as expenses picked up and rents lagged so bad in past that today even with better increases they cant catch up. .
its like trying to get the lid back on a can of tuna and you cant stop the stink.
the damage done decades ago has left so many buildings today with poor cash flow and they cant get caught up. .
they cant unload these buildings with poor cash flow now
Here's how it's done.
1. Call a realtor specializing in apartment buildings.
2. Ask for a certain amount
3. Negotiate for the best price you can get
4. SELL!
This is not rocket science. It's called SELLING AT THE MARKET...you guys are well versed in the term MARKET PRICE, no?
It is also actual wages earned, what a person has left to survive, in view of the commute cost.
For example, a waiter is "work for hire," justified or not, which means that s/he bears the enormous burden of self-employment tax, and then the penalties and "failure to pay fee" levied by the IRS in the event, very common, that the person needs to use ALL of the wages earned just to survive and literally cannot pay their quarterly tax amount.
I see this more every day, and not just for wait staff. It is also the case for basically full-time administrative assistants and many more occupations, people who have the misfortune of ending up at a company whose leadership decides, in order to retain their own salaries (i.e., to avoid taking a hit themselves in the poor economy), to claim as much of the help as they can get away with as 1099 employees. The growing "work-for-hire" debacle will probably get much more discussion and notice in the year to come.
This, setting aside the fact of no health benefits or anything else.
Oh, and, I know people with degrees who are living like this, given the dearth of jobs.
Waiters are not independent contractors. My employer paid half of the FICA tax.
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.
