4 ms·

It's not "rents for the rich" it's "rents for higher priced apartments" and it's basic supply & demand. This headline stokes unnecessary class conflict. WaPo sh

It's not "rents for the rich" it's "rents for higher priced apartments" and it's basic supply & demand. This headline stokes unnecessary class conflict. WaPo should be ashamed.

jakelazaroff 6y ago
Who is renting higher priced apartments if not the rich?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- powersnail 6y ago
  Aren't most rich people living in their own houses? I'd imagine most higher priced apartment renters are middle class.
  - warent 6y ago
    I think these days high priced apartments are only affordable by the wealthy, unless people are grouping together with multiple roommates, at which point it means they can't actually afford the apartment, so is it really middle class anymore?
    - trillic 6y ago
      If 4 22 year olds making 50k each share a $3,000 4bd 2ba rental "for the rich" I'd say they're middle class and can afford it.
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
      - ArchOversight 6y ago
        4bd 2ba for $3k ain't happening in SF ;-)
        fwip 6y ago
        Most places aren't SF
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
  - jandrewrogers 6y ago
    No, quite a lot of the rich live in rental property, at least part of the time. There are disadvantages to owning, even if you can afford it, and not everywhere you want to live may be for sale.
  - BoorishBears 6y ago
    Across the street from me in a similar building to mine with condos instead of rentals, a studio goes for 1M. Unless I'm set on living in NYC for the rest of my life I'm not buying real estate here. I imagine most people apply the same logic
- oh_sigh 6y ago
  If higher priced apartments lower in price, doesn't that make it more affordable for more people? Isn't that a good thing?
secondcoming 6y ago
Those clicks won't click themselves!
warent 6y ago
I thought it was a well known problem that in the US class disparity (i.e. the gap between middle class and upper class) is increasing. The middle class is evaporating, becoming very rich or borderline poverty. Am I confused? WaPo isn't really saying anything new or controversial.
- gph 6y ago
  It's more like the middle class is bifurcating between upperish middle class and lower-middle class. In-demand tech workers, doctors, high-level admins/managers, etc. are getting higher and higher wages while other professions that used to be middle class as starting to stagnate and fall behind such as low-level office workers, journalists, teachers, mid-to-low level managers, etc. I wouldn't consider either group to really be upper class, but I guess there's always going to be differences in how people are sorted into those categories. I think the issue is that the article is inflammatory click-bait because it makes it seems like rich people are getting a break while poor people are getting shafted. It's not until you've read through most the entire article that they finally get to the point, which is that 'rich' people are buying houses in the suburbs/exurbs now that they can work remotely. Unsurprisingly this means prices are spiking in those areas while rent for high-end apartments are shrinking as demand dries up. So rich people aren't really catching a break so much as exiting the rental market in major cities and redirecting their spending to the suburban housing market.
  - thomastjeffery 6y ago
    > I think the issue is that the article is inflammatory click-bait because it makes it seems like rich people are getting a break while poor people are getting shafted. Why? Do you seriously think that is untrue? Go talk to some poor people. Hell, just talk to someone who is 18-29: there is a 52% chance they are stuck living with their parents[1]. We're definitely getting shafted over here. [1] https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/09/04/a-majority-of-young-adults-in-the-u-s-live-with-their-parents-for-the-first-time-since-the-great-depression/ https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/09/04/a-majority-...
    - 6y ago
overton 6y ago
There's nothing natural about housing markets. Across the developed world bougie homeowners have been using zoning regulations to restrict supply with immensely lucrative results. I would also like to see you tell someone experiencing housing precarity that these conversations are unnecessary, to their face.
hstan4 6y ago
Just doing what WaPo does best
pasquinelli 6y ago
right, and anyway the rich collect rent.
tptacek 6y ago
It's better not to fulminate. If the market restricts access to housing for working class people, we can't just wave our hands and say "oh, well, markets". Chicago doesn't have rent control. The implication of the story is that the market is failing in Chicago, and that's a problem, whether or not it's the product of top-down policy or bottom-up market dynamics.
- hntrader 6y ago
  How is it the "market restricting access" if the rents went up because of the eviction moratorium? If that's the reason, then what you said is true in a trivial literal sense, but that's blaming the consequence (market pricing) instead of the real cause (government policy). Likewise, if housing supply is restricted due to regulations, that's not the "market failing" - that's government policy guaranteeing that rents will be high for poor people. The only way to make rents cheaper for all poor people is to incentivize massive construction of new apartments, or at least clear all regulatory hurdles to doing so and simply let the market do the rest for you. Flood the market with supply. The more supply, the cheaper rents will be, since demand is mostly stable.

