Live data from Hacker News

How Manhattan Became a Rich Ghost Town

theatlantic.com

111–120 of 153 posts

Re: How Manhattan Became a Rich Ghost Town

#111
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those have to be really big cities, because in cities with reasonable public transport you can hop on a train or a bus from basically anywhere within city limits and reach the expensive center in less than half an hour.

>cities with reasonable public transport Does NYC qualify? I think you can still hit theoretical under-half hour times if you manage to get the subway right as your train comes in and don't have to walk too far from the stations to the doors. But if you live in New York the psychological barrier of dealing with that crap is big enough that people tend not to do it outside of commuting. It's a chore to get someone in…

NYC has some of the best, if not the best, public transport in the US.

> It's a chore to get someone in Brooklyn to come into the city to hang out unless it's right after work. And vice versa.

The issue, I think, is that young professionals have largely been priced out of Manhattan, and the East River acts as a psychological boundary. Even if it's just a short trip, you're still leaving/entering "the city".

As a side anecdote, the club Maxwell's in Hoboken closed a few years ago; the reason given was that most of the bands that played there were willing to cross one river to play a gig, but only a small fraction were willing to cross both, even though the trip wasn't substantially longer.

Re: How Manhattan Became a Rich Ghost Town

#112
post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The next generation is far less materialistic than generations of the past. Ehhhh, I dunno that I'd go that far. It's just different shit. I think we all know plenty of people lined up the second a new iPhone or Pixel is announced.

Materialism probably isn't the word, but conspicuous consumption of consumer goods (say that 5 times fast) is definitely less of a thing among the urban set than it used to be in the 80s and 90s. I wouldn't categorize smartphones as conspicuous consumption per se, because even when blinged out in gold they still tend to be pretty understated in comparison the the dinner-plate sized Breitlings that finance bros used t…

That's the claim (experiences over stuff). Though I just got back from London and walked down Oxford Street (one of the main shopping streets) a couple times and you almost couldn't move for all the people with their shopping bags stuffed with goods from all manner of stores. London may well be an exceptional case but there was certainly no shortage of shoppers.

Re: How Manhattan Became a Rich Ghost Town

#113

I lived in NYC from 2009 to 2017 and can affirm the author's feeling. Over the span of those years, and mostly as of late, I saw many of my favorite brick and mortars (Rare books, sporting goods shops, record stores, etc.) all be replaced by coffee shops or juice places. Granted each of the above mentioned places have challenges with their respective industry but the feeling still stands. Having been born in North Te…

To be clear, TX doesn’t do state-level zoning but city-level zoning is ubiquitous. Counties also generally regulate development with zoning or other regulations that are similar.

Re: How Manhattan Became a Rich Ghost Town

#114

It's not just Amazon. The next generation is far less materialistic than generations of the past. No one can blame them for not wanting to spend 500$ on a Gucci gucci bag or 400$ on overpriced jeans, especially when they've got all that student debt. Workplace clothes are changing as well. Less people are opting for the fancy suits. Retail needs to keep up with the changes and start offering something people actually…

Yup, there's lots of data recently on how millennials prefer to spend money on experiences over possessions.

Re: How Manhattan Became a Rich Ghost Town

#115
post #3

Is there some legal issue at play here that the article isn't drawing attention to? Why is it a better idea to leave a property vacant than to have a short-term tenant?

Not a legal issue but a financing one. For commercial landlords it’s often better to let a building sit empty at a high posted rent than to lower the rent, since the building value (for financing purposes) is determined by the posted rent not the actual revenue, and lowering the rent may put the building “underwater,” hurting both the landlord and the bank.

https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2017/11/27/the-paradox-o...

Re: How Manhattan Became a Rich Ghost Town

#116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't usually carry an espresso machine with me as I walk around the city, so, actually, yes, if I want to drink an espresso while I'm out, then I'll probably need to buy it from a coffee shop.

As if half the customers aren't ordering iced coffee.

If it's not obvious to you that you can replace "espresso" with literally any beverage on the planet, then you didn't get my point.

Re: How Manhattan Became a Rich Ghost Town

#117

I actually think that we no longer live in a capitalistic system. A lot of firms continue to behave in ways that capitalism should punish, but doesn’t. My current running theory is that our economy is more based around rent extraction, largely from land and companies that wield effective monopolies or oligopolies, rather than competition. This explains why we keep seeing things that make no sense from a capitalist po…

This is one macro-narrative on the current economic system: Neoliberalism as Creative Destruction [1].

> In this article, the author contends that neoliberalism is above all a project to restore class dominance to sectors that saw their fortunes threatened by the ascent of social democratic endeavors in the aftermath of the Second World War. Although neoliberalism has had limited effectiveness as an engine for economic growth, it has succeeded in channeling wealth from subordinate classes to dominant ones and from poorer to richer countries. This process has entailed the dismantling of institutions and narratives that promoted more egalitarian distributive measures in the preceding era.

[1] http://cult320sp15.onmason.com/files/2015/01/Harvey.Neoliber...

Re: How Manhattan Became a Rich Ghost Town

#118
post #15
post #11

Here's my opinion on what will happen on a longer time scale: Eventually the tourists will stop coming, because there are other parts of town with more atmosphere. Businesses will start moving out to other parts of town because of the cost of rent and lack of customers (due to no residents or tourists), and eventually the "city center" will defacto move. The only people who will lose out are the people who used it to…

I think this is sort of happening in NYC: The center of gravity is sort of moving to Brooklyn since it's cheaper, there's more space, it's more interesting, etc. And depending where you are, Manhattan is still very accessible. Obviously the key NYC tourist targets aren't moving, but anecdotally I am seeing an uptick of tourists in my 'hood. For what it's worth.

Brooklyn has always been "up and coming".

Re: How Manhattan Became a Rich Ghost Town

#119
post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anecdotally, that doesn't really seem to be the problem with New York and definitely not the problem the article is talking about. Ground-level stores don't seem to be suffering from staffing issues, largely because in New York it's not uncommon to work in Manhattan but live in Staten Island or Jersey. Instead, ground-level stores seem to be disappearing because commercial lease agreements are just insanely expensive…

And, this feels like an issue that will naturally fix itself over time, as landlords realize what they're asking for isn't reasonable.

This idea presupposes that owners are looking to be landlords.

There is so much cash floating around the high end of the economy, thanks to QE and tax dodging and everything you've heard about, that RE is purchased simply as a way to diversify holdings beyond stocks & bonds. It never has to be used.

Re: How Manhattan Became a Rich Ghost Town

#120
post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The turnaround of restaurants and bars here is amazingly fast. When one fails, another one springs up. The same street will have very different storefronts each year. Is that supposed to be a positive thing? Sounds pretty unstable and a terrible detriment to developing an actual neighbourhood.

>Is that supposed to be a positive thing? Sounds pretty unstable and a terrible detriment to developing an actual neighbourhood. Nationwide, 90 to 95% of restaurants fail in the first year. Not to say NYC isn't worse, but it's more noticeable when it's that dense.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN