Live data from Hacker News

Manhattan rents cross $5k threshold for first time

axios.com

881–890 of 1001 posts

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

#881
post #390

The problem for me, as a long time NYC resident, is that there's no other place in America I want to live even with work from home as a possibility. I like mass transit. I like not owning a car. I like that the city is generally safer than the rest of America. I like that it's the center for tech on the east coast, the arts for the entire country, and finance for most of the world. I like that we generally get along…

Honestly don't get what is so special about NY... It's not bad, but on the flipside is pretensious, expensive, and difficult to travel to/from.... also all of the things you mention that are positive points are by no means unique to new york.

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

#882

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None (or at least few) of the folks you’re gonna see on HN are going to be in the income bracket where they’re going to be living in East Harlem. It’s about half an hour from the places where things happen, at least, and might as well be an outer borough for most intents and purposes, given transit times, even if it’s technically within the stated geographical limits of Manhattan.

Eh. I wouldn't jump the gun on that claim. "Where things happen", aka Manhattan? Tbh, Manhattan kinda blows these days. It's more or less a sterile, disneyified, yuppy, consumerist grazing ground from 100th down, with the exception of alphabet city and Chinatown. But even Chinatown's changing, unfortunately. Feels like the old Chinatown Fair shutting down was a signal. Idk Manhattan has a few solid areas that have he…

45 minutes each way in the subway so I can hang with my boys in a non Disney outer borough

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

#883

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But you're sharing propaganda instead of crime stats. So all you've done is repeat a Republican party "talking point", which in the context of crime over time is nonsense.

Plenty of evidence of DAs in Democrat-run cities not prosecuting violent criminals. In Portland mobs fully control the streets, drag people out of cars and beat them, they threaten people, while police is just standing and watching. This is on video, not propaganda.

> In Portland mobs fully control the streets

So you follow-up propaganda with hyperbole, and pretend that extreme outliers are somehow a normal representation.

There's also plenty of evidence of Republican-run cities locking up innocent people, or conservatives attempting a violent coup during a transition of power. It's a silly game.

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

#884
post #286
post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you believe that?

Because I grew up in Brooklyn and Queens and saw what all of the new development did to the demand. The street that my grandmother used to rent an apartment for in the early 2000s for under $1k/month now only has units that go for $5K/month. Here's greenpoint as an example: https://www.zumper.com/rent-research/new-york-ny/greenpoint . Same goes for LIC.

As a Californian, if the demand is there, it will eventually bid up trash fire apartments to 2k a month, even if they're still colocated with violence and bad schools, you don't need to induce any demand with development.

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

#885

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had similar thoughts. I live on the west coast and feel so safe that I don't even lock the front door to my house, ever. I wonder if OP feels safe enough to always have their front door unlocked.

I wonder how much people think the typical flimsy locks on a residential door will actual stop someone who goes up to the door with the intention of entering. It would almost require someone to want to enter but iff the door was unlocked, which seems like a poor strategy for a burglar.

It's only a poor strategy in places where people lock their doors all the time.

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

#886

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The NYC crime rate varies wildly by neighborhood so I don't think its very useful to compare city-wide crime stats. For example, the felony assault rate is literally 10x higher in parts of the Bronx than on the UES. If you live and work in safer neighborhoods the city will appear to be very safe to you. In NYC the most dangerous areas are pretty far out from (edit: downtown) Manhattan and you'd really have to go out…

>"The NYC crime rate varies wildly by neighborhood so I don't think its very useful to compare city-wide crime stats. For example, the felony assault rate is literally 10x higher in parts of the Bronx than on the UES. If you live and work in safer neighborhoods the city will appear to be very safe to you." This makes no sense. It's a mobile city. You can live on the UWS but have to go downtown to see a doctor, or wor…

I think you and GP are on the same page. GP isn’t saying that life in the city is safe for everyone, the point is that it is safe for some, depending on where they frequent, how/where the commute, etc.

If I was thinking of moving to somewhere in NYC, I would want to know just that: could I live there safely? If someone answers that topic with “well, many people are exposed to crime, and it’s really unfortunate, and change is really desired”, that’s all true, but that doesn’t answer my question. If one were to tell me “yes, it can be fairly safe if you have the means to live here, and commute over there, and mostly hang around this place”, that doesn’t somehow minimize or deny the plight of those who are less fortunate. These are two separate topics that are both worth discussing.

Edit:

I now live in Dallas. I don’t know about crime stats at the moment, but if you’ll allow me to speak of how safe I feel in the city: I would say that there’s no way to live in Dallas (assuming you want an active social life that involves music, drinks, shows, etc) that feels safe. The usual hangout spots in Dallas (e.g. Deep Ellum) are right next to shady overpasses, sections of street with vacant buildings with busted out windows and broken street lights. So much of the city is in a state of disrepair. I feel like I’m gambling with my life if I go anywhere remotely interesting in Dallas.

When I lived in Carrol Gardens in Brooklyn, I could walk to the coffee shop, or go to dozens of great restaurants and shops, get late night tacos or pizza, and never feel like I was in a sketchy area. Granted, I was privileged to have the means to live where I did.

If someone then asks me where I would prefer to live on the basis of apparent safety, I would say Brooklyn. If I was then asked if everyone feels safe in Brooklyn, I would say “no” — if you live in a low income, high crime area, you’re not going to feel safe — and that’s an unfortunate reality for many people. Both things are simultaneously true.

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

#887
post #859
post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It takes two parties to increase the price of a housing unit. If rents are up 20% that means people are willing to pay 20% more. I don't know about the UK, but here in California, prices have skyrocketed, but so has the price of construction. There are two reasons that has happened: 1) Shortage of construction workers. The ones that are here are either (well paid) first generation immigrants, make more than Silicon V…

There's good and bad regulation. Bureaucracy in the wrong place is a pain, but without crucial regulations I feel that private capital would be even more ruthless and we'd be left with badly built homes, in badly planned communities, lacking services and infrastructure, without much care for the environmental impact.. It's really hard to see a way out of this for me without extreme interference by government..

In practice badly built, badly planned, lacking infrastructure, etc. are just code phrases for being different from status quo and accommodating too many people. And it's nonsense that an urban apartment building could have an "environmental impact" offsetting the sprawl and vehicle-mileage costs of not building in cities.

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

#888

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 only sustainable way to get affordable housing is when the market price is affordable. And the only way to reduce the market price to affordable rates is to crack down on the demand - there is no reasonable way to expand the offer side in many cities any more since they don't have the space. And most demand is driven by the fact that rural areas have been left in a decrepit state for decades : highways, bridges…

its actually important for the long trend towards urbanization to continue, for many reasons.

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

#889
post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can get all that online. So it might make sense to move these communities to somewhere very very cheap. Or even distribute them around.

Ah yes let’s go to each other’s massive meta verse homes (we all really live in those cell room apartments) to view NFT galleries.

Yeah lol, all these people think we are gonna do it online. Nobody wants to waste their life looking at that stuff for entertainment

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

#890
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…

>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…

Scarcity really exists. Markets are one way of contending with scarcity; you could also use a lottery or a queue. But people who lose the lottery or get stuck in the queue are just as deprived as people who can't pay the market price. And there are exactly as many of them. Probably more, since there is no mechanism to bring more supply online when the queue is deep, while the market mechanism works to some extent, choked off as it is by government limits.

Fundamentally, the only way that more people can be satisfied with the housing they have access to is to produce more of the housing people want.

Post reply on HN