Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(New York Daily News)   NY landlords launch a media campaign to try to convince people that "the rent is too damn low." Good luck with that   (nydailynews.com) divider line 106
    More: Dumbass  
•       •       •

5188 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Jun 2014 at 1:16 PM (32 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



106 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-06-11 02:16:49 PM  

Delta1212: has launched a six-figure ad campaign called, "A rent freeze hurts everyone."

Up next, the "food doesn't cost enough" campaign to be followed by the "don't you think you should be paying a bit more for gasoline?" campaign.


Yeah, good luck with that.


I'm going to be an Executive on the board of "Why poor people should pay for air"
 
2014-06-11 02:16:56 PM  
So much for my snark having legs
 
2014-06-11 02:18:26 PM  

kling_klang_bed: thornhill: kling_klang_bed: I'd have to ask, from people who live in NYC, just how much rent is there.

In Manhattan, a one-bedroom walkup averages our around $2,300. In a place as far north as Hamilton Heights it will be less, and in a hot neighborhood like the west village it will be more. A building with a doorman is probably closer to $2,700. Size is about 550 to 650 square feet.

YIKES! I thought rent in Chicago was high!


Oh, I left out the dreaded broker fee.
 
2014-06-11 02:20:40 PM  

moothemagiccow: Smeggy Smurf: thornhill: kling_klang_bed: I'd have to ask, from people who live in NYC, just how much rent is there.

In Manhattan, a one-bedroom walkup averages our around $2,300. In a place as far north as Hamilton Heights it will be less, and in a hot neighborhood like the west village it will be more. A building with a doorman is probably closer to $2,700. Size is about 550 to 650 square feet.

Where I live $2700 won't rent you a damned thing because nothing is that expensive

http://boise.craigslist.org/search/apa?sale_date=-&minAsk=2700


They must have had one hell of a housing bubble.
 
2014-06-11 02:21:03 PM  

brap: mentula: i have a rent controlled apartment, and it's in quite sound condition

I know this is probably a little rushed and given the fact you don't know me, may come as a shock but....

*gets down on one knee*

Will you marry me?


why *blush* yes! yes i will!
and then we'll move into your place as two persons can't fit in where i live!
 
2014-06-11 02:21:26 PM  

dantheman195: They need to eliminate rent control entirely and allow these units to be market rate, sure the people in rent control apartments will see a rise in rents, but the people who are not part of the lucky club, will see their rent go down.

It would be interesting to see what the free market can do

I bet the end result is better than "government control"


Wouldn't that turn Manhattan into an exclusive millionaire's island?
 
2014-06-11 02:23:25 PM  

medanzig: brap: LineNoise: Rent contol is outdated, and is directly responsible for both inflated rents in people who aren't lucky enough to snag something rent controlled, and substandard conditions in rent controlled apartments. There is a balance to be had somewhere in the middle.

Rent CONTROLed apartments have all but dissapeared.  THere are only about 25,000 that still exist in all of NYC's boroughs.

Rent STABILIZED apartments are the only way I have been able to afford living in the city.  And frankly with 4 to 8 percent annual or bi-annual bumps in rent, it has gotten to the point where it makes more sense for me to buy.  Young people probably don't have that luxury.

My neighborhood has been rezoned and what was a relatively modest three to four story predominately brownstone neighborhood has become a canyon of towers, with rents and sales costs doubling what they replaced.  Everything is dubbed luxury (generally it means a small new space with burnished stainless steel kitchen appliances) and very little affordable housing is being built.  The Atlantic Yard project is kind of what's farked about the latest spate of development in a nutshell.  The whole housing aspect of the new stadium was shiatecanned.

It's a joke.  New York is becoming a sanitized playground for the upperclass.

I mean, how many rich people are there?  Really?  Seems like there is an insane bubble and its popping.


Nope. Not at all.

The others just move to Hoboken or jersey city
 
2014-06-11 02:26:32 PM  

dantheman195: They need to eliminate rent control entirely and allow these units to be market rate, sure the people in rent control apartments will see a rise in rents, but the people who are not part of the lucky club, will see their rent go down.


HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAHAHAHAHHHAAA
 
2014-06-11 02:26:54 PM  

thornhill: kling_klang_bed: thornhill: kling_klang_bed: I'd have to ask, from people who live in NYC, just how much rent is there.

In Manhattan, a one-bedroom walkup averages our around $2,300. In a place as far north as Hamilton Heights it will be less, and in a hot neighborhood like the west village it will be more. A building with a doorman is probably closer to $2,700. Size is about 550 to 650 square feet.

YIKES! I thought rent in Chicago was high!

Oh, I left out the dreaded broker fee.


That would make it another $200?
 
2014-06-11 02:27:01 PM  

brap: My neighborhood has been rezoned and what was a relatively modest three to four story predominately brownstone neighborhood has become a canyon of towers, with rents and sales costs doubling what they replaced. Everything is dubbed luxury (generally it means a small new space with burnished stainless steel kitchen appliances) and very little affordable housing is being built. The Atlantic Yard project is kind of what's farked about the latest spate of development in a nutshell. The whole housing aspect of the new stadium was shiatecanned.

It's a joke. New York is becoming a sanitized playground for the upperclass.


And it's spreading to CT. I had to leave Stamford, and move way up in Norwalk - Stamford has become nohthing but those "luxury" buildings, and then you have a bunch of illegal, cut up house "apartments" which is where the rest of us who can't afford $1800+ a month for a small one-bedroom apartment.

They built a horrendous Trump Tower downtown and every time I drove past it, I wanted to throw up.  The slogan?
"Another RICH living experience."  Way to just say "fark you" to those of us who had lived there for a long time, or people like my boyfriend who was born in Stamford.
 
2014-06-11 02:29:53 PM  

kling_klang_bed: I'd have to ask, from people who live in NYC, just how much rent is there.


The calculus of that question is staggering, factors include:

Neighborhood (safety, hipness, etc)
Quality of building (walkup, elevator, old or new construction, luxury (gym, doorman, onsite laundry) etc
The View (for reals, skyline vs next buildings brick wall)
Recent renovation (appliances & lead paint from the 50s, or granite countertops, new floors and fixtures)
Access to transprtation (subway, xpress bus, parking if you have a car)
Surrounding stores & restaurants (99c shops & run down chinese takeout vs. hip new sushi place and well maintained boutique shops)
Quality of surrounding buildings (can vary wildly block to block)
Ethnic flavor (if thats a thong u care about)
Which borough and how far out from manhattan (or parts of brooklyn now) where 'high' culture exists (museum, theaters, galleries, music venues, etc)
Access to a decent park

And other shiat i'm too lazy to brainstorm right now. But A FARKING LOT.

1br in average alocation of those things, manhattan 2k & up, brkln, 1.5k & up, queens 1.2k & up. Who the fark wants to live in staten isl or bronx, so no clue.
 
2014-06-11 02:29:53 PM  

TheGreatGazoo: Same as rents go up and down anywhere else.  Someone will lower their prices, and the places that cost too much will either go empty or have the rents reduced.



Hasn't happened in the last three decades so I wouldn't bet on it.
 
2014-06-11 02:32:00 PM  

Serious Post on Serious Thread: I'm sure that sounds like paradise to you though.


Thanks for speaking on my behalf! My fingers were getting tired!
 
2014-06-11 02:32:24 PM  

MichiganFTL: Grapple: steamingpile: So their insane or just stupid

*there

/peeve

they're*

/not a peeve, just a jerk


You'se a jerk.
 
2014-06-11 02:34:09 PM  

kling_klang_bed: Oh, I left out the dreaded broker fee.

That would make it another $200?

Usually, they take a month's rent.
So you need 1st month, 1-2 months security, 1 month for the broker, and some places also want last month.

And every landlord finds a way to not return security deposits.
 
2014-06-11 02:34:23 PM  

kling_klang_bed: thornhill: kling_klang_bed: thornhill: kling_klang_bed: I'd have to ask, from people who live in NYC, just how much rent is there.

In Manhattan, a one-bedroom walkup averages our around $2,300. In a place as far north as Hamilton Heights it will be less, and in a hot neighborhood like the west village it will be more. A building with a doorman is probably closer to $2,700. Size is about 550 to 650 square feet.

