Speaker Quinn Bears Bad News for Real Estate Crowd
As the featured speaker at Tuesday’s quarterly gathering of the Brooklyn Real Estate Roundtable, Council Speaker Christine Quinn didn’t tell the audience of developers, property owners and brokers what they wanted to hear. If the City wrests control over rent stabilization from the State, as is expected, Quinn said that it would likely work to…
As the featured speaker at Tuesday’s quarterly gathering of the Brooklyn Real Estate Roundtable, Council Speaker Christine Quinn didn’t tell the audience of developers, property owners and brokers what they wanted to hear. If the City wrests control over rent stabilization from the State, as is expected, Quinn said that it would likely work to undo the pro-landlord steps that have been taken in recent years regarding decontrol and destabilization. She also didn’t give the impression that 421-a program would be reinstated anytime soon. The one bit of news that didn’t elicit a groan from the crowd: She does not expect that the city will raise property taxes later this year. Oh, and she also made glowing comments about Two Trees when asked about the prospects for its proposed Dock Street development.
“Maybe they should pass a law that if you accept welfare/public housing, you must agree to go through a medical procedure whereby you can’t have any more children.”
Jeeze Louise. You’re not exactly a bundle of laughs are you?
Montrose,
Of course I don’t want those people on the streets or in jail either, and I’m fine with some of my tax dollars going towards supporting the neediest amongst us. But why should the neediest amongst us be allowed to procreate so we who work have to fork out even more money to take care of their children and their children’s children as well?
Maybe they should pass a law that if you accept welfare/public housing, you must agree to go through a medical procedure whereby you can’t have any more children. Otherwise it’s just a continuing cycle of government supported poverty and it’s not fair to tax payers.
FSRQ,
The local Democrats on the city council are just trying to appease the rent stabilized voting block who are scared that as their numbers decrease through vacancy decontrol, they won’t have the votes in the future to keep their arcane rent programs alive. It’s all political. Of course nobody really cares about rent laws that protect millionaires.
It’s all about pandering to the lowest common denominator — getting something for nothing and not having to ever do a lick of work in the meantime.
Hi Montrose – I didn’t mean to sound aggressive. I enjoy many of your posts.
but you can probably add New Zealand, Australia and Austria to that list of more civilised countries. Who I’m sure all have their own Christine Quinns.
MM, you keep believing America is the most civilized on earth. I just don’t buy it!! I can’t see how the US is somehow more civilized than any of e.g. the Scandanavian countries. God forbid the US would drop the death penalty and institute free healthcare, free higher education and other extravagances like one month’s paternity leave…
I do totally agree with:
“I believe that there are some people in this country for whom life is a series of bad breaks and no luck. They do not have education, or decent jobs, they may have made very poor choices in partners, they may have too many children, or children with special needs. They did not have parents who supported them, or schools and religious institutions that nurished and gave them direction. They made bad choices, missed the line for just about anything good, and will probably never get any higher than where they are now.”
But at the same time I do have a sympathy-failure with those who continually make the same bad mistakes, those who carelessy have way more children than they can support etc. I also realize its a vicious circle – the poorly educated have large numbers of children, which they are less able to support, etc etc, who end up poorly educated themselves…
For the life of me I can not understand why vacancy decontrol and perpetual stabilization – i.e. no income limit, no rent limit isnt a viable compromise. Why should a private LL be subsidizing the initial rent of a new renter (who may not even need a subsidy). Yet given the relative inelasticity of supply, it seems fair to protect existing tenancy with rent increases that are not subject to the wild excesses of fashion, exuberance and greed.
Whats the problem – how is this not “fair” and also politically viable since existing tenants are protected – is there that big a constituency of people looking for new rental apartments below fair market value??
Kate, I don’t particularly like Quinn, and I certainly don’t approve of her RE dealings, as well as those of Rangel, et al. It’s hypocricy of the worst kind, as they not only can afford to pay more, but they have CHOSEN to be public servants, and should be held to higher standards.
Iron Balls, I never said any of what you are accusing me of, you’ve taken to speaking for me, since I didn’t speak any of this myself. Let me put it out there SLOWLY and CLEARLY, so you will understand:
I’ve never said anything about what people can charge for their apartments. My comments yesterday on property rights are in reference to building owners who neglect, abandon and warehouse much needed buildings. That has nothing to do with rent control, rent subsidy or millionaires in CPW aparments. I do not have a downstairs apartment. So there. Your “facts” are already wrong.
I am all about hard work and responsibility. I was raised that way, I work like a dog, and I defy you to find anything I’ve ever written that goes against that. You can’t because I’ve never said it. I also believe everyone should have the same mindset.
I also never said that people are “entitled to free stuff paid for by tax payers”. WTF? Making things up because you want to see them there?
Let’s cut to the chase. What I do believe in is basic civilized human rights. I believe in the most advanced and “civilized” nation on earth that everyone, deserving or not, is entitled to a roof over their head. I do not believe that life in the USA should be a Darwinian struggle where only the strongest, or the wealthiest, or best connected, or English Speaking, or native born, or the right color, religion, educational background or preferred sexual orientation get to survive, and it’s tough shit for everyone else.
I believe that there are some people in this country for whom life is a series of bad breaks and no luck. They do not have education, or decent jobs, they may have made very poor choices in partners, they may have too many children, or children with special needs. They did not have parents who supported them, or schools and religious institutions that nurished and gave them direction. They made bad choices, missed the line for just about anything good, and will probably never get any higher than where they are now.
Those people need this society to help them. If my tax dollars do that, it’s fine with me. The alternative is much worse – starving, desperate people with nothing to lose coming after the rest of us. It’s cheaper to house them than to jail them. It’s better to try to save those who want to rise up out of that pit, than to squash them underfoot. If not for the sake of shared humanity, then for your own well being.
The system is flawed. Let’s fix it. Let’s eliminate as many of the cheats and scofflaws and enablers as possible. But helping the helpless will always be a good thing. I don’t really care if that makes me unpopular with you, Iron Balls. It’s not all about money. If you are going to misrepresent me, at least get it right.
I’ve never been to the welfare office.
I suppose they don’t really have silver platters, but I’m sure that will change along with Obama’s generous tax payer’s debt financed stimulus package.
Silver platters for everybody, hurrah!
They’ve got silver platters at the welfare office?
Montrose doesn’t care about anyone’s private property rights except her own. If we forced her to rent her downstairs apartment at half its market value she’d go nuts screaming murder in the streets.
She’s one of those people who think people deserve things for doing nothing.
Working hard, earning a living, and being independently responsible for oneself aren’t important to folks like Montrose.
According to her mentality, being poor “entitles” you to free stuff paid for by tax payers. Why work, if you can have it handed to you on a silver platter?
Artificially low rents subsidized by other private citizens are a “basic human right” according to folks like Montrose.
GIMMIE, GIMMIE, GIMMIE. . . . it’s sickening.