Bill de Blasio on private property

[woolfe9998]

It is stupid and its most likely hyperbole but if you are offended by it then you probably need thicker skin or should stay away from the internet. The fact of the matter is that people get emotional when it comes to politics, sometimes that emotion is justified, many times it is not. If it really bothers you what people think then you should either try to understand their point of view or explain your view better.

Basically, don't take it personal.

Why would I take it personally? It's actually never happened to me, strangely enough. I've been criticized and disagreed with, sure. That is fine. I've never had anyone suggest I'm a closeted conservative because I don't always agree with everyone on the left. The closest thing I've experienced is Agent saying I carry water for the Klan, an accusation which, if anything, I find amusing.

I have, however, seen it happen to others on many occasions. I just think it's ridiculous that there are people who evidently cannot handle being disagreed with and feel the need to lash out with totally unsupported accusations. Those are the people who are too thin skinned.

 

[nexus5rocks]

Meanwhile he hikes rents on his tenants.
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york...tenants-urging-price-freeze-article-1.3065786

 

[OutHouse]

You don't like it, don't live in NYC. No one's fucking forcing you.

lol so that is a strawman to you? damn u dumb

 

[Indus]

lol so that is a strawman to you? damn u dumb

Lol a dumb fuck conservaterrorist calling me dumb is a badge of honor. Means I'm a fucking genius.

 

[Phynaz]

Everywhere.

Not really. I was thinking more of the Jews in the '30s or Blacks in the '60s.

 

[WelshBloke]

I'm not going to pretend that London is cheap, I paid near £4 million for my house but I'll get twice that today. It's a matter of what you can afford though and it's not NYC, it's everywhere.

My wife sold her apartment in Toronto last year for $2 million.

Neither of us started out with any kind of money, I was living in a ghetto outside London and had to straighten myself out. I've had my share of stories that I don't want to tell but the thing is, I got out of there and I did what I needed to do to make it back into the streets of London. I bought my dream house cash, literally cash as in a suitcase of money.

Why? I could have deposited it or we could have done the transaction in another way but when I was 13 I dreamt up that dream and I fucking did it.

I don't see how devaluing my property that I paid $4 million for is fair to me or anyone else, they can do what I did or they can't, if they can't they can go live elsewhere, you do not HAVE to live there.

I see a huge problem, if you start devaluing properties that people like me worked our entire lives to afford then you can go fuck yourself.

You know what will devalue your property?

When the bit of the city that you live in whithers and dies because teachers, nurses, policemen, shop owners, etc, etc can't afford to live in it.

 

[senseamp]

Meanwhile he hikes rents on his tenants.
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york...tenants-urging-price-freeze-article-1.3065786

2.5% per year from the depth of financial crisis to booming last year of Obama economy. More than reasonable. Any renter in NY would want a landlord like that.

 

[realibrad]

You know what will devalue your property?

When the bit of the city that you live in whithers and dies because teachers, nurses, policemen, shop owners, etc, etc can't afford to live in it.

Has that ever happened?

 

[zinfamous]

This is only scary if you're the type of person that fundamentally believes that social security and universal healthcare represent an inevitable decline towards Stalinism, the Gulag, and Armageddon.

 

[Phynaz]

You know what will devalue your property?

When the bit of the city that you live in whithers and dies because teachers, nurses, policemen, shop owners, etc, etc can't afford to live in it.

Hasn't happened in Silicon Valley. Have you seen the price of real estate in San Francisco?

AVERAGE HOME VALUES BY CITY

• San Francisco $1,104,000
• Belvedere $3,558,000
• Berkeley $986,400
• Brisbane $807,700
• Daly City $799,300
• Mill Valley $1,418,300
• Oakland $619,800
• Richmond $406,800
• Sausalito $1,203,400
• Tiburon $2,360,800

 

[realibrad]

This is only scary if you're the type of person that fundamentally believes that social security and universal healthcare represent an inevitable decline towards Stalinism, the Gulag, and Armageddon.