YIKES! I thought rent in Chicago was high!

Oh, I left out the dreaded broker fee.

That would make it another $200?


15% x first years rent (though you can negotiate it down to 11%)
 
2014-06-11 02:36:21 PM  

Fissile: Serious Post on Serious Thread: No, as in turning the city into a series of uber wealthy coveted enclaves that'll be virtual gated communities. And then outlying pockets of complete and utter squalor for the poors. You'd know this if you had the first clue as to the dynamics of NYC real estate realities.

I'm sure that sounds like paradise to you though.

The Bronx never gets any love.


Heh. Or staten isl, outerlying pockets densly packed jersey shore acolytes.
 
2014-06-11 02:36:25 PM  

Tom_Slick: So basically, any incentive the owner of the property has to improve the property even when making a healthy profit is gone because a re-assessment could put him in the red financially.


Not necessarily. The cost of any major capital improvements to the building can be passed on to each tenant (rent stabilized or not) according to a formula (something like the total spent divided by a number of months and then each apartment's rent can be increased by a percentage of that amount based on how many rooms it has). Likewise, even in a rent stabilized apartment if major improvements are made the cost can be passed along to the tenant in the form of a rent increase.
 
2014-06-11 02:39:03 PM  

thornhill: brap: nocturnal001: I'm not one of those gut reaction "the FREE MARKET!!!" guys but in this case yeah. I don't get why the government is involved at all. If I'm willing to pay your landlord 20% more, isn't that screwing me out of a place to live?

Even with rent stabilization rents have consistently outpaced inflation in NYC.  The market is far from free here.  And yes, I am a firm believer in having mixed-income communities.  It tends to help ease the lines between the haves and have nots rather than turn the city into an island of wealthy people surrounded by slums.  It's part of what I loved about New York.  That said, I am confident that your outlook and developers profits will eventually win out over my hippie-dippy Utopian outlook on what an urban community should look like.

I'd argue that the city's economic health would be even better than it is if rent wasn't such a disproportionate expense for most New Yorkers.


Doesn't that just shift that expense to people who aren't able to find rent controlled housing?
 
2014-06-11 02:40:43 PM  

thornhill: I'd argue that the city's economic health would be even better than it is if rent wasn't such a disproportionate expense for most New Yorkers.


Agreed.  It's true that when New Yorkers get together they almost always at least touch on the topic of real estate.  It's not only a drain on our wallets, it's a drain on our meaningful conversation.
 
2014-06-11 02:42:07 PM  

Cork on Fork: Tom_Slick: So basically, any incentive the owner of the property has to improve the property even when making a healthy profit is gone because a re-assessment could put him in the red financially.

Not necessarily. The cost of any major capital improvements to the building can be passed on to each tenant (rent stabilized or not) according to a formula (something like the total spent divided by a number of months and then each apartment's rent can be increased by a percentage of that amount based on how many rooms it has). Likewise, even in a rent stabilized apartment if major improvements are made the cost can be passed along to the tenant in the form of a rent increase.


Which ensures that the second anyone moves out the landlord will quickly do juuuuuust enough to justify a rent increase while doing no repairs in the other apartments that have long term tenants.  Or maybe that's just our place.
 
2014-06-11 02:42:34 PM  

nocturnal001: thornhill: brap: nocturnal001: I'm not one of those gut reaction "the FREE MARKET!!!" guys but in this case yeah. I don't get why the government is involved at all. If I'm willing to pay your landlord 20% more, isn't that screwing me out of a place to live?

Even with rent stabilization rents have consistently outpaced inflation in NYC.  The market is far from free here.  And yes, I am a firm believer in having mixed-income communities.  It tends to help ease the lines between the haves and have nots rather than turn the city into an island of wealthy people surrounded by slums.  It's part of what I loved about New York.  That said, I am confident that your outlook and developers profits will eventually win out over my hippie-dippy Utopian outlook on what an urban community should look like.

I'd argue that the city's economic health would be even better than it is if rent wasn't such a disproportionate expense for most New Yorkers.

