Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Manhattan rents cross $5k threshold for first time

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 1001 posts

Re: Manhattan rents cross $5k threshold for first time

#301

Post by rcpt »

spaniard89277 wrote: post #36

Housing and land is a non-transable good, and therefore there should be heavy state intervention on it, preferably by doing the same as Vienna, which is holding >40% of the renting stock and charging according to income, and renting to a representative distribution of tenants so to prevent guettos. Rent is the main detractor of disposable income which hurts the rest of the economy, and property owners provide almost…

Vienna was only able to pull that off after a devasting war left nearly everyone poor. It's not clear that the US could seize 40% of rentals in Manhattan without starting a revolution.

To your other points yes. Land Value Tax now! There's simply no good reason for why we're all taxed so heavily on our labor while land speculators get away for pennies.

Re: Manhattan rents cross $5k threshold for first time

#302

Post by macksd »

suchow wrote: post #275
j0hnyl wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think they can. The thing is the corporate landlords would rather have their high rises sit empty than rent the units at reasonable rates.

Do you know what would motivate this behavior? Naively, any rent is more than zero rent, so why let a unit sit empty?

My gut feeling is this doesn't entirely explain it, but any tenant is also more work than no tenant, so they may not want to do the work of signing a new lease and dealing with the work it will trigger for less than you're making per-head on your current tenants.

There's probably also a fear that if you let a new tenant in for lower rent, this might lower the rent other people expect and the problem starts snowballing.

Re: Manhattan rents cross $5k threshold for first time

#303

Post by feet »

mym1990 wrote: post #226
feet wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the person I'm replying to, in the order of their statements and questions, first assumes that it is a bold claim and after that decides they don't understand the statement they're replying to. It's backwards

Must be fun spending the whole day looking for technicalities to address.

No, I just understand how to make valid criticisms. First step before you can criticize is to understand what you're criticizing

Re: Manhattan rents cross $5k threshold for first time

#305

Post by abduhl »

feet wrote: post #219
abduhl wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Non transable is not a term that anyone uses and therefore is not one that has a definition outside of this thread. Which is why GP asked what it is, smart ass.

And the person I'm replying to, in the order of their statements and questions, first assumes that it is a bold claim and after that decides they don't understand the statement they're replying to. It's backwards

It's not backwards. Calling housing and land an X and saying that this means it should have heavy state intervention IS a bold claim regardless of what X is because it's calling for heavy state intervention.

Compare: "Abortion is a non-transable good and therefore there should be heavy state intervention in it." "Video games are non-transable goods and so there should be heavy state intervention in it." "Cryptography is a non-transable good and therefore should heavily be regulated by the government."

All of these are BOLD claims regardless of what non-transable means, and it's appropriate to ask what non-transable means in order to understand why the bold claim stands.

Re: Manhattan rents cross $5k threshold for first time

#306

Post by mancerayder »

j0hnyl wrote: post #229
m_ke wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm no NIMBY but places like NYC will never be able to build enough to outpace demand.

I think they can. The thing is the corporate landlords would rather have their high rises sit empty than rent the units at reasonable rates.

do you have evidence for this?

Vacancy rates are well low at the moment.

Re: Manhattan rents cross $5k threshold for first time

#307

Post by DeathArrow »

spaniard89277 wrote: post #36

Housing and land is a non-transable good, and therefore there should be heavy state intervention on it, preferably by doing the same as Vienna, which is holding >40% of the renting stock and charging according to income, and renting to a representative distribution of tenants so to prevent guettos. Rent is the main detractor of disposable income which hurts the rest of the economy, and property owners provide almost…

>Many attempts at public housing failed because they just tried to provide housing for low-income people in separated and/or undesirable areas, with a predictable outcome.

So the taxpayers should pay so the people with low income or no income can live iny Manhattan? Why not also provide them with expensive cars and exotic vacations?

Re: Manhattan rents cross $5k threshold for first time

#308

Post by coryrc »

Zxian wrote: post #287
eloff wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet it works in Tokyo, a city of almost double the population?

New York City already has a significantly higher population density than Tokyo (~11,300/km2 vs ~6,300/km). It's easier to develop more housing when you have more land.

You need to include Newark, Yonkers, Long Island, etc if you want to compare those figures.

Tokyo is 13400 sq km, NYC is 780 sq km. If I rounded Tokyo's land area to the same sig figs as I did for NYC, it would be lowered by half the total area that NYC takes up!

Re: Manhattan rents cross $5k threshold for first time

#309

Post by macksd »

feet wrote: post #194
bleuchase wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Housing and land is a non-transable good, and therefore there should be heavy state intervention on it That's a bold claim. What led you to believe that's the case? And what is a "non-transable good"?

I think it might help to find out the definitions of terms before assuming the statement is wrong

Can you help me with the definition, then? I can't find that word in any of my dictionaries and search engines are suggesting I mean "non-transferable" which is not a property of land in NYC.

Unless there's a definition, saying that this property calls for heavy state intervention is indeed a bold claim.

Re: Manhattan rents cross $5k threshold for first time

#310

Post by popularrecluse »

peanuty1 wrote: post #251
danjac wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Moreover artist communities flourish in urban spaces with cheap rent, like New York in the 1970s, Paris in the 1920s, Berlin in the 1990s and so on. Without that you just end up with Dubai or Monaco with shittier weather.

Would it be such a bad thing if those artists move to, say, St. Louis and create the next big thriving art hub there?

Artists tend towards progressive locales.
Post reply on HN