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

321–330 of 1001 posts

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

#321

Post by huevosabio »

patrickthebold wrote: post #234
huevosabio wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Housing =/= Land. But our policies which heavily kneecap our ability to build more [0] make it such that Housing starts behaving like Land. The solution is to build more, and the success of Vienna does not come from public intervention but from the added supply. Tokyo is another city with famously cheap housing, and the secret is that they make it easy to build. I personally think that achieving affordable housing pr…

The article is about Manhattan. Do you have any idea if it has similar problems? In my mind, Manhattan is pretty dense.

I am obviously less informed on Manhattan shenanigans, but enough to know that there's plenty of obstacles to new construction in NYC and Manhattan proper.

I recall AOC lobbying for stopping an apartment complex in a formerly industrial area. And a articles on how certain areas of Manhattan don't allow towers. In fact, a quick look at the zoning map [0] has, eg, large areas zoned as "R8B contextual districts are designed to preserve the character and scale of taller rowhouse neighborhoods".

SF is the worst offender, but NYC is still pretty bad.

[0] https://zola.planning.nyc.gov

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

#324

Post by ponow »

ElevenLathe wrote: post #283
eatsyourtacos wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>When supply is less than demand, prices go up Question though... why, exactly does that have to be the case? Especially with something like housing where say there is mostly a fixed supply at any point and you can't just turn a machine on/off to produce more. The only reason the prices go up is because of greed basically- because people say "hey I can just charge more and people will pay more!". And there in lies th…

I largely agree, but if there is a scarce good (where there is less of it available than people want -- i.e. supply is less than demand) then we have to ration it /somehow/. The American way is by bidding up the price, so whoever is willing to pay the most money gets it. The Soviet way was by queuing, so whoever gets in line first gets it. We could also do it by lottery. We can come up with any number of schemes and…

Very nice description. No free lunch.

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

#325

Post by bdcravens »

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?

Likely true, but tenant occupied properties do have additional maintenance costs.

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

#326

Post by 71a54xd »

This is why I left Manhattan - especially in a new world where remote work is the new norm. I miss it, but I don't miss literally living in a box or the noise.

Fortunately, I got to live in an insanely nice luxury apt (30% under market rent) for a year in 2019 while construction was being finished on an adjacent high rise. Even though I had an incredible view of the Hudson from the 26th floor on W57th street tbh that kind of luxury is overrated in my opinion. Finance people are also generally pretty boring and / or degenerate. That said - I'll always miss pre-covid New York.

Granted, every single person I know in finance got a huge raise / bonus last year so this increase isn't exactly surprising. Looks like Louis Rossman was right with his prediction of New York becoming a city where "only rich finance and tech workers can afford to exist".

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

#328

Post by devb »

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?

Why would an artist who wants an opportunity to live somewhere as exciting as NYC want to move to St. Louis? Even if St. Louis did manage to become an artistic hub, what would stop it from going through the usual gentrification cycle and becoming unaffordable to regular people the way Portland, Austin, Oakland (not to mention Bushwick, Crown Heights, Bed-Stuy) have?

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

#329

Post by nickles »

ehnto wrote: post #292
nickles wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 This is great policy if you want to make housing unaffordable. When supply is less than demand, prices go up. Those price increases incentivize builders to increase the housing stock (which subsequently lowers prices). Capping prices prevents the price mechani…

We're all very aware of how the economics should play out, but look around you, it's not working that way in a bunch of places. That's because houses are being used as investment vehicles, with rentals being thoroughly flogged because they know people have no choice but to pay. No amount of building will help if the value of the property is not intrinsically linked to the supply and demand of places to live for peopl…

> No amount of building will help if the value of the property is not intrinsically linked to the supply and demand

Building new houses is intrinsically linked to supply. When you build a house, that increases the supply of housing. NIMBYs oppose new construction precisely to prevent the value of their properties from decreasing.

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

#330

Post by aaaaaaaaaaab »

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?

Lots of empty property → less housing supply → higher rents → higher property prices

If property appreciation outpaces the gains one could make from renting it out, then it’s better to leave it empty.

Post reply on HN