Doesn't that just shift that expense to people who aren't able to find rent controlled housing?


I'm talking broadly about the high coast of rent and reasons for the government to intervene.
 
2014-06-11 02:42:46 PM  
Rent control is stupid.  "Waaaaaaah, I want to live on a tiny island with millions of other people (i.e. demand is high, supply is low) but I don't want to pay the market price for living there so I will get the government to force private property owners to lower their prices."  If your NYC job doesn't pay you enough to live in NYC you either need to get a new job or a new city.
 
2014-06-11 02:43:38 PM  

brap: thornhill: I'd argue that the city's economic health would be even better than it is if rent wasn't such a disproportionate expense for most New Yorkers.

Agreed.  It's true that when New Yorkers get together they almost always at least touch on the topic of real estate.  It's not only a drain on our wallets, it's a drain on our meaningful conversation.


...as well as whatever delay there was on the subway today.
 
2014-06-11 02:44:59 PM  

MichiganFTL: Grapple: steamingpile: So their insane or just stupid

*there

/peeve

they're*

/not a peeve, just a jerk


thatsthejoke.jpg
 
2014-06-11 02:47:48 PM  

Serious Post on Serious Thread: Fissile: Serious Post on Serious Thread: No, as in turning the city into a series of uber wealthy coveted enclaves that'll be virtual gated communities. And then outlying pockets of complete and utter squalor for the poors. You'd know this if you had the first clue as to the dynamics of NYC real estate realities.

I'm sure that sounds like paradise to you though.

The Bronx never gets any love.

Heh. Or staten isl, outerlying pockets densly packed jersey shore acolytes.


Staten Island is New York City's very own piece of Jersey.
 
2014-06-11 02:53:24 PM  

serpent_sky: kling_klang_bed: Oh, I left out the dreaded broker fee.

That would make it another $200?
Usually, they take a month's rent.
So you need 1st month, 1-2 months security, 1 month for the broker, and some places also want last month.

And every landlord finds a way to not return security deposits.


Well, here's my old place in Chicago (the building next to it, owned by the asshole who owned the restaurant):

http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20140514/hyde-park/ribs-n-bibs-closes -h yde-park

So yeah, used to slumlords. I can't even name how many problems I had with that place, and lived there for 10 years.
 
2014-06-11 02:53:46 PM  

LineNoise: brap: I have mixed feelings as not raising my rent further could negatively impact my "God Bless Our Overpriced Hovel Of A Shiateslum" wood-burned plaque business.

Rent control, as it stands now though, is outdated, and is directly responsible for both inflated rents in people who aren't lucky enough to snag something rent controlled, and substandard conditions in rent controlled apartments. There is a balance to be had somewhere in the middle.


Ideally wages would increase with inflation so that people could keep up on rent.  The reason why everyone is so opposed to rent increases is that their wages aren't going up but the costs of living is.
 
2014-06-11 02:55:37 PM  
The city could build its own apartments. If anyone knows how to run a business its NY.
 
2014-06-11 02:55:40 PM  

nocturnal001: Doesn't that just shift that expense to people who aren't able to find rent controlled housing?


In the case of Rent Stabilized buildings, no it doesn't because the buildings were constructed post WWII have pre-mid 1970s and have a minimum number of rentable units (can't remember the exact number) so anyone owning or purchasing such a building will know almost exactly what the rent roll on such an apartment will be.

Also, loopholes have allowed owners to "Reno" such an apartment between tenants and convert it to "market rate" this usually just involves putting in some new bathroom tiles and some kitchen cabinets and/or slapping up a cheap wall to "add" a bedroom.  My building is a good case study.  Since they eased conversion standards the cheapo "renos" in my building that are no longer rent-stabilized demand around $1,000 more a month than my rent and their predecessor's previously regulated rents.  Overall the building is in pretty sad shape.  None of this increased rentroll money has been pumped into share amenities.
 
2014-06-11 02:55:47 PM  

LineNoise: brap: I have mixed feelings as not raising my rent further could negatively impact my "God Bless Our Overpriced Hovel Of A Shiateslum" wood-burned plaque business.

