5 ms·

NYC Has 100k-250k Overpriced Vacant Apartments, 63k Homeless Families

43 points by cimmanom 9y ago

smn1234 9y ago
"For years, development officials, the real estate industry and think tanks have told us that artificially low rents are holding the city back. Higher rents, the argument went, would free landlords to make a reasonable amount of money and serve as an incentive to increase the housing supply." who are these "geniuses?"
- otakucode 9y ago
  Rent-seeking is a destructive economic behavior. It literally destroys value from an economy. I have no idea how they might suppose permitting some wealthy people to get more wealthy by doing nothing of any value would do anything but provide a vampiric drain on value from the economy of the city.
  - mlvljr 9y ago
    you bloody marxist! :)
- dpark 9y ago
  The question is whether the housing supply has increased faster than rent. The assertion that it’s too expensive to build low-rent apartments in a city where land is about as expensive as it gets us not unreasonable. I have seen little concrete that shows rent control helps supply in general.
thrownaway954 9y ago
"and 27,009 held off the market for unexplained reasons" the title of the article is sensationalized. most off the apartments have a legitimate reason for being vacant while there were only 30K that they couldn't find a reason for.
- sp332 9y ago
  > Additionally, many of the 75,000 temporary apartments are pied-à-terres, weekend or vacation crash pads for the rich, up from just 9,282 in 1987. And 3x that number that are vacant for pretty questionable reasons.
  - thrownaway954 9y ago
    "weekend or vacation crash pads for the rich" how is that even remotely "for pretty questionable reasons"? it states right there that the rich are using them as second homes and party pads which is very common. what ticked me off about the article is they claim that there are close to 250K vacant apartments cause they are "priced out of reach for most renters" which is totally false.
    - sp332 9y ago
      When there are so many homeless people in the city, renting out an apartment that will only be used for a few weekends a year is morally questionable for both the renter and the landlord.
      - thrownaway954 9y ago
        excuse me, take a step back just one minute. you cannot make a false statements as "And 3x that number that are vacant for pretty questionable reasons" and then turn around and use the sympathy card as justification by stating that what someone is doing with the property they rightfully own as "morally questionable". by doing so, you are no better than the author of the article in my eyes. i don't like it either that people are sleeping on the streets while these places are "uninhabited" for whatever reason, but the people who own these places have the right to do with them whatever they want.
        deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
        sp332 9y ago
davidf18 9y ago
The real reason for expensive housing and a housing shortage in NYC (as well SF, LA, Boston, DC, London, ...) is a market failure from rent-seeking in this case using politics to create zoning density restrictions that make land artificially scare. This rent-seeking while harming a number of people, making them pay more for rents than they would in a healthy market, benefits wealthy landlords such as Donald Trump. Ironically, it is a Democratic NYC city counsel that made Trump so very wealthy, making it possible for him to become President. The fix is a simple one in that it costs not a cent and that is simply to remove the market failure, the rent-seeking zoning density restrictions. Japan has a Federal law that overrides local laws that would otherwise limit zoning density. We need the same in the US.
XR0CSWV3h3kZWg 9y ago
If you want to disincentive properties sitting vacant you can do something like Vancouver: http://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/empty-homes-tax.aspx http://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/empty-homes-ta... For whatever reason I like the idea of raising property tax and giving a tax credit if your property is at or near full occupancy. If you goal really is to provide enough cheap housing that no one is missing a house, then you might want to give a housing tax credit for every person you house in a legal space. Rent control only helps people that already live in a neighborhood, housing assistance requires a good bit of regulation & has stimga attached. If you target the renter instead you can just leave it to the market.
- cimmanom 9y ago
  NYC does have something like that now. Both homeowners and renters are eligible for a property tax credit. But the rent credit is only available if rent is less than $450/mo, which is... impossibly low.
  - XR0CSWV3h3kZWg 9y ago
    450. Yikes that reads as pretty out of date/touch. For those wondering here is zillow returning zero results under those conditions: https://www.zillow.com/homes/for_rent/New-York-NY/house,condo,apartment_duplex,mobile,townhouse_type/6181_rid/0-114112_price/0-450_mp/41.063045,-73.489952,40.429962,-74.379845_rect/10_zm/ https://www.zillow.com/homes/for_rent/New-York-NY/house,cond... Also making a tax credit like that without a gradient produces some pretty nasty effects.
    - cimmanom 9y ago
      The odd thing is that the credit is fairly new - IIRC, within just the last few years.
dannyw 9y ago
Property tax should be: - based on value of unimproved land; to encourage development - include a tax-rebate per full time resident living there Positive incentives are responded to better than a vacancy tax.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

