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

Priced out of Paris

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 186 posts

Re: Priced out of Paris

#101

Post by yardie »

glenra wrote: post #82
ludoo wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OMG a Le Corbusier nephew. Right, let's raze all historical cities, and build stell and glass cubes. And while we're at it, let's burn a few books and paintings too...

> Right, let's raze all historical cities, and build stell and glass cubes. If redevelopment were generally allowed in cities like Paris and New York some of ugliest, least unique buildings would tend to get replaced with something newer and possibly better. And fifty or a hundred years later some of those new buildings would themselves also be prized by preservationists. People HATED the Eiffel Tower when it was fir…

The city planners did allow some unchecked redevelopment in the early 70s and 80s. Most of those buildings are still considered ugly and time hasn't made them any prettier, trust me.

I wouldn't say it's the traditionalist but the the people have, collectively, have decided that they want a specific aesthetic and most of the buildings being proposed aren't it. The Forums Les Halles was erected in the 70s, the architects thought it was pretty, a majority of the population didn't like it. It was built and, 30 years later, demolished.

Re: Priced out of Paris

#102

Post by salmonellaeater »

twic wrote: post #50
salmonellaeater wrote: post #13

The article implies that it's a big problem for commodities to go to the people willing to pay the most for them. Housing is just another commodity; is it surprising that the people who derive the most value from being in a city center (professionals in finance, law, business) end up paying the most for the privilege?

Housing is simply not just another commodity. An utterly fundamental aspect of commodities is that their production is price-elastic, and governed by supply and demand: if demand increases, prices rise, so, supply increases, prices fall again, and the market remains efficient. The housing supply has very little price elasticity, at least in London. This is for the very simple reason that there is hardly any space to…

You're right: I chose the wrong word. My point was more about the allocation of housing to the people willing to pay the most. I don't see why housing ought to be special in this regard; most things money can buy are sold at market prices.

Re: Priced out of Paris

#103

Post by Thrymr »

dasil003 wrote: post #87
Thrymr wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guarantee there a plenty of people living in cities who would be quite happy to live elsewhere if only there were jobs there. Many of those people live in the city to avoid a long commute, not because they enjoy living in a city.

Yes, and I guarantee you there are plenty of people in suburbs that would prefer to live inside the city if it were more affordable. What is your point?

Just that what drives people to live in cities is primarily jobs, not that they prefer living in cities. I am not arguing that is universal (plenty of people do prefer to live in a city) but the main factor.

Re: Priced out of Paris

#104

Post by michaelochurch »

Someone needs to publish a list of all these 11.5-month-vacant apartments that rich people buy and that take up so much space, so that burglars can get in when they're not there. There should be an app for that. I'm sure there are home security measures up the wazoo, but those are technical problems.

I could never hack the criminal lifestyle-- I have enough anxiety as it is-- but there are cases in which non-violent crime is a necessary social process.

If the law won't provide the 6-month-and-1-day law that these cities desperately need, then let the burglars do it. When legal measures fail-- clearly the Powers That Be have not shown an interest in doing the right thing on the housing problems-- then resort to illegal ones.

Re: Priced out of Paris

#105

Post by julienmarie »

As a former Parisian, now expatriated to South East Asia, what is the most striking in Paris is the ratio between salaries and housing costs. Salaries in France are not high because of the heavy taxations, which has some good effects – free education, healthcare, etc... A 50 square meters in a really not nice area of Paris (XIXe arrondissement) would cost around 1400 / 1500 euros ( USD 1800 to 2000 ). As a rule, to be able to rent this, you need at least 3 or 4 times this amount as revenue, so between 4500 and 6000 euros a month. A little statistics I like : only 3% of the french household has a monthly revenue higher than 4000 EUR. Also the renting market is really not liquid in France, because it is really hard to make someone move out in case they do not pay ( it can take as long as 2 years ). So as a consequence, the selection to find a tenant is hard ( you need people to guarantee you, and more and more often, you need also people guaranteeing your guarantee... )... Crazy...

Re: Priced out of Paris

#106

Post by VLM »

lr wrote: post #79

Perhaps it is time for people with incomes lower (and very low assets/net worth) to be able to deduct their rent from their income, the same way mortgage interest is...

I don't see any point in this. By supply and demand it will just explode prices upward, probably by about the amount deducted. So the poor will have to do more paperwork to keep up yet are those least able to do so, and the rich will get richer because rents will go up. Doesn't seem to be the desired outcome.

