Comments on: Hunters Point South manifests some destiny today; Queensbridge all lit up

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 13:00:58 +0000

Any updates from yesterday’s CB2 meeting?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 23:09:43 +0000

Wow, who knew that this was a political blog!

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 21:54:23 +0000

I’m so glad I live in a neighborhood full of self-satisfied rich libertarians.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 21:11:17 +0000

No, what I would prefer is that some people excercise some more compassion in their lives for those less fortunate then them.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 21:06:27 +0000

Would you prefer a study funded by Move On.org?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 20:58:54 +0000

Rupert Murdoch is a good start

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 20:55:02 +0000

What’s wrong with the Cato Institute?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 20:42:11 +0000

Ah, the Cato Institute. You must be right.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 20:20:01 +0000

Interesting reading for anyone so inclinded to learn more facts on the issue: http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-274.html

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 19:42:17 +0000

I agree with you that this would indeed lower housing costs to some degree. And this would benefit the middle class. But you cannot get away with this in NYC, the city is too massive and the gap between the rich and poor is incredible. This is Queens, the most diverse area in the entire county. Elimination of this diversity would completely change the city for the worse.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 19:36:56 +0000

First of all, a $300,000 one bedroom apartment is not exactly affordable to someone who makes 60K a year. Its possible, don’t get me wrong, but not easily affordable. If this was any other city, I would completely agree with you.

And I’m sorry, but they are entitled to breaks and handouts. They pay taxes just like you. Why should the wealthiest be the only ones to receive these breaks. Rich people comaplaining about the middle class getting an unfair advantage. What’s new.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 19:33:24 +0000

52- you are not correct. There is plenty of empirical evidence that rent regulations actually limit the supply of moderately and affordably priced apartments. Look at Boston after it got rid of rent controls in 1997. There was no widespread destructive effect on tenants, and the number of affordable apartments developed afterward grew significantly.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 19:21:32 +0000

Any thoughts that eliminating regulated housing would somehow cause the free market to stabilize is very dangerous and purely speculative. The displacment of those who not be able to afford their apartments would be absolutley destuctive to the families, neighborhoods and communities that make nyc what it is.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 19:21:23 +0000

Good, dedicated teachers should be commended for their public service, just like cops and firefighters. No one is putting them down. But let’s be real. Most of my friends that went into teaching were looking to get into a cushy government job and are happy not to have to deal with the real world. A lot of them tried the private sector and went into teaching for better hours and less stress. There is nothing wrong with that – they are happy, comfortable, work hard and deserve credit. However, that does not mean they are entitled to breaks and handouts when it comes to waterfront apartments! Talk about insulting, you free rent beggars are incredibly elitist to disparage and disregard the good middle class affordable neighborhoods in Queens and Brooklyn.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 18:53:15 +0000

thank you #48. this whole thread has very classist, racist and misogynistic undertones. everyone is happy that their tax dollars go to making vernon blvd look like an outdoor mall in ohio, but god forbid the middle class get a break.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 18:46:01 +0000

#46 – regulated housing limits supply and creates artifical high demand, so yes it contributes to high real estate prices.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 18:41:06 +0000

I can’t believe that school teachers — who deserve to be venerated and showered with as much cash as portfolio analysts for the work they do and the crap they put up with — are getting beaten up on this thread. The comments stink of ignorance and, I suspect, a whiff of misogyny/racism. If many more white men were in the field, the tone of this “debate” would be a whole lot different.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 18:00:31 +0000

average teacher salary is 55K. I belive they start at around 40K.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 17:59:04 +0000

Lets be honest. Greed, limited supply, and high demand is has what caused the high real estate prices, not regulated housing.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 17:45:42 +0000

There is no way that a NYC public school teacher with over 5 years experience is only making $55k.

By: End Rent Control

End Rent Control — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 16:38:27 +0000

Yes, there will be plenty of market apartments, but unfortunately none for me. The developer will look at his books and figure that he needs $xxx to make his desired profit. Since the regulated units can only bring in a fixed amount he has to raise the price on the unregulated units to get to that number, putting the price out of the range for average new yorkers. So you create more regulated housing to solve to problem of afforability, and so on and so one the cycle continues. The only way out of this is to end this silly housing programs which do nothing but artifically inflate prices. Average price would drop across the board making the city much more affordable. Study after study proves this. There are also real life examples of it in Boston. Problem is that our politician know this but pander to those that can’t imagine a world without handouts.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 15:34:21 +0000

#42 – you are correct in that the program is in some ways unfair, but there isn’t much fair about the real estate market in nyc to begin with. there will still be plenty waterfront apartments available though, its not like this land will only be used for the regulated apartments. and like i mentioned above, they will be going up on public land.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 15:23:54 +0000

#41 – not sure if I follow your point. So higher income New Yorkers that work hard should be forced to live out in the boonies where the commute to work adds on to their already long day, just because the are stuck in that grey area where they much too much for government help, but still too little to afford anything nice on their own? Until someone anwsers that question, I will continue to view these programs a misguided and unfair.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 13:22:22 +0000

I still think the point is being missed by focusing on the teachers. Although they certainly fit in this category. But what about the firefighters and police who risk their lives on a daily basis? Obviously, they don’t chose their jobs purely because of the salary.
Lower income New Yorkers that work hard because they care about the human race should not be forced to live out in the boonies where the commute to work adds on to their already long day.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 01:51:05 +0000

or Madison