Rent control, as it stands now though, is outdated, and is directly responsible for both inflated rents in people who aren't lucky enough to snag something rent controlled, and substandard conditions in rent controlled apartments. There is a balance to be had somewhere in the middle.


Rent control was a means for the government to force policy on citizens without being responsible for the costs of the program. It is bullshiat.
 
2014-06-11 02:55:52 PM  
Fissile:  Staten Island is New York City's very own piece of Jersey.

Hey!  St. George in Staten Island is an up and coming neighborhood.  I know because they've been saying this since I moved to NYC in 1983!
 
2014-06-11 02:56:06 PM  

Warlordtrooper: LineNoise: brap: I have mixed feelings as not raising my rent further could negatively impact my "God Bless Our Overpriced Hovel Of A Shiateslum" wood-burned plaque business.

Rent control, as it stands now though, is outdated, and is directly responsible for both inflated rents in people who aren't lucky enough to snag something rent controlled, and substandard conditions in rent controlled apartments. There is a balance to be had somewhere in the middle.

Ideally wages would increase with inflation so that people could keep up on rent.  The reason why everyone is so opposed to rent increases is that their wages aren't going up but the costs of living is.



Maybe that's the universe's way of telling you that you aren't making wise choices in terms of where you live & work.
 
2014-06-11 02:57:57 PM  

gamergirl23: Which ensures that the second anyone moves out the landlord will quickly do juuuuuust enough to justify a rent increase while doing no repairs in the other apartments that have long term tenants. Or maybe that's just our place.


Huh? What does one thing have to do with the other?

I don't know. I live in a building where some apartments are stabilized and some are market rate. The building is very well taken care of by the owners. They aren't throwing money at it but they certainly do not let it get rundown. But maybe the percentage of stabilized vs market rate apartments comes into play there.

NYC real estate is a universe unto itself.
 
2014-06-11 03:00:04 PM  

nocturnal001: thornhill: brap: nocturnal001: I'm not one of those gut reaction "the FREE MARKET!!!" guys but in this case yeah. I don't get why the government is involved at all. If I'm willing to pay your landlord 20% more, isn't that screwing me out of a place to live?

Even with rent stabilization rents have consistently outpaced inflation in NYC.  The market is far from free here.  And yes, I am a firm believer in having mixed-income communities.  It tends to help ease the lines between the haves and have nots rather than turn the city into an island of wealthy people surrounded by slums.  It's part of what I loved about New York.  That said, I am confident that your outlook and developers profits will eventually win out over my hippie-dippy Utopian outlook on what an urban community should look like.

I'd argue that the city's economic health would be even better than it is if rent wasn't such a disproportionate expense for most New Yorkers.

Doesn't that just shift that expense to people who aren't able to find rent controlled housing?


In a nutshell, no. Unless you want to live in a new construction luxury high rise, or a very specific location, or the attic of a townhouse, there's likely a stabalized (WHICH IS NOT THE SAME AS CONTROLLED) unit. May have to compromise on some factors, like super hip neighborhood that's maxed out, but otherwise not really.

See: http://www.nycrgb.org/html/resources/zip.html

The point is stabalized are already barely BARELY affordable. Rip that rug out and you are left with run down far flung ghettos and sky high rent exclusively wealthy neighborhoods that monopolize any marginally desireable part of NYC
 
2014-06-11 03:05:19 PM  

tlchwi02: dantheman195: They need to eliminate rent control entirely and allow these units to be market rate, sure the people in rent control apartments will see a rise in rents, but the people who are not part of the lucky club, will see their rent go down.

It would be interesting to see what the free market can do

I bet the end result is better than "government control"

and why exactly do you think landlords will drop rent rates on other apartments? the goodness of their hearts?


Supply and demand.
 
2014-06-11 03:05:49 PM  

serpent_sky: kling_klang_bed: Oh, I left out the dreaded broker fee.

That would make it another $200?
Usually, they take a month's rent.
So you need 1st month, 1-2 months security, 1 month for the broker, and some places also want last month.

