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.
jeff-
it works both ways
often times the rents in these rent stabalized places are so cheap because the neighborhoods used to be terrible
if not for rent stabilization laws to begin with many of these people would never have signed their leases to begin with, the buildings would be a lot emptier, take longer to fill up and consequnetly without these people living there when the neighborhood better when it sucked, the neighborhoods would continue to be slums and the landlords would never get these crazy rents they are getting.
Im not saying the system is perfect, but if I was lucky enough to have a family member in a rent controlled/stabilized apt and I was able to keep it in the family for the next 100 years I would do so. I dont make the laws.
Yeah I wasn't saying that if you have a rent controlled/stabilized apartment you should give it up. I live in stabilized apartment, and I don't plan on leaving for a long long time.
However what I am saying is that the whole system is screwed up.
yeah but u act like new york city is the only place with "special programs".
and once again i say, i really dont think you have any idea on how much of the city would become unaffordable for the middle class. virtually anything within a 30 minute radius of manhattan. do you know how much displacement that will cause? the rent stabilzation, public housing, section 8, are necessary because they provide this for the lower and middle class. the people that serve you at restaurants, the people that climb into the subway tracks to service them, the people that pump your gas.
i'm not saying they need to live in manhattan, but the outer boros will get hit. and you tell me where they're gonna go? long island, where property tax in some places is rent for the year? what are you gonna do then, pay somebody at mcdonalds $75K just so he can afford to buy a house? well say goodbye to mcdonalds in nyc then because i know of nobody that can afford a "market rate" apartment on a mcdonalds salary, unless they're a regional manager. matter of fact, say goodbye to most of retail, unless you want to set up a system where you just hire college kids for every retail store in nyc and recycle them after they get their B.A.
both of you live in rent stabilized buildings and cry that the system's ****ed up, when you should be kissing the ground you walk on that you can afford a rent stabilized apartment. because if there was no rent stabilization program, i would surely like to see where the 2 of you would be living. there used to be a time where in nyc you can move into a rent stabilized apartment for 7 years and save up a nice-size downpayment to move into a home. do you realize how hard that is to do even now? we're all not perfect, but thats usually the idea.
my aunt's lived in her rent stabilized apartment for over 25 years, why should she pay market price if she doesnt want to? you act like the landlord forced a pen into her mouth and made her sign the lease. you tell the old man on smith street that he has to go, even though he's lived there for over 30 years.
Last edited by SeventhFloor; 01-15-2008 at 01:38 PM..
Okay, so a friend of mine has a rent stabilized apartment in a nice part of Manhattan. She's only paying about $1200/mo for a large 2BR place.
She is currently in the process of buying a condo, but doesn't want to give up the rent stabilized apartment (simply b/c it's such a great deal) and she has offered to rent it to me (at the same $1200).
It's in a large building and there's no doorman and the maintenance people work for an outside company so there are different ones all the time so she thinks there's little chance of getting caught.
This would be a huge move for me and, of course, I have reservations about it. If we DO get caught, I'm out on the street with nowhere to go. If we DON'T get caught, I can have a nice apartment and pay less rent.
Any opinions????
oh yeah i totally forgot....maybe you can try adding your name onto the lease, and taking your friend's name off the following year. see if that works. either way, the landlord can only raise your rent 15% max legally. you can go to your borough's DHCR office and request a copy of the rent registration for your apartment to see what the person before you was paying. if its more than 15% you can take the LL to court and get an abatement for your overpaid arrears.
yeah but u act like new york city is the only place with "special programs".
and once again i say, i really dont think you have any idea on how much of the city would become unaffordable for the middle class. virtually anything within a 30 minute radius of manhattan. do you know how much displacement that will cause? the rent stabilzation, public housing, section 8, are necessary because they provide this for the lower and middle class. the people that serve you at restaurants, the people that climb into the subway tracks to service them, the people that pump your gas.
i'm not saying they need to live in manhattan, but the outer boros will get hit. and you tell me where they're gonna go? long island, where property tax in some places is rent for the year? what are you gonna do then, pay somebody at mcdonalds $75K just so he can afford to buy a house? well say goodbye to mcdonalds in nyc then because i know of nobody that can afford a "market rate" apartment on a mcdonalds salary, unless they're a regional manager. matter of fact, say goodbye to most of retail, unless you want to set up a system where you just hire college kids for every retail store in nyc and recycle them after they get their B.A.
both of you live in rent stabilized buildings and cry that the system's ****ed up, when you should be kissing the ground you walk on that you can afford a rent stabilized apartment. because if there was no rent stabilization program, i would surely like to see where the 2 of you would be living. there used to be a time where in nyc you can move into a rent stabilized apartment for 7 years and save up a nice-size downpayment to move into a home. do you realize how hard that is to do even now? we're all not perfect, but thats usually the idea.
my aunt's lived in her rent stabilized apartment for over 25 years, why should she pay market price if she doesnt want to? you act like the landlord forced a pen into her mouth and made her sign the lease. you tell the old man on smith street that he has to go, even though he's lived there for over 30 years.
