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

What Airbnb Did to New York City

citylab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 240 posts

Re: What Airbnb Did to New York City

#181

Post by visarga »

sudouser wrote: post #86
visarga wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the grandparent poster was right - AirBnb opens up a way for people to see life in communities that were difficult to access before. That's what I appreciate most about it - how natural it feels to live like a local person. Living in a hotel while travelling feels artificial now.

you’re saying that cities should be ghost towns where nobody lives and every single place is an airbnb... because obviously we would like to have as many people see this amazing community uh?

When I'll need an interpreter, I'll call you. But in the meantime please don't tell me what I am saying.

Re: What Airbnb Did to New York City

#182

Post by camgunz »

ordinaryperson wrote: post #67
untog wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're ignoring the OPs point. Rent controlled apartments are a rounding error in the grand scheme of making NYC apartments affordable. It's also been around for a very long time, so its effects are well known. As the article outlines, Airbnb is something new.

Rent controlled and rent stabilized two very different things but both decrease housing inventory. According to this there are 1 million rent stabilized (not controlled) units in NYC: https://ny.curbed.com/2017/4/13/15264890/nyc-apartments-guid... If that's accurate, it's a little bit more than a rounding error. Ultimately there has to be a balance. Throwing out long-time renters isn't a great idea but nor is capping…

To expound a little; from the actual data source linked in that article:

> According to the 2014 NYC Housing and Vacancy Survey, there are about 27,000 rent controlled apartments vs. about 1,030,000 rent stabilized apartments.

Like you say, rent control is very different than rent stabilization. Rent control limits the actual rent. Rent stabilization limits the annual rent increase.

Rent stabilization doesn't really account for extra stickiness in the housing market (in other words, it doesn't meaningfully decrease housing supply). Rent control does but again, since there are so few of those it's basically a non-factor.

Re: What Airbnb Did to New York City

#183

Post by gpickett00 »

The article should have mentioned this at the very top: "It’s also worth noting that Wachsmuth’s research was funded in part by some avowed foes of home sharing—the New York City Hotel Trades Council—and was cosponsored by housing and tenant advocacy organizations."

Re: What Airbnb Did to New York City

#184

Post by amorphid »

true_religion wrote: post #105
amorphid wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the landlord knew exactly what they were doing when they rented the apartment to Grandma. If the landlord didn't want to enter into a contract the involving rent control, they shouldn't have been in the business of renting NYC apartments.

Contract law usually doesn't allow for lifetime contracts because people can't consider such a long timespan logically. Rent control is the same thing. It forces a contract with on going payments and services with no end date. Is there any escape clause?

IANAL...

I believe the landlord is bound by the language of the law, not the contract. If the law enabling grandma's rent control were fully repealed, there'd be no rent control-related reason the landlord couldn't raise Grandma's rent to market rent. Basically, Grandma AND the landlord both needed to know what they were getting in to.

Grandma: "I want this apartment."

Landlord: "OK, it's $250/month with rent control. But just so you know, if they ever repeal that law, and market rate is more than the $250/month you're paying, I'm raising you rent."

Grandma: "Understood. If I were the landlord, I'd raise the rent on the grandma renting my apartment, too."

Re: What Airbnb Did to New York City

#185

Post by busterarm »

dang wrote: post #141
busterarm wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? Because rent control certainly myself and everyone I knew in a similar situation with a chance at class mobility. Rent control allowed my mom to stop being a cab driver and go to nursing school. Rent control facilitated me getting a really great education and career. I grew up needing food stamps, handmedown clothes and even shoes. How can you, with a straight face, tell me that bullshit?

> How can you, with a straight face, tell me that bullshit? That breaks the site guidelines and you can't do it here, regardless of how wrong someone is. Please read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html .

Sorry. There's a better way that I could have phrased that, but I pretty clearly did not criticize the person or call them names but rather their argument. I know you're a busy guy but maybe could you correct my misunderstanding here?

This is absolutely language that I would use face to face with someone.

Re: What Airbnb Did to New York City

#186

Post by camgunz »

ironjunkie wrote: post #9
ForHackernews wrote: post #2

Manhattan should probably just admit that it's going to become the Venice of America: a playground for tourists and the ultra-rich, with virtually no residents. There's nothing wrong with that. They can tax the hell out of it and use it to fund services in the rest of the city where real people live.

Kind of agree with you. Don't even think living in Manhattan if you don't pull at least 150k$. (Or be ready for some of those roomshare situations). I'm also amazed by the average night price at Manhattan hotels. Even during normal weeks, the cheapest is well above 300$/night.

The formula in actuality is your annual income should be 40x the monthly rent. So if your rent is $2k, you should make $80k a year pre-tax. There are a lot of studios and Jr. 1 beds for < $2k/mo. in Manhattan. Most people have roommates though, and your average 2 bdrm is like $3,200/mo., which means you only need to make around $65k/yr. This is very doable.

Re: What Airbnb Did to New York City

#187

Post by camgunz »

My take, after living in NYC Airbnbs for around a year, is the effects are most dramatic in non-white areas. And it's not lower income people who are renting their place out on Airbnb; it's typically commercial renters and hipsters/professionals looking to supplement their income. So it certainly feels like the main effect is to accelerate gentrification.

Re: What Airbnb Did to New York City

#188

Post by arprocter »

swarnie_ wrote: post #37
TomV1971 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last month I stayed a weekend at the Salisbury hotel right across Carnegie Hall for $180 per night. Nothing fancy, but a surprisingly big room at a prime location.

I stayed in this hotel in 2005. Is the constant sound of car horns 24 hours a day caused by the area or is that all of Manhattan?

57th is loud because it's a two way street, and a lot of emergency traffic uses it

Re: What Airbnb Did to New York City

#189

Post by [deleted] »

exolymph wrote: post #172
kerkeslager wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People say 'affordable housing' when they mean 'government legally forcing landlords to underprice their units' versus what the term should actually mean, 'a reasonable price range of rents'. Huh? No, "affordable housing" means "rents people can pay" (an extreme example being a $250/month apartment). This isn't complicated. > There isn't necessarily more but there should be less to incentivize builders. No point in…

> I realize I'm being hostile here, but your viewpoint is hostile to the poor and homeless of NYC. I recognize that you feel passionate about this issue, but hostility is counterproductive in this kind of discussion. https://www.sonyaellenmann.com/2016/05/hostility-online-disc...

[deleted]

Re: What Airbnb Did to New York City

#190

Post by razorunreal »

ordinaryperson wrote: post #71
pc86 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I get not throwing grandma out of the $250/month 4BR she’s been living in for 50 years Sorry, but not when the 2BR across the hall is renting for $4,000/mo and is on the market for 4 hours before someone gets it. Grandma doesn't have a right to live in the exact same apartment for the rest of her life at the expense of everyone else.

The economist in me agrees with you but where is she going to live? Just going to ship her out to West Virginia? I'd be OK w/it if you have a humane way to implement it but I doubt voters in the city would ever sign off on it.

If Grandma needs subsidized housing, that is something that should be separately agreed upon and implemented, presumably from tax revenue. The idea of forcing landlords to pay that subsidy basically at random seems ridiculous to me, the kind of thing that results in discrimination and legal fights.
Post reply on HN