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

321–330 of 450 posts

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

#321

Post by lifestyleguru »

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…

> In my section of Germany, housing is even worse with rent caps and tenant rights, plus a lack of housing.

German rental market is one of the things I decided I will never again deal with in my lifetime. There is finite number of refrigerators and washing machines one can buy, finite number of deposit disputes one wants to experience.

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

#322

Post by bsdpufferfish »

polygamous_bat wrote: post #253
bsdpufferfish wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If all the landlords are using collusion The market for housing in a metropolitan area cannot be organized. Everyone is a landlord. If rent spikes to 100k a year, I'm going to throw away shit so I can rent my 2nd bedroom for 50k, and the cycle continues down.

Why would you rent for 50K if you can rent for 100K? Are you an economically irrational actor? Same applies for landlord who could either undercut the competition or join the “app” (aka collusion ring) to make higher profit.

In that scenario it's a shared place vs your own.

> collusion ring

Once again, markets for such a commonly desired good are not 5-10 or even 100 participants. They are unstructured webs of opportunities and favors.

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

#323

Post by ltbarcly3 »

BugsJustFindMe wrote: post #299
ltbarcly3 wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 yo…

> It's literally not a crime You're using a specific definition of "crime" that is different than the one the people you're arguing against are using, and that makes the argument not apt. Being shameful for causing harm is also what calling something a crime can mean. See: https://ibb.co/xS3wnhg

Right, you are using a second or forth definition of crime, changing to that despite the original context of the first definition. I'm the one who originally said it's not a hate crime, as much as people act like it is. That you would then accuse me of trying to play games with definitions is really quite remarkable.

But lets go along with your desire to get away with using your definition instead of the original way the word was used in this context. Is it really a 'grave offense against morality' for a city to democratically decide to not allow skyscrapers? What would be the consequence of not allowing skyscrapers, is it that people like BugsJustFindMe starve to death? nope. That you will be deprived of basic human needs like shelter or the right to self determination? nope. The 'grave moral harm' done to you is that you can't afford to live within walking distance to that cool bar you like to go to. How ridiculous are you going to be?

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

#324

Post by bsdpufferfish »

polygamous_bat wrote: post #245
bsdpufferfish wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> those are “unavoidable” This myth has been reviewed by economists over and over. You can always economize and it naturally occurs on both the demand and supply side. I'm not saying these outcomes are good, but people WILL do them. Housing demand: live in a smaller place, live with more people, live further away than you want to, live in a van Housing supply: rent out your extra room, try to build a rental (collect…

So our choice is to either legally discourage rent seeking behavior in certain necessary parts of our life (health, housing, education) OR “live in a van… don’t go to a doctor … go to community college” just so the overlords could keep making profits on their investments. I wonder why not more people are signing up for the latter.

No. The point is that these actions at the margin put pressure on prices. People do have an alternative and will not just pay any price. I suspect you're feeling what I described at the end.

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

#325

Post by carom »

bradlys wrote: post #88
flavius29663 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> no one is fucking building anything Introducing rent control makes it even less likely to have new builds. Try to think like a millionaire that could potentially invest in real estate: would you buy a 2 million house not knowing that you can recoup that investment and also make a profit? Isn't it easier to just dump the money in an ETF and get 8% on the market? > you need it to prevent landlords from just extractin…

You cannot have housing be affordable and an investment. You need to decouple the two. Fundamentally these are in disagreement. If you believe that landlords should control the world then keep believing this idea that housing should also be an investment. I don’t think housing should be an investment. It is impossible for something to be a good investment and affordable. They go against one another.

Affordable housing is a loaded term. In the US that means housing whose price is fixed to some percentage of the area's median income. I do not want affordbale housing. I want market rate housing with uncapped supply. This would make it a commodity.

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

#326

Post by bradlys »

PH95VuimJjqBqy wrote: post #252
bosie wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

House ownership statements are always with a location in mind. I want to walk or take public transport for 15-20 minutes to have most medical docs around, multiple different cuisines, park etc. What i do not care is a 2 car garage. That already implies a lifestyle i really do not want. So where wpuld i move to in the US?

here? if you don't want a 2 car garage then fine, move downtown. You can get _anywhere_ in this town in 20 minutes or less. We flat don't have the traffic that places like NYC does. rush hour might be a bit slower depending on where you go, but not appreciably slow. I feel like people who don't live in these areas have a lot of misconceptions.

This might be an exceptional town, not sure what kind of place you're talking about, but most places don't have public transit or much in the way of walkability in the USA. He's talking of not using a car and doesn't want to drive at all.

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

#327

Post by PH95VuimJjqBqy »

whycome wrote: post #311
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.

Did you buy this property because you knew of the police neighbor? Is it just well known for the kids as well? It's just a strange signifier to me. Does a real estate agent mention this? Do they know they play this role? Are they compensated in any way? Should other neighborhoods encourage the presence of a single police officer home?

Reverse that.

Why is it a strange signifier that a police officer living next door and a park where kids are openly playing implies it's a nice neighborhood that you might enjoy living in?

it's like saying it's a strange signifier that you would avoid a neighborhood with homeless walking down the street pushing carts and empty syringes laying around the sidewalk.

Neither of those seem strange conclusions and I posit that if you can't understand that it says more about you than anything else.

and yes, I've been shown houses in neighborhoods like that, and no, I didn't move in.

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

#328

Post by ponderings »

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…

The limited supply is what makes the market not work.

Whatever people think about migrants we can at least agree that everyone living in an area (town/city/country) all should have a roof over their head.

The real problem seems the disconnect between people, companies, processes and regulations getting in the way of building and the people, companies, processes and regulations wanting to move there or expand the population.

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

#329

Post by bradlys »

lowbloodsugar wrote: post #281
davidw wrote: post #149

New report dropped recently that vacancy rates there are like 2% or less. That is far, far below healthy levels. NYC needs more housing, as does much of the US in places where the jobs are.

Or we need remote work for those who can, but the rich will lose their real estate investments so…

I'm sure both would be fine but a lot of people want to live in a place like NYC. They just need to build more housing to accommodate it.

For instance, I'm a single man. I could get numerous remote jobs. This wouldn't help my chances of dating a young professional woman though if I moved out to BFE. Thus, why I'm in NYC. They just need to make more housing. A ton of the projects here in the city are completely frozen.

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

#330

Post by mmaurizi »

jrockway wrote: post #196
formerly_proven wrote: post #3

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

> Rent control fundamentally cannot work Rent control definitely works, because owners lock in the original price of the building with a fixed-rate mortgage. If you buy a building in 1960 to rent out, you can rent it out at 1960s prices pretty much forever, with only a tiny fraction added to cover increasing property taxes (subsidized for owners of rent-stabilized apartments) and the increasing costs of routine maint…

The people maintaining your building need somewhere to live, so unless they're in a rent-controlled unit themselves your maintenance costs will rise at the same rate as housing costs, as they're primarily labor.
Post reply on HN