I bed to differ on some of your points. First off, I don't live in a rent stabilized apartment. I used to but the backhanded dealings of the landlord who was trying to get around the stabilization board made things more trouble than they were worth. Again, I wouldn't have had these issues if my landlord was not constantly trying to finagle his way out from under the thumb of rent stab.
Second, the city will not be any worse off than it is now for the lower and middle class. The landlord will no longer have to make up for the $300/mo a rent controlled tenant is paying by charging everyone else in the building $100 more each month. Everything would level out. The middle class and working class still will not be living on Park Ave and likely not even Manhattan, just as they aren't now.
In a free market everything will work out the kinks of working class wages, housing, etc. Manhattanites will still require places to eat, stores to shop in, janitors to clean the office buildings, and so on. They may get better wages, food may cost more to provide those wages, salaries will go up for people buying that food or those people will move out. All of this will naturally occur without the government deciding that someone working at McD's for $9/hour can live walking distance from their work in Manhattan while a professional making 5 times that has to live a 45 min commute away.
I bed to differ on some of your points. First off, I don't live in a rent stabilized apartment. I used to but the backhanded dealings of the landlord who was trying to get around the stabilization board made things more trouble than they were worth. Again, I wouldn't have had these issues if my landlord was not constantly trying to finagle his way out from under the thumb of rent stab.
ok u got that i assumed u did
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffcon0
Second, the city will not be any worse off than it is now for the lower and middle class. The landlord will no longer have to make up for the $300/mo a rent controlled tenant is paying by charging everyone else in the building $100 more each month. Everything would level out. The middle class and working class still will not be living on Park Ave and likely not even Manhattan, just as they aren't now.
rent controlled tenants are such a minority in the city. and i said it would affect the outer boros, not manhattan.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffcon0
In a free market everything will work out the kinks of working class wages, housing, etc. Manhattanites will still require places to eat, stores to shop in, janitors to clean the office buildings, and so on. They may get better wages, food may cost more to provide those wages, salaries will go up for people buying that food or those people will move out. All of this will naturally occur without the government deciding that someone working at McD's for $9/hour can live walking distance from their work in Manhattan while a professional making 5 times that has to live a 45 min commute away.
i know its a hypothetical situation u just put out there, but how many mcdonalds employees in manhattan live 5 mins walking distance from their job?
i know its a hypothetical situation u just put out there, but how many mcdonalds employees in manhattan live 5 mins walking distance from their job?
I am admittedly using this exaggeration to make a point. The point being that those who make significantly more money in many cases have to live further out than those getting handouts and housing subsidies. Why, as someone who works 10 hours a day and has a decent salary, can I not afford to live in places where people who have no job?
I am going to stop myself as I am getting off course now using examples that are rather extreme to illustrate my point. This is a hot button issue for everyone who lives and works in New York regardless of which side of the argument one falls on.
Okay, so you've heard a second hand story about it.
In all the years I've lived in NYC (and it's been well over 25 years!) and have known people with $60/month rent controlled apartments and people with $900/mo rent stabilized places and people with $1200/mo rent stablized places and I have yet to hear about anyone ever being offered that amount of money to get out. I've heard pleny of *stories* (my friend's cousin, a guy knows a guy, someone in the building up the block, etc), but nothing ever first hand.
I even had a friend who had a great place on CPW that was Rent Controlled. He was paying almost nothing in rent. The management company was trying to turn the building condo as people died, moved out, etc and offered him an insider price so he could purchase the apartment. He declined and that was it. They didn't offer him anything to get out. They just left him be until he decided to (FOOLISHLY) move out and then did renovations and sold the apartment.
This was years ago but I had a friend who moved into the Columbus Circle in the early 70s. The neighborhood became prime and the landlord who is extremely wealthy wanted to turn the bldg into condos. He actually offered my friend $150,000 way back then to move. She refused. He took her to court and lost. Since he was so wealthy, she continued to live alone in that bldg for years. She cleaned the halls herself.
I know of another person who married someone who had a terminal illness so she could have his apartment (it was his suggestion, not hers) - which leads to a roof only accessible by her from her apartment.
In a free market everything will work out the kinks of working class wages, housing, etc.
Hardly.
Rent Control was instituted in the first place because the free market was not meeting the demand for housing after WWII, and landlords were gouging tenants. Instant nullification of rent protections would leave the city devastated. You think there's homeless crisis now? I'd hate to be around to see the first few years of free market rentals in New York City. Calcutta on the Hudson.
As for the low-wage workers who are left with long commutes, at what point is it not worth their while to travel? If they can't live near their jobs, they'll find work near where they live. You gonna spend 4 hours traveling every day and try to take care of a family? Not likely.
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.
