Rent controls have split housing in Berlin into two distinct markets • Hacker News Board

Re: Rent controls have split housing in Berlin into two distinct markets

#541

Post by nemothekid » Wed, Mar 03, 2021, 4:47 AM UTC

refurb wrote: post #527

shuckles wrote: post #520

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Few San Francisco new constructions have pools, and I don’t see how putting some exercise equipment in what would otherwise be a storage closet makes a building luxury. That can’t be more than a few basis points of total project cost.

Pools are a bad example for SF, but here is an example of a luxury condo built in the last few years. I don't disagree that they don't add much to the cost, but they are high-margin offerings - people pay more rent for places that offer these. http://38doloressf.com/amenities/ Amenities: LEED Gold certified, butterfly garden, outdoor living room with fire pit

I'm not sure those are the amenities that would signify a high end apartment; which probably tracks with the dilution of the brand. Those amenities are pretty standard for most corporate housing, (ex. Avalon's 55 9th[1] has those amenities, but doesn't market itself has luxury).

Compare that building with the 181 Fremont[2] in SOMA which has a several private lounges, a doorman, a building concierge, and valet parking. Several other building in that area, such as the Avery[3] do have pools. I'd consider that 181 Fremont would still be a luxury offering in a city like Chicago where the housing market isn't insane.

However, despite the range the building offerings, most units still rent out for $55-75/sqft.

[1] https://www.avaloncommunities.com/california/san-francisco-a... [2] https://181fremont.com/amenities/ [3] https://www.theaverysf.com/lifestyle

Re: Rent controls have split housing in Berlin into two distinct markets

#542

Post by brutusborn » Wed, Mar 03, 2021, 4:49 AM UTC

sudosysgen wrote: post #84

gruez wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This is not how it works. Without the possibility to rent out or consolidate homeownership, the inflationary pressure on home prices collapses. No, as we seen in north america that's not really true. Homes can go up on speculation alone. >You create an insane level amount of supply for homeownership on this market. An absolutely insane level. Is homeownership a necessary component of this? Creating a insane level of…

I'm not speculating at all. The article has the data to back the facts : house prices went down in Berlin. Yes, homes can go up on speculation alone, but this is a bubble that will pop. In North America, rising rents act as a backstop that prevent the bubble from popping, because of guaranteed rental incomes that protect you. It's not possible to create an insane level of supply for appartment rentals. There's two re…

That's not the only solution. Georgist policies do the same thing without disincentivising developmemt.

Re: Rent controls have split housing in Berlin into two distinct markets

#543

Post by smnrchrds » Wed, Mar 03, 2021, 4:53 AM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #534

donarb wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting that it took an essay contest to break the tie. Seattle now has an ordinance that they must rent to the first applicant who qualifies. This is to prevent discrimination against minorities.

> Seattle now has an ordinance that they must rent to the first applicant who qualifies. This is to prevent discrimination against minorities. Isn’t it already illegal to discriminate against minorities in renting housing?

Yes. But it is impossible to prove, so the law never gets enforced.

Re: Rent controls have split housing in Berlin into two distinct markets

#544

Post by dcolkitt » Wed, Mar 03, 2021, 4:58 AM UTC

bosswipe wrote: post #508

JPKab wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is plenty of scientific denialism on the right. Along with anti nuclear, the belief that rent control is a remotely good idea is an example of scientific denialism on the left. There are some decent arguments to be made against nuclear but rent control has always always caused more harm than good everywhere it's been tried.

Rent control is not scientific denialism. Economics is not a science because nobody ever does controlled experiments. There are also disagreements about what end goal you're trying to optimize for. Economics is just a bunch of biased political arguments using different priors for assumptions. This is evident when you about different "schools" of economic thought. There are no irreconcilable "schools" of thought in th…

> Economics is not a science because nobody ever does controlled experiments.

So, is astronomy not a science?

Re: Rent controls have split housing in Berlin into two distinct markets

#545

Post by gameman144 » Wed, Mar 03, 2021, 5:04 AM UTC

tehjoker wrote: post #478

gameman144 wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One could just as easily say that you're missing the opposite point: why should policy prevent new people from moving in? In either scenario, policy will disadvantage one group and advantage another. Any policies that aim to give stability to long-term tenants is liable to disadvantage new and shorter-term tenants. There's no natural law dictating that people should be forced to move out, but there's also no natural…

I agree, but I don't think the literal lord of a property should be able to force people to migrate by demanding higher tribute. There should be a rational humane process that isn't driven by simple greed.

You can flip this argument on its head so easily, though: "why should a person be able to keep out others who want the property more, in an arrangement that both the newcomers and the person who has poured their money into the property, solely out of their own selfishness in not wanting to move."

