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

261–270 of 450 posts

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

#261

Post by codedokode »

Tijdreiziger wrote: post #195
username332211 wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we're talking about this sort of solutions, we must nevertheless implement a means to manage demand. After all, it's impossible to house the entire Netherlands in Amsterdam. In countries where housing was socialized they had a system of residency. You couldn't move to another city, without a permit. If you live in Tholen, you shouldn't be able to move to Amsterdam, unless you mary someone from there or if society…

You need to manage the supply, not the demand. As long as enough properties are built in the areas where people want to live, there’s no problem. Sure, maybe not everyone will be able to live smack in the center of Amsterdam, but there’s enough space in other parts of the city, not to mention nearby places like Amstelveen, Hoofddorp or Almere (which, you will know, house mostly ‘overflow’ from the Amsterdam market).

If you want to create a fair system you should also build infrastructure otherwise it is unfair when someone lives near the subway in a historical part of the city and someone has to live near the forest among ugly modern high-rise buildings.

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

#262

Post by notyourwork »

PH95VuimJjqBqy wrote: post #258
notyourwork wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just naively and ignorantly ignoring supply and demand. If everyone moved to your LCOL area costs will rise. If ever leaves the city (HCOL), city living will decrease in cost. Not sure how your proposed solution works while also defying basic economics.

stop making excuses, an individual can make an individual decision or they can bitch about their situation but refuse to explore their alternatives. "oh, but market forces so I'm just going to stay here and continue posting online about how horrible it is that I'll never be able to afford a house!". You do you I guess.

I’m not making excuses. I’m highlighting what reality is. Big cities are big because of people population. Why are a lot of people there? Because of work, lifestyle preference or both. That’s not an excuse, that is reality. I don’t want to live in the middle of no where even if the entire mortgage is less then my 20% down payment for something closer to a big city. Economics speak for themselves. Stop pretending demand for a city is artificial.

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

#263

Post by bhchance »

wolverine876 wrote: post #244
deegles wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And it's a reason why "just build denser housing" is not a complete solution. More density makes an area more desirable, so prices will remain flat or in rare cases increase since the demand continues to outstrip supply. I believe the solution involves dramatically looser building regulations and major investment in public transit (essentially, get to Tokyo levels of density). Places like SF or NYC are in that uncann…

Which regulations would you cut? Safety? Basic serivces like kitchen and bathroom? Light?

Parking minimums.

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

#264

Post by AndrewKemendo »

vr46 wrote: post #13

The UK has completely abolished fees (I think) for tenants - I am a reluctant landlord - and I completely agree with that, the power asymmetry in finding housing is already bad enough without allowing blank-cheque negotiations. In my section of Germany, housing is even worse with rent caps and tenant rights, plus a lack of housing. Tenants are hard to move on, so landlords are painfully cautious about getting the rig…

What's a "reluctant landlord?"

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

#265

Post by PH95VuimJjqBqy »

wolverine876 wrote: post #254
PH95VuimJjqBqy wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

both, the park regularly has kids playing in it from the neighborhood. Kids run up and down the streets not worrying about violence, etc.

Is the area dangerous enough that they would not be safe without the police officer neighbor? What if the officer isn't home or is sleeping?

[flagged]

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

#266

Post by ltbarcly3 »

kredd wrote: post #236
ltbarcly3 wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And presumably you can afford to out bid all the other people who want what you want. Its great that you are wealthy and/or able and willing to spend a very high fraction of your income on non essentials like walking to nice restaurants and being near cool people you want to be near. The problem is that people who can't afford that think it is a hate crime if they can't afford to live in Brooklyn with the rest of the…

Your “non-essential” is someone else’s “essential”. Everyone has different needs and wants, and it’s just a useless flamewar. It’s the same as the discussion of whether the cities should stop subsidizing suburbs and other areas. Absolutely useless as everyone have their preferences and we have to find some sort of compromise.

> Your “non-essential” is someone else’s “essential”.

I don't think this word means what you think it means.

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

#268

Post by ltbarcly3 »

BugsJustFindMe wrote: post #242
ltbarcly3 wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And presumably you can afford to out bid all the other people who want what you want. Its great that you are wealthy and/or able and willing to spend a very high fraction of your income on non essentials like walking to nice restaurants and being near cool people you want to be near. The problem is that people who can't afford that think it is a hate crime if they can't afford to live in Brooklyn with the rest of the…

> The problem is that people who can't afford that think it is a hate crime if they can't afford to live in Brooklyn with the rest of the hipsters. City planning is hard, but it's absolutely the case that cities just do it very stupidly and poorly and myopically and to preserve the wealth of the wealthy at the expense of the everyone else. There are not any good reasons for Cambridge, MA to have a 35 foot maximum hei…

It's literally not a crime, and it's not even an action motivated out of hate.

I think it would do you good to work out the difference between things that make you angry and things that are unjust.

I agree with you, transportation and planning is intentionally manipulated by wealthy landlords to maintain their high rents. Absolutely. So don't live there? Don't base your self worth on how impressive the resume's of your neighbors are? Find other neighborhoods that aren't based on inherited multi-generational snobbery and artificially restricting access to education to elite morons?

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

#270

Post by paulgb »

wordpad25 wrote: post #184
paulgb wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it weren't legal, we'd instead just see deals like this go to friends/family of the owner, or the payment would be under-the-table instead of an upfront broker's fee.

You could make the same argument about any law. Why don't we just make murder and rape also legal to better track it?

My point is not that it should be legal (as an NYC renter I’d be glad to see a cap on broker’s fees), but that we shouldn’t delude ourselves into thinking that artificial price ceilings would work if only we plugged one last loophole. For every loophole you plug there are two more. This is not true of, say, murder!

Whenever we artificially manipulate the market with ceiling prices, it necessarily means there will be some demand unfulfilled. A better approach is to build enough housing to satisfy the demand.

Post reply on HN