Rent Board Chief on Shifting Onus from Landlords
The Observer ran an interesting interview yesterday with the head of the Rent Guidelines Board, Marvin Markus, that lays out some of the common-sense problems with rent control and stabilization. If we as a society deem it worthwhile to subsidize certain people (and clearly there are lots of reasons to do so), then the cost…
The Observer ran an interesting interview yesterday with the head of the Rent Guidelines Board, Marvin Markus, that lays out some of the common-sense problems with rent control and stabilization. If we as a society deem it worthwhile to subsidize certain people (and clearly there are lots of reasons to do so), then the cost should be borne by society as a whole not individual landlords, argues Markus. “There are poor tenants, they should be protected, but the individual owner is not the one that should protect them. The population at large clearly should be the ones footing the bill,” he says. And how would be do that? “One suggestion is a rent tax/surcharge of some limited amount, on all rents in the city … and all co-op and condo charges in the city. … It’s very important for the city of New York that there be a mixed income base—from an economic standpoint; from a social standpoint—and we want to make sure, I want to make sure, that that continues.” While landlords make easy political targets, it’s hard to make any rational arguments in favor of the current system: Lifetime entitlements makes no sense at all; nor does a system that dis-incentivizes landlords from maintaining the housing stock.
Rent Board Chief Markus Pleads for ‘Rationality’ [NY Observer]
Photo from the Tenement Museum
I’m so glad bxgrl is here to provide us with endless amusement and further evidence as to why democracy is a failure.
Bensen,
You make a good point. Most of my rent stabilized and rent controled tenants seem like pretty unhappy people.
If they’d bought years ago when prices were cheap, they would be able to sell even today for a big profit and live somewhere much much nicer. . .
Instead they’re hunkered down in their prewar shitholes with no justification to move since their rents are so absurdly low.
benson- have you gone nuts? You and ironballs even read anything with any amount of reading comprehension? I was quoting from a NYC report on the history of rent control. jeez-
ironballs- who said anything about people who moved here 20 years ago deserving special deals??? And I strongly believe there should be an income requirement. Whose posts are you reading? Not mine obviously.
Bxgrl;
I see. So we shouldn’t look at what happened in an actual situation, but we should heed the hypothesis of a politician who has an entrenched interest in the status quo. Riiiggghhhhtttt…..
FSRQ;
Sad, but true. Rent control is one of the “holy of holies” in NYC. My wife has an aunt and uncle who live in a rent-stabilized apartment in Queens. They were both NYC public school teachers, and never had children. They have comfortable net worth. Yet, they consider all landlords to be greedy bastards, and take pride in the fact that they live in a rent-controlled apartment. They ignore the fact that the apartment is a shithole, but they think that they’ve pulled one on the landlord. They drop everything to attend one of those rallies in Albany in support of RC/RS.
In my mind, they serve one useful purpose. I always used them as an “negative” example when I was raising my daughter, of what happens when a sense of entitlement becomes overwhelming.
Bxgrl can’t defend her position since it’s so absurd.
There’s no defending a system that allows folks regardless of income to pay below market rents to private landlords, and deep down I’m sure Bxgrl knows it. . .
benson- Boston is not NYC.
FSRQ- true. But at least it was a good discussion to have (although Andrew Stein may not be thrilled)
suburbandude- indeed I did and I supplied you with the reasons for rent control and stablization. You make it very simplistic and simplify it even more by calling Andrew Stein a political whore as an talking point. Would that the whole issue was as clear as you want it to be. But its not.
Idisagree- I agree 🙂
Let me just say here at the 60th post or so
This whole discussion while interesting is TOTALLY academic
the only proposals related to RS that are being considered are increases in the RS/RC laws as they currently exist…..
Mr Mrkus may have brilliant ideas – but no one (except us and the NY Observer care)