The same thing happens with social engineering of tuition costs or health care costs or day care costs or pretty much anything centrally controlled.

Re: Priced out of Paris

#107

Post by yardie »

mason55 wrote: post #93
alan_cx wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be clear, before I start: I'm not in the anti-immigrant, finger pointing, blame every one else camp what so ever. Call me a mental hippy, but I believe people should be able to go, in a country sense, where they like on this planet. What I don't understand here is that there have been reports and articles about how the white working classes are being forced out of London (That would be Greater London, not central…

> Well, if that is true, then how do they afford London? It's just like the jobs. The immigrants are willing to deal with conditions that the natives aren't, for many reasons. For example, I live in NYC Chinatown. There are buildings set up where they section off an entire floor into 8 foot by 8 foot rooms with a shared kitchen & bathroom. Most Americans would never live there but the immigrant Chinese are happy to b…

I used to live in Manhattan Chinatown. Are those places still around? I ask because even Chinatown is becoming increasingly expensive. I think in most of those "studios" the landlord has cashed out and sold the property for redevelopment. No way that even 20 poor immigrants can pay the rent of a single Wall street trader. Also the city was cracking down on those slumlords because most of them were rife with code violations.

Re: Priced out of Paris

#108

Post by bvi »

rdouble wrote: post #46
twic wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nitpick: the City of London does not have neighborhoods of empty luxury apartment developments, because the City of London is the one square mile of the city where the financial industry lives. It's equivalent to the Financial District in New York. The only significant chunk of residential building is the Barbican, which is not empty, just awful. The name of the city as a whole is simply London. You could even call i…

I actually know the difference between City of London and London because I watched that one clever Youtube video explaining it. However, I don't really have the details internalized as I've not been to London. To explain what I meant, I was thinking of this article that I read about One Hyde Park: http://www.vanityfair.com/society/2013/04/mysterious-residen... I had merged this info in my head with another link that…

Which clever video was this? Link please?

Re: Priced out of Paris

#109

Post by msie »

rdouble wrote: post #22
stevoski wrote: post #4

The article talks a lot about cities now being the domain only of "one-percenters" and "global elite". This is demonstrably false. Consider the UK. UK's population: 62 million London population: 8 million 13% of the UK's population, therefore, resides in London. To say that only the "1%" can afford London is clearly not the case. In France's case, 15% of the population live in Paris. Perhaps we can't all live in Lond…

The 1% buy multiple properties in many different cities. There have been articles about how the City of London has neighborhoods of empty luxury apartment developments owned by various sheikhs and russian/central asian commodities oligarchs. In SF when you buy a house you are also competing with dozens of investors from overseas paying cash who don't have any intention of ever living there. I believe that the Vancouv…

I believe that the Vancouver real estate market was also affected by overseas investors in a similar way, making it the least affordable housing market in North America.

I think the real culprit was mortgage rules that let Canadians borrow cheap money for long periods plus need for all people (not just foreigners) to engage in real estate speculation. Ever since the Canadian federal govt tightened up the mortgage rules the market has been in a slump. But everyone loves to blame the overseas investors. Also people like to cherry pick parts of Vancouver as indicative of the foreign buying trend like the West Side, British Properties and Richmond but they fail to look at East Vancouver, New Westminister and Burnaby which has decent housing as well, but is not as desirable.

Edit: I'd also like to point out that some properties are priced high, but no one is buying them. It's also a seller's perception of a hot market that drives up prices.

Re: Priced out of Paris

#110

Post by michaelochurch »

dabeeeenster wrote: post #21
stevoski wrote: post #4

The article talks a lot about cities now being the domain only of "one-percenters" and "global elite". This is demonstrably false. Consider the UK. UK's population: 62 million London population: 8 million 13% of the UK's population, therefore, resides in London. To say that only the "1%" can afford London is clearly not the case. In France's case, 15% of the population live in Paris. Perhaps we can't all live in Lond…

Most young Londoners cannot afford to buy property anywhere near the center of the city any more. I employ several, and see this first hand. In 2001 I bought a flat for (at the time quite a lot of money!) £200,000. I could just about afford it on a developer salary at the very peak of the dot-com boom. I sold it a few years later. Now that flat is worth about £700,000. This article is accurate as far as London is con…

Now that flat is [priced at: ed. corr.] about £700,000.

Fix 5d6c334... price/value correction.

Post reply on HN