Hellish Landlord Drawing Protest in the Slope

Thanks Grendel
I guess i did not read anit rent stab articles recently.
I simply dont belive in excesive regulation.
Especialy in regulation that need regulation to work. Call me crazy

Malymis, it’s not just the “sophisticated” press. The Post, Daily News, Newsday, you name it and they will have weighed in heavily against rent regulations. The Post is actually one of the most vocal, with many editorials to choose from.

And the press circulates myths about rent regulation that people simply take as true without reading the law. For example, did you know that if you are a tenant in a rent controlled apartment, you *cannot* leave it in your will to your child/parent/sibling or anyone else? This has been stated as fact so many times that people simply believe it to be true. Rent regulated units can only be passed from one person to the next if that person has lived in that apartment witht the tenant of record for the last 2 years, and meets certain other requirements. Rent regulated apartments cannot be passed along in someone’s will.

I could talk about this for days, but I will spare you the trouble. Needless to say, I stand by my statement above that we are having the wrong argument. If there’s a problem with Cyndi Lauper having a huge apartment for pennies a month, then let’s fix that problem. If we don’t think it’s fair for landlords to pay the cost, then let’s tackle that. I have yet to be convinced that regulation is somehow bad, per se. Bad regulations are bad, but there can be good regulations that put the incentives in the right places, mimimize inefficiencies, and places value where the market cannot. Call me crazy, but I truly believe that.

no, not everyone does agree that you have to follow the law, that is, apparently, the problem with the landlord in question. The landlord is trying to drive people out by breaking the law, that is exactly the problem and you keep trying to make it about something else. Iam starting to wonder if you are the landlord in question, or know the landlord in question, or are a landlord who practices such things, and therefore have a conflict of interest in this discussion which you should reveal?
There are plenty of landlords who absolutly refuse to follow the law. Maintaning a building in compliance with things like the fire code has nothing to do with “RS” or “RC”.
Yes there are many cheaper places in other areas of the country, places like Iowa. Go to Hoboken, its not cheap there is it? Its the same as NYC, or maybe you think Greenwich Conn. is so cheap? Where around NYC is it “cheap” huh? Patterson NJ or some other dump? Please tell me where I can get a 1 bedroom apartment around here in a decent area for $500? Where? Where is “your many cheaper alterntives” tell me. You can’t because it does not exist anywhere around here in the entire tri-state area, in places where there is not “RC” or “RS”.
Furthermore “RC” and “RS” is not limited to NYC, it also exists statewide, and if you go upstate NY, its cheaper. Its not “RC” or “RS” that makes it more expensive, its the fact that the population of the city increased 750,000 in the last 10 years and there are more people who want to live here then there are places to live, that and the fact that landlords can charge and get high rent. Moreover, the argument that new apartments do not get built is simply not true, places are going up all over, have you been to willamsburg, or queens or downtown brooklyn? It does not “freeze” the market because new apartments are not subject to “RC” or “RS”. And by the way $1,800 dollars, which is still “RS” in NYC is not a cheap apartment anywhere else in the country. As for forcing a landlord to charge below market, nobody made them buy the building, the landlord knew it was rc or rs when bought, they made the deal, its not anyone else’s fault or responsibilty that said landlord was not smart enough to know there own mind, or too irresponsible to know what they bought. As for property taxes, etc and landlord who are losing moeny, tooo darn bad, its not the teneant’s fault that a landlord is too stupid to make money legally off apartments in the most expenseive housing market in the country and he/she should be out of business.

Once again a number of you are mixing oranges with grapes, the issue is that a landlord is breaking the law, NOT whether rent control/stablization is good or not. A landlord can’t decide “gee, I want to stop following the law and turn off the heat in winter because I don’t like the rent stablization thing”. A landlord gives up rights in a property when he/she accepts money from a tennant. A landlord can no longer do whatever he/she wants, thats why they get paid, that is the bargain they made. A landlord is required by law to provide things like hot water, etc. A landlord can not decide “I don’t want to do that now because I want to sell the building because the building is more valuable now and so I will drive the tennants out by breaking the law.”
The argument many of you are making is simlar to saying I don’t like stop signs they slow me down, and keep me from driving as fast as I want, so therefore I am going to feel free to speed and run people over to make up for having to stop. You don’t get to ignore and break one law because you don’t like a different law. A landlord does not get to break the law and place people’s health and safety at risk because the landlord no longer likes the deal he/she made. If a landlord does not want to own a rent control/stablized building, then don’t buy it in the first place, its that simple. Its like anything else, if you don’t want the responsbility, then don’t do it in the first place.

Sorry – Housing is not a commodity.
It is basic human need and if government of the people decides it must intervene to meet that need than that triumphs.
That does not mean that rent-control is right/best choice. You can debate freely its pro’s and con’s. But we do not (or at least try not to) ignore human needs to satisfy free-market purists.