And every landlord finds a way to not return security deposits.


www.toothpastefordinner.com
 
2014-06-11 03:09:10 PM  

thornhill: kling_klang_bed: I'd have to ask, from people who live in NYC, just how much rent is there.

In Manhattan, a one-bedroom walkup averages our around $2,300. In a place as far north as Hamilton Heights it will be less, and in a hot neighborhood like the west village it will be more. A building with a doorman is probably closer to $2,700. Size is about 550 to 650 square feet.


By that you mean the closet size, right?  How large is the rest of the apartment?

//i keed, I live in SoCal.  my last place was 800sq on the beach, which I guess would be a palace comparitively
 
2014-06-11 03:12:29 PM  

Smeggy Smurf: thornhill: kling_klang_bed: I'd have to ask, from people who live in NYC, just how much rent is there.

In Manhattan, a one-bedroom walkup averages our around $2,300. In a place as far north as Hamilton Heights it will be less, and in a hot neighborhood like the west village it will be more. A building with a doorman is probably closer to $2,700. Size is about 550 to 650 square feet.

Where I live $2700 won't rent you a damned thing because nothing is that expensive


So wouldn't 2700 get you any thing you wanted since it was higher than the highest cost?
 
2014-06-11 03:13:01 PM  

IamAwake: thornhill: kling_klang_bed: I'd have to ask, from people who live in NYC, just how much rent is there.

In Manhattan, a one-bedroom walkup averages our around $2,300. In a place as far north as Hamilton Heights it will be less, and in a hot neighborhood like the west village it will be more. A building with a doorman is probably closer to $2,700. Size is about 550 to 650 square feet.

By that you mean the closet size, right?  How large is the rest of the apartment?

//i keed, I live in SoCal.  my last place was 800sq on the beach, which I guess would be a palace comparitively


550 is pretty large by NYC standards.

350 to 450 studios are pretty common, and cost on average $1,750/month.
 
2014-06-11 03:14:08 PM  

MyRandomName: Rent control was a means for the government to force policy on citizens without being responsible for the costs of the program. It is bullshiat.


It was actually implemented post-WWII nationwide to address housing shortages and price gouging that veterans and their families faced upon returning from war but thanks for playing another great game of Fictional Revisionist on The Interwebby.

I do thank you for at least not dragging Milt Friendman into this, I fear I would vomit.
 
2014-06-11 03:20:09 PM  

thornhill: moothemagiccow: Smeggy Smurf: thornhill: kling_klang_bed: I'd have to ask, from people who live in NYC, just how much rent is there.

In Manhattan, a one-bedroom walkup averages our around $2,300. In a place as far north as Hamilton Heights it will be less, and in a hot neighborhood like the west village it will be more. A building with a doorman is probably closer to $2,700. Size is about 550 to 650 square feet.

Where I live $2700 won't rent you a damned thing because nothing is that expensive

http://boise.craigslist.org/search/apa?sale_date=-&minAsk=2700

They must have had one hell of a housing bubble.


It was insane at the end.  In the shiatty city of Nampa which is about 15 miles west of the Boise city limit bare dirt lots of 40' x 120' were going for as much as $114K.  For the dirt.  That was the cheap area to live in.  The house I designed for that lot wasn't a good house but it's what the developer wanted.  The bubble burst before he finished construction and the house sat empty for years.  It was the last project I did before I shut down and took a job doing grocery stores.
 
2014-06-11 04:35:34 PM  
I won't pretend that it's a good thing or a bad thing in the broad scheme of things, but I am very glad that around here rent increases are hard-linked to the rate of inflation.  Next year I have a 0.7% rent increase to look forward to.  Sure, the housing market around here does have its own dysfunctionalities, but still.

/on the other hand, property taxes are split between owner and occupant, so I suppose you'd have to add that extra 200€/year in there somewhere.
 
2014-06-11 05:33:05 PM  
Rent control is one of the few issues where conservatives have a point.  Physical space is one of the few things that actually *is* a limited resource in a city.  Rent control does actually create shortages.  That said, the landlords are indeed making money hand over fist.  That's because the property value is insanely high.  An investment worth millions is expected to make lots of money, or people won't invest in it.

