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.
So, because I'm a far-Left but non-crony Democrat, I'm comfortable pointing out that rent regulation needs to go, stat. Increase the supply and let the middle class back into Manhattan.
And the great majority of housing economists, including the liberal ones like Paul Krugman of the NY Times, agree with you. 93% of housing economists, from left to right, agree with the statement "rent regulation is destructive to both the quality and quantity of housing".
The problem is that we're dealing with a political animal. Rent regulation has nothing to do with good housing economics. And most of the politicians who vote for this lousy system are well aware of this. But any Democrat who even utters a peep of criticism of RR will be targeted by the well-oiled, powerful RR lobby. He or she would not survive the next primary.
So sad for the majority of the population of both the state and city. About 15 years ago, somehow RR was put up as a state referendum in Massachusetts. As a result the pros and cons were publicly debated. In other words, the light of day was finally shed on how the system hurt the majority of the population, and benefited a privileged minority. Needless to say, RR was roundly defeated.
Why do they have to live in NYC? Lots of other much cheaper places to live around the country.
And, as I said before, just because the market rent for an apartment isn't above the regulated rent, it doesn't mean landlords wouldn't make use of the ability to rework their properties to make the worth a higher rent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NyWriterdude
So are you saying you want these poor people put to death by execution squads? You do realize that they have to live somewhere. If the laws expired that would only affect prime areas near job centers. The Bronx and East Brooklyn would remain as ghetto as ever. As time goes by more poor will shift to the fringes of the city and the suburbs. But they will still be with us.
So are you saying you want these poor people put to death by execution squads? You do realize that they have to live somewhere. If the laws expired that would only affect prime areas near job centers. The Bronx and East Brooklyn would remain as ghetto as ever. As time goes by more poor will shift to the fringes of the city and the suburbs. But they will still be with us.
They don't -HAVE- to live in NYC, and some of them would learn quickly that many other places in the US would better suit them.
I'm not advocating for or against that, merely a point to bring up- what MAY happen is a necessary increase in salaries, especially at the lower end of the spectrum in New York City.
So many jobs in NYC pay so far below the cost of living and you find those positions taken by those who can afford to live on their families wealth, or those who can afford to stay in because they're in a -good- apartment situation.
When (and hypothetically -if-) the market takes over the same market would start to penetrate many businesses. They'd either have to pay up or the employees can no longer feasibly afford to live in or near New York. Landlords and taxpayers have no business subsidizing these underpaid employees.
I'm aghast when i see careers in Publishing, Editing, and museum work require a degree yet pay under 40K. Without any significant promise of increases, who would want to exist on that -IF- they had to also pay market rents.
So are you saying you want these poor people put to death by execution squads? You do realize that they have to live somewhere. If the laws expired that would only affect prime areas near job centers. The Bronx and East Brooklyn would remain as ghetto as ever. As time goes by more poor will shift to the fringes of the city and the suburbs. But they will still be with us.
No one said to put them to death. Don't be silly.
My point is, take for example Washington Heights. The buildings in Washington Heights are not projects like you see in east Harlem, they are old pre-war buildings that are subject to the RS law.
We can all agree that one of the undesirable things about Washington Heights particularly in the summer is loud a** Dominicans loitering in the street at all hours of the night playing Bachata, Merengue and Reggaeton.
Very inconsiderate to the other residents who wish to enjoy their apartment in a peaceful manner wouldn't you say?
Under the status quo, these unruly people live in RS apartments which entitles them to a guaranteed lease renewal despite their unruly behavior. This means that despite the Landlord's deepest desire to remove these loud people from the building, he legally can't because they are protected by the RS law giving them entitlement to their apartment with forever lease renewals.
Now, assume the RS law does not get renewed, once the leases of these RS tenants expires, the landlord is finally able to remove these unruly tenants by simply not renewing their lease as the Landlord is no longer under any obligation to renew the tenant's lease like before.
As a result of finally having the ability to NOT renew leases, the Landlord can finally clean up his building from all the unruly people that created a nuisance. Multiple this by other Landlords following suit and not renewing leases from problematic tenants, and you can easily see how quickly the "hood" can be transformed into a nice quiet neighborhood in a fraction of the time it would take under the RS law which hamper growth and gives the tenant the right to lease renewals. This is all accomplished by simply allowing Landlords the power to not renew leases.
Well these are just proposals. So it is still hard to tell what actually be finally passed into law.
However it *does* show what one and others have said all along; the Republican controlled senate is looking for something and we now know some of their wish list.
As specifically stated upthread the property tax cap law means as much to upstate New York politicians as RS to downstate/NYC. One year is *NOT* a very long period of time and it is an election year for Albany.
