4 ms·

One of the conditions required for a condo to receive generous tax breaks (which it passes on to the tenants) is that they build affordable housing. >As origin

by bko 12y ago

One of the conditions required for a condo to receive generous tax breaks (which it passes on to the tenants) is that they build affordable housing. >As originally designed, the program requires to allocate at least 20 percent of their units to low-income families, in return for tax breaks of up to 80 percent. It's a badly kept secret in Manhattan that the program is often used by luxury developers. One57 used a popular loophole in the law that allowed the developers to take the tax benefit for the building overlooking the park, but fund the affordable housing units in another location. One57 bought credits or "certificates" that helped fund those affordable housing units in outer bouroughs, according to city records. [0] This is all part of a misguided housing policy in New York that focuses on "affordable" housing. This results in housing that is below market and a few lucky people that get in. For instance, one new building that got a lot of attention for having a separate door for the subsidized tenants (dubbed the "poor door" by the media) has received 88,000 applications for 55 subsidized units. [1] In my opinion, if the government wanted to subsidize the less fortunate, they should provide a cash subsidy for the individual to use as see fit. Forcing someone to take the entire value of that subsidy in the form of a housing credit is silly. For example, if you force developers to charge only $1000 for a $5000 apartment, you're essentially transferring $4,000 from landlord to tenant as a housing credit. I would prefer the individual receive $4,000 cash and be able to choose how to spend that amount, or somewhere in-between. I doubt most would use the entirety of that amount on better housing. [0] http://www.cnbc.com/id/49360274 http://www.cnbc.com/id/49360274 [1] http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/21/nyregion/poor-door-building-draws-88000-applicants-for-55-rental-units.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/21/nyregion/poor-door-buildin...

thrownaway2424 12y ago
Direct cash payment is always better than subsidies. Subsidized housing simply transfers money to property owners.
- CPLX 12y ago
  > Direct cash payment is always better than subsidies. Because you say so? Direct cash benefits have one effect, rent regulation has another. It depends on what you are trying to achieve. I am always perplexed when people talk about NYC housing policy and how it's self-apparently and obviously being done wrong, they invariably fail to note that it's the most desirable and culturally important city in the Western Hemisphere.
  - bko 12y ago
    I think a better measure of whether housing policy has succeeded in New York is a measure of the cost of housing. In that case, New York's housing policy has not stopped housing prices from increasing. You could argue that the situation would be worse without it though. > Because you say so? I'm not the commenter, but I think cash is better precisely because I don't know what would be better for the recipient. It's pretty arrogant to assume that you know what is right for someone. To say that a $4,000 transfer should be used on housing and housing alone is an insult to the person receiving the benefit, as though that person cannot think or make decisions for themselves.
    - CPLX 12y ago
      > I think a better measure of whether housing policy has succeeded in New York is a measure of the cost of housing. Thus, we can conclude that by the same metric that the most successful civic and urban policies are employed in rural Nebraska and West Texas. Perhaps that's actually not the best way to measure the success of a city? > I'm not the commenter, but I think cash is better precisely because I don't know what would be better for the recipient. It's pretty arrogant to assume that you know what is right for someone. Perhaps. But what if, instead of making a decision based on what's better for some arbitrary recipient, you wanted to make decisions that would increase the likelihood of having a vibrant and diverse urban environment with people that have various economic and cultural roles to play interwoven into the fabric of the city's housing stock. What if you placed stability and continuity as higher values in your trade off calculations than maximizing economic efficiency? Again, my argument is a plea for empiricism. New York is a staggeringly successful city, one of the world's most desirable and influential places, with an incredible culture of residents. I always wonder if people have actually paused to notice that when they start evaluating housing policy.
      - bko 12y ago
        Perhaps effectiveness of housing policy could be measured by the price changes as population grows. Texas for instance has very loose zoning regulations, with high population growth and below median home prices. Also, Texas didn't have the huge run-up in housing appreciation as did many other states, and hence virtually no subsequent crash [0]. During that time Texas has grown in population substantially. To be fair, New York didn't have much of a crash either but the housing market is very expensive. I love NY. I choose to live here. I don't like high rent though. I'm just a little weary of allowing political bodies to determine the right "urban environment" as these same bodies have used their powers for segregation. Sure, diversity sounds good, but it sometimes leaves a bad taste in my mouth. For instance, ~70% of Stuyvesant High School is Asian and admission is based solely on a test. Should Asian's be prevented from attending? [0] http://static.cdn-seekingalpha.com/uploads/2015/5/11/saupload_150508_RealMedianHousePricesUSvsTexas.png http://static.cdn-seekingalpha.com/uploads/2015/5/11/sauploa... [1] http://seekingalpha.com/article/3167336-houston-wavers-but-texas-housing-still-benefits-from-economic-resiliency http://seekingalpha.com/article/3167336-houston-wavers-but-t...
- sukilot 12y ago
  In a sellers market, cash transfers areeffectively subsidies -- the landlord consumes all the renter's ability to pay.

by bko 12y ago

thrownaway2424 12y ago

Direct cash payment is always better than subsidies. Subsidized housing simply transfers money to property owners.

CPLX 12y ago
> Direct cash payment is always better than subsidies. Because you say so? Direct cash benefits have one effect, rent regulation has another. It depends on what you are trying to achieve. I am always perplexed when people talk about NYC housing policy and how it's self-apparently and obviously being done wrong, they invariably fail to note that it's the most desirable and culturally important city in the Western Hemisphere.
- bko 12y ago
  I think a better measure of whether housing policy has succeeded in New York is a measure of the cost of housing. In that case, New York's housing policy has not stopped housing prices from increasing. You could argue that the situation would be worse without it though. > Because you say so? I'm not the commenter, but I think cash is better precisely because I don't know what would be better for the recipient. It's pretty arrogant to assume that you know what is right for someone. To say that a $4,000 transfer should be used on housing and housing alone is an insult to the person receiving the benefit, as though that person cannot think or make decisions for themselves.
  - CPLX 12y ago
    > I think a better measure of whether housing policy has succeeded in New York is a measure of the cost of housing. Thus, we can conclude that by the same metric that the most successful civic and urban policies are employed in rural Nebraska and West Texas. Perhaps that's actually not the best way to measure the success of a city? > I'm not the commenter, but I think cash is better precisely because I don't know what would be better for the recipient. It's pretty arrogant to assume that you know what is right for someone. Perhaps. But what if, instead of making a decision based on what's better for some arbitrary recipient, you wanted to make decisions that would increase the likelihood of having a vibrant and diverse urban environment with people that have various economic and cultural roles to play interwoven into the fabric of the city's housing stock. What if you placed stability and continuity as higher values in your trade off calculations than maximizing economic efficiency? Again, my argument is a plea for empiricism. New York is a staggeringly successful city, one of the world's most desirable and influential places, with an incredible culture of residents. I always wonder if people have actually paused to notice that when they start evaluating housing policy.
    - bko 12y ago
      Perhaps effectiveness of housing policy could be measured by the price changes as population grows. Texas for instance has very loose zoning regulations, with high population growth and below median home prices. Also, Texas didn't have the huge run-up in housing appreciation as did many other states, and hence virtually no subsequent crash [0]. During that time Texas has grown in population substantially. To be fair, New York didn't have much of a crash either but the housing market is very expensive. I love NY. I choose to live here. I don't like high rent though. I'm just a little weary of allowing political bodies to determine the right "urban environment" as these same bodies have used their powers for segregation. Sure, diversity sounds good, but it sometimes leaves a bad taste in my mouth. For instance, ~70% of Stuyvesant High School is Asian and admission is based solely on a test. Should Asian's be prevented from attending? [0] http://static.cdn-seekingalpha.com/uploads/2015/5/11/saupload_150508_RealMedianHousePricesUSvsTexas.png http://static.cdn-seekingalpha.com/uploads/2015/5/11/sauploa... [1] http://seekingalpha.com/article/3167336-houston-wavers-but-texas-housing-still-benefits-from-economic-resiliency http://seekingalpha.com/article/3167336-houston-wavers-but-t...
sukilot 12y ago
In a sellers market, cash transfers areeffectively subsidies -- the landlord consumes all the renter's ability to pay.