So no room in between? Arguably we have historical examples and economic theory to back up why doing what he is suggesting is a bad idea. Can there not be a which against something like this, but not a fear of the extreme?

 

[Jhhnn]

So no room in between? Arguably we have historical examples and economic theory to back up why doing what he is suggesting is a bad idea. Can there not be a which against something like this, but not a fear of the extreme?

Cite the historical examples & economic theory.

 

[realibrad]

Cite the historical examples & economic theory.

Basic economics, but sure.

Here is Paul Krugman.

http://www.nytimes.com/2000/06/07/opinion/reckonings-a-rent-affair.html

The analysis of rent control is among the best-understood issues in all of economics, and -- among economists, anyway -- one of the least controversial. In 1992 a poll of the American Economic Association found 93 percent of its members agreeing that ''a ceiling on rents reduces the quality and quantity of housing.'' Almost every freshman-level textbook contains a case study on rent control, using its known adverse side effects to illustrate the principles of supply and demand. Sky-high rents on uncontrolled apartments, because desperate renters have nowhere to go -- and the absence of new apartment construction, despite those high rents, because landlords fear that controls will be extended? Predictable. Bitter relations between tenants and landlords, with an arms race between ever-more ingenious strategies to force tenants out -- what yesterday's article oddly described as ''free-market horror stories'' -- and constantly proliferating regulations designed to block those strategies? Predictable.

He is pretty far left too.

Ultimately what the Mayor wants it to force what he considers affordable housing in a high demand space. That will mean that demand will always be outdone by supply. The reason prices are so high is because demand is so high. Lowing the entry cost will not lower demand, but raise it. The cost of trying to meet the demand will quickly be exceeded and the profit margins quickly vanish. That means supply will stop as the cost of building low income housing is limited by the revenues that can be collected.

Here is a great article on this.

http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/RentControl.html

Economists are virtually unanimous in concluding that rent controls are destructive. In a 1990 poll of 464 economists published in the May 1992 issue of the American Economic Review, 93 percent of U.S. respondents agreed, either completely or with provisos, that “a ceiling on rents reduces the quantity and quality of housing available.”

 

[ivwshane]

So no room in between? Arguably we have historical examples and economic theory to back up why doing what he is suggesting is a bad idea. Can there not be a which against something like this, but not a fear of the extreme?

Are there?


Nevermind, I see what you are referring to now.

 

[realibrad]

Are there?


Nevermind, I see what you are referring to now.

Hey, points for that. Not joking.

 

[Jhhnn]

Basic economics, but sure.

Here is Paul Krugman.

http://www.nytimes.com/2000/06/07/opinion/reckonings-a-rent-affair.html



He is pretty far left too.

Ultimately what the Mayor wants it to force what he considers affordable housing in a high demand space. That will mean that demand will always be outdone by supply. The reason prices are so high is because demand is so high. Lowing the entry cost will not lower demand, but raise it. The cost of trying to meet the demand will quickly be exceeded and the profit margins quickly vanish. That means supply will stop as the cost of building low income housing is limited by the revenues that can be collected.

Here is a great article on this.

http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/RentControl.html

DeBlasio wasn't even talking about rent control but rather development of $2M+ ownership units. He decried development of high end units over more affordable units. His comments on rent were peripheral.

 

[realibrad]

DeBlasio wasn't even talking about rent control but rather development of $2M+ ownership units. He decried development of high end units over more affordable units. His comments on rent were peripheral.

This is complicated, but not that complicated.

I’ll give you an example. I was down one day on Varick Street, somewhere close to Canal, and there was a big sign out front of a new condo saying, “Units start at $2 million.” And that just drives people stark raving mad in this city, because that kind of development is clearly not for everyday people. It’s almost like it’s being flaunted. Look, if I had my druthers, the city government would determine every single plot of land, how development would proceed. And there would be very stringent requirements around income levels and rents. That’s a world I’d love to see, and I think what we have, in this city at least, are people who would love to have the New Deal back, on one level. They’d love to have a very, very powerful government, including a federal government, involved in directly addressing their day-to-day reality.

