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.
Just keep your eyes on California, which leads New York in foolishness. By creating a class of voter that either a) depends on government subsidized programs or b) works for the government, you end up with a guaranteed Democratic voting block that will grow larger and larger as a) they throw more subsidies to interest groups and b) expand government until they take over the state. Then you’re left with so many anti-business, anti-private property, anti-capitalist, hyper-regulatory tax-the-rich crap on the books that businesses flee, capital flees, the taxpayers you’ve been soaking flee and, well, your much-maligned golden geese are gone or dead. Your state crumbles and you’re at the part where you’re state’s not only broke, it’s so broke you’re going to have to set loose 58,000 prisoners.
But by all means, keep voting Democrat on the local levels. (Not that voting Republican’s going to help at this point. The numbers simply aren’t there. And it’s not like they’re that much better when they’re in charge.)
“Sure, but it’s no more of a conflict than repealing term limits, but having the repeal apply only to current incumbents, i.e. the very people who changed the law.”
Exactly. She’s a sell-out. You’re SURPRISED she again voted in her own self-interest?
Benson, my wife is a public school teacher. She breaks her neck for her kids, continues to pursue higher qualifications, and often spends her own money to buy supplies for her kids because the school is often short. She and I have worked hard for everything we have. We’ve always worked and paid taxes. We each put ourselves through college, and have since put my son through college. We rented at market rate and still saved and bought a house. We have never taken a DIME of public money, except when I got unemployment when I was out of work in the recession in the 1980s. If anyone believes in hard work and not getting something for nothing, it’s us. That said, your generalizations about teachers in particular are insulting and off target.
“Boreum Hill: according to Eric Schneiderman (Dem, Manhattan) an income of $250K makes you a millionaire and he wants to tax you as such, but rent control is to be extended to $240K salaries. So middle class in NYC means earning $241-$249K. Finally, we have a definition. ”
This reminds me of the old joke about liberal public policy, which I hate because it looks like there’s some truth to it:
If it moves, tax it.
If it keeps moving, regulate it.
When it stops moving, subsidize it.
Boreum Hill: according to Eric Schneiderman (Dem, Manhattan) an income of $250K makes you a millionaire and he wants to tax you as such, but rent control is to be extended to $240K salaries. So middle class in NYC means earning $241-$249K. Finally, we have a definition.
CMU,
According to dictionary.com, bigoted means:
“utterly intolerant of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one’s own.”
Please explain how my comment was bigoted?
And while you’re at it, please explain why tax payers should support non working welfare recipients and their huge families because they’re too stupid and lazy to wear condoms?
I can’t wait to hear your explanation. . .
For the record, I realize all sort of folks are given a free ride by the NYC rent regulations.
I know a retired millionaire who lives in a $1100/mo stabilized classic six a block from Central Park on the Upper West Side.
He spends most afternoon sipping Cherry with his buddies at the Friar’s Club.
Those NYC rent laws sure do help those in need!
This kind of political hack shit makes me want to move our business to Philadelphia. It certainly encourages flight.
Ha!
You guys slay me.
Imagine a NYC politician actually supporting rent control! Did you ever?
Rent control is like our municipal religion. It is our sacred cow, our holy of the holies. Rent-regulated tenants outnumber landlords by about 50,000 to one. It will never die!
Suburban Dude,
For rent control an income of $240K is “working class” that needs protection and for Obama’s tax plan “rich” and needing a tax increase income of $250K. That doesn’t make sense to me.