It's not "rents for the rich" it's "rents for higher priced apartments" and it's basic supply & demand. This headline stokes unnecessary class conflict. WaPo should be ashamed.

jakelazaroff 6y ago

Who is renting higher priced apartments if not the rich?

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
powersnail 6y ago
Aren't most rich people living in their own houses? I'd imagine most higher priced apartment renters are middle class.
- warent 6y ago
  I think these days high priced apartments are only affordable by the wealthy, unless people are grouping together with multiple roommates, at which point it means they can't actually afford the apartment, so is it really middle class anymore?
  - trillic 6y ago
    If 4 22 year olds making 50k each share a $3,000 4bd 2ba rental "for the rich" I'd say they're middle class and can afford it.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - ArchOversight 6y ago
      4bd 2ba for $3k ain't happening in SF ;-)
      - fwip 6y ago
        Most places aren't SF
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
- jandrewrogers 6y ago
  No, quite a lot of the rich live in rental property, at least part of the time. There are disadvantages to owning, even if you can afford it, and not everywhere you want to live may be for sale.
- BoorishBears 6y ago
  Across the street from me in a similar building to mine with condos instead of rentals, a studio goes for 1M. Unless I'm set on living in NYC for the rest of my life I'm not buying real estate here. I imagine most people apply the same logic
oh_sigh 6y ago
If higher priced apartments lower in price, doesn't that make it more affordable for more people? Isn't that a good thing?

secondcoming 6y ago

Those clicks won't click themselves!

warent 6y ago

I thought it was a well known problem that in the US class disparity (i.e. the gap between middle class and upper class) is increasing. The middle class is evaporating, becoming very rich or borderline poverty. Am I confused? WaPo isn't really saying anything new or controversial.

gph 6y ago
It's more like the middle class is bifurcating between upperish middle class and lower-middle class. In-demand tech workers, doctors, high-level admins/managers, etc. are getting higher and higher wages while other professions that used to be middle class as starting to stagnate and fall behind such as low-level office workers, journalists, teachers, mid-to-low level managers, etc. I wouldn't consider either group to really be upper class, but I guess there's always going to be differences in how people are sorted into those categories. I think the issue is that the article is inflammatory click-bait because it makes it seems like rich people are getting a break while poor people are getting shafted. It's not until you've read through most the entire article that they finally get to the point, which is that 'rich' people are buying houses in the suburbs/exurbs now that they can work remotely. Unsurprisingly this means prices are spiking in those areas while rent for high-end apartments are shrinking as demand dries up. So rich people aren't really catching a break so much as exiting the rental market in major cities and redirecting their spending to the suburban housing market.
- thomastjeffery 6y ago
  > I think the issue is that the article is inflammatory click-bait because it makes it seems like rich people are getting a break while poor people are getting shafted. Why? Do you seriously think that is untrue? Go talk to some poor people. Hell, just talk to someone who is 18-29: there is a 52% chance they are stuck living with their parents[1]. We're definitely getting shafted over here. [1] https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/09/04/a-majority-of-young-adults-in-the-u-s-live-with-their-parents-for-the-first-time-since-the-great-depression/ https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/09/04/a-majority-...
  - 6y ago

overton 6y ago

There's nothing natural about housing markets. Across the developed world bougie homeowners have been using zoning regulations to restrict supply with immensely lucrative results. I would also like to see you tell someone experiencing housing precarity that these conversations are unnecessary, to their face.

hstan4 6y ago

Just doing what WaPo does best

pasquinelli 6y ago

right, and anyway the rich collect rent.

tptacek 6y ago

It's better not to fulminate. If the market restricts access to housing for working class people, we can't just wave our hands and say "oh, well, markets". Chicago doesn't have rent control. The implication of the story is that the market is failing in Chicago, and that's a problem, whether or not it's the product of top-down policy or bottom-up market dynamics.

hntrader 6y ago
How is it the "market restricting access" if the rents went up because of the eviction moratorium? If that's the reason, then what you said is true in a trivial literal sense, but that's blaming the consequence (market pricing) instead of the real cause (government policy). Likewise, if housing supply is restricted due to regulations, that's not the "market failing" - that's government policy guaranteeing that rents will be high for poor people. The only way to make rents cheaper for all poor people is to incentivize massive construction of new apartments, or at least clear all regulatory hurdles to doing so and simply let the market do the rest for you. Flood the market with supply. The more supply, the cheaper rents will be, since demand is mostly stable.