I don't understand why people willingly choose to live in an extremely crowded and expensive city.  But they do.  The high rent is just a symptom of so many people packing themselves into a tiny space.  The problem won't be fixed unless people escape the city or build more apartments (impossible with building codes as they are).
 
2014-06-11 05:38:10 PM  
I have this vision of everyone whose housing costs are >50% of their earnings just moves out overnight from NYC and all the rich people wake up in the morning and starve over the next few weeks because the people that wipe their ass are all gone.

The thing about "oh well then just move" is at some point there's no where else to move to.
 
2014-06-11 05:41:17 PM  
I've had a theory for awhile that a limit on size of apartments might help. I understand that this will never, ever happen and that there are pitfalls (like with any system), but if space is such a precious commodity, letting rich people (and the developers who profit from them) take up as much space as they want because they're rich is unjust, as well as unwise. Rich people in NYC live in apartments that are bigger than most American houses everywhere else (like these: http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2014/02/12/here_are_the_10_biggest_apar t ments_for_sale_in_manhattan.php ). While the non-rich (which is most people) live in tiny boxes that take half their income. That seems farked up to me.

Discuss.
 
2014-06-11 06:33:03 PM  

dantheman195: Delta1212: has launched a six-figure ad campaign called, "A rent freeze hurts everyone."

Up next, the "food doesn't cost enough" campaign to be followed by the "don't you think you should be paying a bit more for gasoline?" campaign.


Yeah, good luck with that.

Does the government set the price on menu items or grocery stores? That the store must sell these items for X-amount even if the store owner is losing money?

Didn't think so


They do subsidize food and gas through payments to producers. For food to lower prices and for oil so that other energy forms have trouble competing without big money lobbying to reduce their own development costs.

So mostly the answer is "yes."

I think every government subsidizes food in some way.
 
2014-06-11 07:13:26 PM  

serpent_sky: And every landlord finds a way to not return security deposits.


Geez, isn't that the truth?  When I moved out of my apartment in 2004 after having been there for seven years, the management company sent a letter saying that not only were they keeping the entire security deposit, they were asking for additional money to cover the damage because "they had to replace part of the kitchen countertop that was damaged".  I called them back and asked them if they were sure that was the case, and they responded yes, they had already replaced the counter and could show me the bill for the work.

Unfortunately, they didn't know that I knew the tenant that had moved into my old apartment (she had lived across the breezeway from me), so I went down there and she let me in to photograph the place.  Of course, nothing at all had been done to the kitchen, and they hadn't even bothered to replace the carpet or paint the walls.  I then went to the rental office to speak to the property manager, showed her the photos and a copy of the letter she'd sent, and explained that legal action would be forthcoming as well as a call to the police department and local newspaper.  I got a package from FedEx the next day with a check for the full amount of my security deposit.

Most landlords aren't quite that bad, but I would suggest that there always be a full walkthrough with the property manager, with full video, before returning the keys to any rental property.
 
2014-06-11 07:29:42 PM  

tlchwi02: TheGreatGazoo: Same as rents go up and down anywhere else. Someone will lower their prices, and the places that cost too much will either go empty or have the rents reduced.

i take it you haven't had any dealings with the rental markets in any major city in about the past 15-20 years? rents don't go down anymore. the supply of property is finite and the demand for living space constantly goes up.

That's not entirely true. Rents in the SF bay area dropped 20-30% in the early 2000s because of the tech bubble bursting. Granted, that was a fairly specific and uncommon set of circumstances.
 
2014-06-11 09:05:45 PM  

ImpendingCynic: tlchwi02: TheGreatGazoo: Same as rents go up and down anywhere else. Someone will lower their prices, and the places that cost too much will either go empty or have the rents reduced.

i take it you haven't had any dealings with the rental markets in any major city in about the past 15-20 years? rents don't go down anymore. the supply of property is finite and the demand for living space constantly goes up.
That's not entirely true. Rents in the SF bay area dropped 20-30% in the early 2000s because of the tech bubble bursting. Granted, that was a fairly specific and uncommon set of circumstances.


Good thing -that- can't happen again.
 
Displayed 50 of 106 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report