If the Republican senate allows RS to die I shouldn't think the Democratic controlled assembly is going to be in a good mood in just several months to renew and make permanent anything that benefits the former.
I'm aghast when i see careers in Publishing, Editing, and museum work require a degree yet pay under 40K. Without any significant promise of increases, who would want to exist on that -IF- they had to also pay market rents.
Exactly the reason they should increase protections and expand regulation, particularly in the sense of supervision of landlords and careful review of anything proposed for deregulation.
The applicants to those jobs have gone downhill - exponentially - quality-wise in inverse relationship to family wealth. It is indeed the case that those positions are being filled by people who can afford it. You may not be involved in anything related but I assure you that it is both ugly and discouraging to watch once creative professions simply die.
In another area, actually hit far worse ... I do realize that many of you understand a specifically good artist to be someone who is wealthy, for instance bankrolled by a trust fund. News flash - not true at all. The artists who now come to New York have money, and few of them have much else.
Ironically, the predatory tendencies will actually destroy the prey. Eventually, outside the wealthy, there will only be vapid-faced transplants and welfare folk, everyone talented and interesting having left or not come at all. The developers do not mind because like the people behind the finance crises they will take their ill-gotten gains with them when they walk away.
Exactly the reason they should increase protections and expand regulation, particularly in the sense of supervision of landlords and careful review of anything proposed for deregulation.
The applicants to those jobs have gone downhill - exponentially - quality-wise in inverse relationship to family wealth. It is indeed the case that those positions are being filled by people who can afford it. You may not be involved in anything related but I assure you that it is both ugly and discouraging to watch once creative professions simply die.
In another area, actually hit far worse ... I do realize that many of you understand a specifically good artist to be someone who is wealthy, for instance bankrolled by a trust fund. News flash - not true at all.
it's not a reason to regulate everything. It is a reason to let the market decide.
The landlords and taxpayers shouldn't have to subsidize those to live there.
If NYC only wishes to employ those not needing employment, so be it.
the quality of applicants will eventually show and those industries may shift elsewhere or pony up the money necessary.
I've absolutely seen what you describe and it's quite atrocious and discouraging, however it's worse to know that others can afford to take a job because their rent is half of what yours is for no compelling reason whatsoever.
Why do they have to live in NYC? Lots of other much cheaper places to live around the country.
And, as I said before, just because the market rent for an apartment isn't above the regulated rent, it doesn't mean landlords wouldn't make use of the ability to rework their properties to make the worth a higher rent.
Why don't you just advocate killing them? Throwing them in the ocean.
Number 1: No community wants all of the Bronx or ghetto Brooklyn dumped onto them. You're speaking of MILLIONS of people.
Number 2: As many of these people don't drive, will be elderly, ill, or just plai unskilled any communities taking in large numbers of them will have to substantially increase their welfare spending and therefore their tax rate.
As far as it being cheaper to live in other parts of the country, not when you have no money. Moving poor people to another location just exports poverty.
Chicago demolished it's housing projects and moved people out. But the new communities they were moved in became new ghettoes.
So if you want these ghettos to disappear you'd have to do ghetto liquidation like the Nazis did.
My point is, take for example Washington Heights. The buildings in Washington Heights are not projects like you see in east Harlem, they are old pre-war buildings that are subject to the RS law.
We can all agree that one of the undesirable things about Washington Heights particularly in the summer is loud a** Dominicans loitering in the street at all hours of the night playing Bachata, Merengue and Reggaeton.
Very inconsiderate to the other residents who wish to enjoy their apartment in a peaceful manner wouldn't you say?
Under the status quo, these unruly people live in RS apartments which entitles them to a guaranteed lease renewal despite their unruly behavior. This means that despite the Landlord's deepest desire to remove these loud people from the building, he legally can't because they are protected by the RS law giving them entitlement to their apartment with forever lease renewals.
Now, assume the RS law does not get renewed, once the leases of these RS tenants expires, the landlord is finally able to remove these unruly tenants by simply not renewing their lease as the Landlord is no longer under any obligation to renew the tenant's lease like before.
As a result of finally having the ability to NOT renew leases, the Landlord can finally clean up his building from all the unruly people that created a nuisance. Multiple this by other Landlords following suit and not renewing leases from problematic tenants, and you can easily see how quickly the "hood" can be transformed into a nice quiet neighborhood in a fraction of the time it would take under the RS law which hamper growth and gives the tenant the right to lease renewals. This is all accomplished by simply allowing Landlords the power to not renew leases.
You haven't mentioned where these displaced loud Dominicans are going to live. Do you want them six feet under? Dumped in the Hudson River? In the ocean?
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.