4 ms·

The data disagrees with you, it has caused shortages. Especially pre-90s. Since I was downvoted for stating things that are factually observed: https://web.st

• CPLX 7y ago
  The goal of rent stabilization is to make neighborhoods more stable. The concept is right there in the name, and that's exactly what it does. It's not built to stop shortages, or to increase the availability of apartments for people moving to the city.
  • chimeracoder 7y ago
    > The goal of rent stabilization is to make neighborhoods more stable. The concept is right there in the name, and that's exactly what it does. No, it's not. Rent stabilization is, purportedly, about ensuring that poor or low-income residents specifically aren't pushed out of neighborhoods or New York City entirely due to gentrification and rising rents. In terms of making housing affordable for those people, rent stabilization is incredibly ineffective.
    • CPLX 7y ago
      That's really not actually why these laws have been created. Their intent has always been to protect existing residents. Not poor or low income, necessarily, in fact for the most part the original idea was to protect the middle class, not so much the poor. Which should be unsurprising if you have any basic concept of who wields political power in cities. The key distinction is between people who are already there and people who aren't. Your assumption is a very common one but it's a misconception, and the difference is pretty crucial. It's not that hard to figure out: having massive rent increases possible upon vacancy, as well as almost no means testing (only in one special case) are two of the several obvious tells.
      • chimeracoder 7y ago
        > That's really not actually why these laws have been created. Their intent has always been to protect existing residents. I'm well aware of the history of rent regulation in New York City, and this is flat-out incorrect. > Not poor or low income, necessarily, in fact for the most part the original idea was to protect the middle class, not so much the poor. Which should be unsurprising if you have any basic concept of who wields political power in cities. Rent stabilization, in its current form, is a handout to the upper-middle class, couched in rhetoric about helping the "poor" and "working class". > It's not that hard to figure out: having massive rent increases possible upon vacancy, as well as almost no means testing (only in one special case) are two of the several obvious tells. This is... not how the rent stabilization law in New York City works.
  • baron816 7y ago
    The problem with these types of price controls is that it’s inherently unfair. If you’re on the inside and lucky enough to get a rent controlled apartment, you win. Everyone else loses.
    • CPLX 7y ago
      That's correct. Or said another way, if you have strong ties to the city and/or are a longtime resident of the neighborhood you win, if you don't you lose.
      • chimeracoder 7y ago
        > Or said another way, if you have strong ties to the city and/or are a longtime resident of the neighborhood you win, if you don't you lose. This has literally nothing to do with who ends up in a rent stabilized apartment. In fact, new residents are more likely to end up in rent stabilized apartments than existing residents, so rent stabilization has the exact opposite effect of what you're describing it does.
        • CPLX 7y ago
          > new residents are more likely to end up in rent stabilized apartments than existing residents Citation needed on that one.
      • baron816 7y ago
        So cities should be walled off gardens that don’t let new people fair access the opportunities to be had within?
    • bko 7y ago
      I would also note that it promotes illegal behavior as people who are lucky enough will often illegally sublet the home at the market price.
      • CPLX 7y ago
        All laws that prevent people from doing something they want to do promote illegal behavior by this definition.