When you frame the motivations of individuals with such simplistic motivations as natural market forces being entirely driven by "greed", I have a hard time believing that you'll actually get to the bottom of things. In much the same way I don't think that workers/unions fighting for higher wages is "greed", I don't think that people that have invested in homes wanting to get the market rate for their homes is "greed".

Re: Rent controls have split housing in Berlin into two distinct markets

#546

Post by jakecopp » Wed, Mar 03, 2021, 5:06 AM UTC

tehjoker wrote: post #519

mjevans wrote: post #501

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a suggestion for a process... Pick a duration upon which to re-evaluate the value of property. Distribute this roughly evenly over all the property everywhere so that it isn't all at once. When a property's up for evaluation, offer it for 'sale' via a distributed dutch auction as part of a block with similar properties in the same jurisdiction (roughly, zipcodes, or maybe divided up should work). The block is bid…

Why are we randomly forcing residents to leave? Why don't we just take the available housing stock and divide it between old and new residents in a rational manner? Should an individual or family be kicked to the curb just because someone has a preference for living somewhere? What if they could prove a necessity? There's a lot to be said for knowing that once you pick a place to live you can depend on it being there…

> Why don't we just take the available housing stock and divide it between old and new residents in a rational manner?

How on earth to "divide" it fairly though?

This is exactly what the free market (attempts) to do, and might do better without rent control or overbearing zoning restrictions - allocate resources optimally according to demand.

Want to live in a super fancy place in the middle of the city? Pay lots because it's a luxury.

Can't afford that or don't want to? Live further out where there is plentiful cheap housing stock (I said no overbearing zoning restrictions remember!) and commute via a well resourced, publicly funded transport system (unfortunately the US doesn't do this well).

Re: Rent controls have split housing in Berlin into two distinct markets

#547

Post by lotsofpulp » Wed, Mar 03, 2021, 5:07 AM UTC

Kalium wrote: post #292

thesuitonym wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know how it is in Germany, but in the US, rent controlled buildings can only have the rent increased if the landlord upgrades the building, so it actually incentivizes them to do upgrades, as that's the only way they can increase rent.

In the US, rent control is regulated by states and enacted by cities. Each state and city is free to do so differently. As such, it can and does vary quite significantly place to place. This means it's impossible to offer an informed comment about rent control in the US.

I don’t think any US state has laws about rent prices. It’s all up to unit cities.

Re: Rent controls have split housing in Berlin into two distinct markets

#548

Post by _-___________-_ » Wed, Mar 03, 2021, 5:09 AM UTC

mandelbrotwurst wrote: post #458

readams wrote: post #448

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Below market rate housing is, by definition, always in short supply.

This isn’t true if the government generates more via subsidies.

That will just push down the market rate so that it's not below market rate any more, won't it?

Re: Rent controls have split housing in Berlin into two distinct markets

#549

Post by nostrademons » Wed, Mar 03, 2021, 5:10 AM UTC

shuckles wrote: post #523

kelnos wrote: post #513

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you only have 15 years of free pricing What do you mean by that? Rent control in SF only applies to buildings built before mid-1979. New buildings built today, whether low-end or high-end, will not be subject to rent control now, or in 15 years. There was a 2020 ballot initiative to change that so buildings older than 15 years old could be subject to rent control on a rolling basis, but IIRC that failed. (And ev…

Not quite true. California passed statewide rent control at inflation + 5% in 2019. Now some have moved the goalposts and called that rent stabilization instead of control because it allow rents to increase. New construction is exempt, though.

I thought that was the difference between rent control and rent stabilization.

https://www.apartmentguide.com/blog/rent-control-vs-rent-sta...

https://rentguidelinesboard.cityofnewyork.us/resources/faqs/...

Yep, those are the definitions. It looks like rent stabilization policies are frequently mis-termed "rent control", though.

Re: Rent controls have split housing in Berlin into two distinct markets

#550

Post by Nasrudith » Wed, Mar 03, 2021, 5:11 AM UTC

diebeforei485 wrote: post #471

CydeWeys wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How are you defining "luxury" here? The land in SF is inherently expensive; any newly constructed apartment building is likely to have rents meeting your definition of "luxury". The land is expensive and so too is building buildings on top of it! The granite countertops and stainless steel appliances are a tiny fraction of the overall cost.

If we're using rents to define luxury, then most of the westside is luxury.

I thought luxury was being used by marketers as their favorite new mouth-noise that sounds good but doesn't mean anythingm Like "premium". If you pay $150 for a $1.5 bottle of wine it actually means overpriced but it is used to make it sound posh. Snark aside it could be "quality enough that it sells above commodity prices" but it is still about what others are willing to pay.

Luxury has many uses as a euphemism "No Karen, just because it is an apartment doesn't mean it will cause a flood of criminals!" NIMBY defense, "Sounds good so you will pay more." and the hillariously low bar to pass "Literally anything above neccessities to sell the place."