Try and follow. There is a border of the city. Given that border, deciding what should be built, and the price of rent and or value of the units would be regulated. That by definition is a price control. A price control in terms of housing is known as rent control. So, if you require that one cheaper thing be built and not a more expensive thing, you are controlling the price of goods in that market. As demand is already high (why else would rent be so high, econ 101) and you build cheap units, demand will be almost unlimited and no amount of units could ever fill the demand given the space constraints.

Does that clear it up for you?

 

[Jhhnn]

This is complicated, but not that complicated.



Try and follow. There is a border of the city. Given that border, deciding what should be built, and the price of rent and or value of the units would be regulated. That by definition is a price control. A price control in terms of housing is known as rent control. So, if you require that one cheaper thing be built and not a more expensive thing, you are controlling the price of goods in that market. As demand is already high (why else would rent be so high, econ 101) and you build cheap units, demand will be almost unlimited and no amount of units could ever fill the demand given the space constraints.

Does that clear it up for you?

Regulating the size & price of new construction units is not rent control. Anybody who buys one can rent it at whatever the market will bear. You just end up with more smaller units at a lower rent price point.

Cities all over America have different zoning for different areas. NYC is peculiar in that demand for units of any price range is very high. What DeBlasio wants in no way inhibits construction, because the developer can readily sell $700K units more easily than $2M units.

 

[fskimospy]

Regulating the size & price of new construction units is not rent control. Anybody who buys one can rent it at whatever the market will bear. You just end up with more smaller units at a lower rent price point.

Cities all over America have different zoning for different areas. NYC is peculiar in that demand for units of any price range is very high. What DeBlasio wants in no way inhibits construction, because the developer can readily sell $700K units more easily than $2M units.

This is not accurate. The units they are talking about are rentals and the rent the developer can charge is very much controlled. Someone can absolutely not buy it and then rent it at market rates.

Additionally, limiting what people can charge for units absolutely limits construction because it changes what developments will be profitable. This is somewhat mitigated by the fact that these are part and parcel with a tax break but that's an entirely separate issue.

Rent control is dumb. It should be done away with, so long as stupid zoning restrictions are done away with too.

 

[realibrad]

Regulating the size & price of new construction units is not rent control. Anybody who buys one can rent it at whatever the market will bear. You just end up with more smaller units at a lower rent price point.

Cities all over America have different zoning for different areas. NYC is peculiar in that demand for units of any price range is very high. What DeBlasio wants in no way inhibits construction, because the developer can readily sell $700K units more easily than $2M units.

Oh, how silly of me. Also, why is it that demand for cheaper units is very high, yet nobody is building them? If it were as simple as people building smaller cheaper units, and that is not stopped buy larger more expensive units, then why is there not construction of said units? Or perhaps, just maybe, land is limited and the cost of building those smaller cheaper units is not worth the time when larger more expensive ones would be built. If land were unlimited, you would simply build cheaper ones and expensive ones, yet that is not what is happening.

We can only wonder as to why...

Or you know, we could look at reality and realize that what spy and I have said is relevant. Whichever.

 

[Jhhnn]

Oh, how silly of me. Also, why is it that demand for cheaper units is very high, yet nobody is building them? If it were as simple as people building smaller cheaper units, and that is not stopped buy larger more expensive units, then why is there not construction of said units? Or perhaps, just maybe, land is limited and the cost of building those smaller cheaper units is not worth the time when larger more expensive ones would be built. If land were unlimited, you would simply build cheaper ones and expensive ones, yet that is not what is happening.

We can only wonder as to why...

Or you know, we could look at reality and realize that what spy and I have said is relevant. Whichever.

There's simply greater profit for developers in higher end construction, so that's what they'll do in NYC when they can. It doesn't mean that they won't make money selling more moderate priced stuff as DeBlasio suggests.

 

[fskimospy]

There's simply greater profit for developers in higher end construction, so that's what they'll do in NYC when they can. It doesn't mean that they won't make money selling more moderate priced stuff as DeBlasio suggests.

What dollar figure do you define as 'more moderate'?