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

A rent-stabilized 1 bedroom apartment for $1,100 In NYC? broker's fee is $15K

gothamist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 450 posts

Re: A rent-stabilized 1 bedroom apartment for $1,100 In NYC? broker's fee is $15K

#31

Post by BurningFrog »

anovikov wrote: post #5
formerly_proven wrote: post #3

Rent control fundamentally cannot work, which is why it never works. Malicious noncompliance is a red herring.

It can and does work in many places. Whole cities like Stockholm mostly consist of rent-controlled apartments which have same rents paid since WWII era, which now amount to almost nothing. It creates awful social distortions and indirect costs, but it certainly does work.

It works in the sense that the system keeps existing, but it doesn't work in the sense that affordable rental housing exists for everyone.

Ask anyone actually living in Stockholm, and you'll hear how the system really works. Last I heard there was a 20 year wait to get an apartment the legal way.

Re: A rent-stabilized 1 bedroom apartment for $1,100 In NYC? broker's fee is $15K

#33

Post by matwood »

samstave wrote: post #24
FredPret wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Supply and demand determines rent; if you have enough supply and also rent control, then you'll have have rent control that magically "works". But it's always supply and demand that gets the upper hand in the end. If there's a shortage of supply, and you put in more market rules & regulations, costs will shift elsewhere (like the broker in the article) or the black market will simply grow to clear the market.

[flagged]

No they don't. The market determines rent. Lower demand or raise supply and watch prices drop, regardless of what the landlords want.

Re: A rent-stabilized 1 bedroom apartment for $1,100 In NYC? broker's fee is $15K

#34

Post by anovikov »

IncreasePosts wrote: post #12
anovikov wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It can and does work in many places. Whole cities like Stockholm mostly consist of rent-controlled apartments which have same rents paid since WWII era, which now amount to almost nothing. It creates awful social distortions and indirect costs, but it certainly does work.

I'm sure it works for the residents of Stockholm, but not so much for all sorts of people who would move to Stockholm but can't wait in line 10 years for an apartment.

Yes that's right! 10 years is an understatement. It means simply that the city is "locked out" for everyone but locals who inherited rental contract from their grandfathers, or multimillionaire cash buyers.

Re: A rent-stabilized 1 bedroom apartment for $1,100 In NYC? broker's fee is $15K

#35

Post by matwood »

hedora wrote: post #23
Our_Benefactors wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It creates awful social distortions and indirect costs, but it certainly does work. I don't think this meets the criteria most would consider “working”.

Sweden is often used as a case study in how rent controls lead to housing shortages. Rent control tries to make housing more affordable by reducing the cost, which immediately reduces the supply. At that point, rent control ends up increasing housing costs. Theory and real-world case studies mean that this is so obvious, that I just assume anyone that's passed economics 101 and is advocating for rent control is eithe…

> Theory and real-world case studies mean that this is so obvious, that I just assume anyone that's passed economics 101 and is advocating for rent control is either grossly incompetent, currently very drunk, or is disingenuous and actually wants to use the power of the government to make sure other people cannot obtain secure and stable housing.

Or they are one of the lucky few living in a rent controlled apartment.

Re: A rent-stabilized 1 bedroom apartment for $1,100 In NYC? broker's fee is $15K

#36

Post by BurningFrog »

samstave wrote: post #24
FredPret wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Supply and demand determines rent; if you have enough supply and also rent control, then you'll have have rent control that magically "works". But it's always supply and demand that gets the upper hand in the end. If there's a shortage of supply, and you put in more market rules & regulations, costs will shift elsewhere (like the broker in the article) or the black market will simply grow to clear the market.

[flagged]

Landlords can ask for any amount, but supply and demand determines how much they can get.

Re: A rent-stabilized 1 bedroom apartment for $1,100 In NYC? broker's fee is $15K

#37

Post by [deleted] »

alephnerd wrote: post #29
werber wrote: post #6

I thought this seemed fair till i read it was in flushing. Nyc is the worst, but, if you’re American where else can you get a city that international and walkable

Chicago, DC, Boston, SF, Philly (depending on "international"), Portland (walkable but not really international - it's just 90s-2000s white Americans doing 90s-2000s white American stuff, you'd think Kurt Cobain still roams the earth) Though if you want affordability, that leaves Chicago and Philly. NYC sucks in that sense though, as a lot of industries that are conglomerated in NYC haven't ensured salaries keep up w…

[deleted]

Re: A rent-stabilized 1 bedroom apartment for $1,100 In NYC? broker's fee is $15K

#38

Post by anovikov »

hedora wrote: post #23
Our_Benefactors wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It creates awful social distortions and indirect costs, but it certainly does work. I don't think this meets the criteria most would consider “working”.

Sweden is often used as a case study in how rent controls lead to housing shortages. Rent control tries to make housing more affordable by reducing the cost, which immediately reduces the supply. At that point, rent control ends up increasing housing costs. Theory and real-world case studies mean that this is so obvious, that I just assume anyone that's passed economics 101 and is advocating for rent control is eithe…

Well, you can't have a working democracy, market economy, and affordable housing at same time. Something has to give.

Re: A rent-stabilized 1 bedroom apartment for $1,100 In NYC? broker's fee is $15K

#39

Post by koolba »

Fripplebubby wrote: post #30
paxys wrote: post #18

The reason I live in a large managed building in NYC is that while such corporate housing may be bad, the broker cartel is infinitely worse. Every independent unit wanted at minimum $7-10K in broker fees, despite the fact that in most cases I didn’t even interact with the broker in any way. So what value are they adding to the system exactly?

The article explains that they are pre-vetting renters and handling showings and such. They add value for the landlord, not for you. But, they are also probably extracting the maximum amount of blood from you, because they can...

They also kick back some of the fees back to the landlord. Not openly or directly of course because that would be illegal. But only an idiot would think that landlords are not getting a cut of those fees.

Re: A rent-stabilized 1 bedroom apartment for $1,100 In NYC? broker's fee is $15K

#40

Post by FredPret »

samstave wrote: post #24
FredPret wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Supply and demand determines rent; if you have enough supply and also rent control, then you'll have have rent control that magically "works". But it's always supply and demand that gets the upper hand in the end. If there's a shortage of supply, and you put in more market rules & regulations, costs will shift elsewhere (like the broker in the article) or the black market will simply grow to clear the market.

[flagged]

Just think logically about this for a second.

If landlords determined rent, why isn't rent infinite?

There is some force that pushes rent down from the infinite amount of dollars that landlords would love to have. That force is competition from other landlords.

Supply and demand.

Post reply on HN