43 points by cimmanom 9y ago

"For years, development officials, the real estate industry and think tanks have told us that artificially low rents are holding the city back. Higher rents, the argument went, would free landlords to make a reasonable amount of money and serve as an incentive to increase the housing supply." who are these "geniuses?"

otakucode 9y ago
Rent-seeking is a destructive economic behavior. It literally destroys value from an economy. I have no idea how they might suppose permitting some wealthy people to get more wealthy by doing nothing of any value would do anything but provide a vampiric drain on value from the economy of the city.
- mlvljr 9y ago
  you bloody marxist! :)
dpark 9y ago
The question is whether the housing supply has increased faster than rent. The assertion that it’s too expensive to build low-rent apartments in a city where land is about as expensive as it gets us not unreasonable. I have seen little concrete that shows rent control helps supply in general.

thrownaway954 9y ago

"and 27,009 held off the market for unexplained reasons" the title of the article is sensationalized. most off the apartments have a legitimate reason for being vacant while there were only 30K that they couldn't find a reason for.

sp332 9y ago
> Additionally, many of the 75,000 temporary apartments are pied-à-terres, weekend or vacation crash pads for the rich, up from just 9,282 in 1987. And 3x that number that are vacant for pretty questionable reasons.
- thrownaway954 9y ago
  "weekend or vacation crash pads for the rich" how is that even remotely "for pretty questionable reasons"? it states right there that the rich are using them as second homes and party pads which is very common. what ticked me off about the article is they claim that there are close to 250K vacant apartments cause they are "priced out of reach for most renters" which is totally false.
  - sp332 9y ago
    When there are so many homeless people in the city, renting out an apartment that will only be used for a few weekends a year is morally questionable for both the renter and the landlord.
    - thrownaway954 9y ago
      excuse me, take a step back just one minute. you cannot make a false statements as "And 3x that number that are vacant for pretty questionable reasons" and then turn around and use the sympathy card as justification by stating that what someone is doing with the property they rightfully own as "morally questionable". by doing so, you are no better than the author of the article in my eyes. i don't like it either that people are sleeping on the streets while these places are "uninhabited" for whatever reason, but the people who own these places have the right to do with them whatever they want.
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
      - sp332 9y ago

davidf18 9y ago

The real reason for expensive housing and a housing shortage in NYC (as well SF, LA, Boston, DC, London, ...) is a market failure from rent-seeking in this case using politics to create zoning density restrictions that make land artificially scare. This rent-seeking while harming a number of people, making them pay more for rents than they would in a healthy market, benefits wealthy landlords such as Donald Trump. Ironically, it is a Democratic NYC city counsel that made Trump so very wealthy, making it possible for him to become President. The fix is a simple one in that it costs not a cent and that is simply to remove the market failure, the rent-seeking zoning density restrictions. Japan has a Federal law that overrides local laws that would otherwise limit zoning density. We need the same in the US.

XR0CSWV3h3kZWg 9y ago

If you want to disincentive properties sitting vacant you can do something like Vancouver: http://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/empty-homes-tax.aspx http://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/empty-homes-ta... For whatever reason I like the idea of raising property tax and giving a tax credit if your property is at or near full occupancy. If you goal really is to provide enough cheap housing that no one is missing a house, then you might want to give a housing tax credit for every person you house in a legal space. Rent control only helps people that already live in a neighborhood, housing assistance requires a good bit of regulation & has stimga attached. If you target the renter instead you can just leave it to the market.

cimmanom 9y ago
NYC does have something like that now. Both homeowners and renters are eligible for a property tax credit. But the rent credit is only available if rent is less than $450/mo, which is... impossibly low.
- XR0CSWV3h3kZWg 9y ago
  450. Yikes that reads as pretty out of date/touch. For those wondering here is zillow returning zero results under those conditions: https://www.zillow.com/homes/for_rent/New-York-NY/house,condo,apartment_duplex,mobile,townhouse_type/6181_rid/0-114112_price/0-450_mp/41.063045,-73.489952,40.429962,-74.379845_rect/10_zm/ https://www.zillow.com/homes/for_rent/New-York-NY/house,cond... Also making a tax credit like that without a gradient produces some pretty nasty effects.
  - cimmanom 9y ago
    The odd thing is that the credit is fairly new - IIRC, within just the last few years.

dannyw 9y ago

Property tax should be: - based on value of unimproved land; to encourage development - include a tax-rebate per full time resident living there Positive incentives are responded to better than a vacancy tax.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]