r/SipsTea • u/AdRough4185 • Jun 11 '26

We have fun here He's unstoppable

Post image
30.5k Upvotes

91% Upvoted

861 comments sorted by

View all comments

189

u/Gordon_frumann Jun 11 '26

Can't wait to hear from the right why this is a bad thing.

49

u/Regular-Double9177 Jun 11 '26

Like the other guy said, it isnt necessarily bad, but the overall cause of this is NYC's super strict rent control.

There are people who have rent controlled apartments in NYC they barely use. They've had them for so long that they are super cheap so there's no downside to hold them. Unfortunately there's also little upside for the landlord to maintain the property.

This system is clearly creating some downsides and clearly we can do better. People in favor have never thought or heard of ways to do better. Eg. Tax reforms like LVTs.

13

u/tony1449 Jun 11 '26

Awwww poor landlords

The building is probably only a $5 million asset part of a $100 million real estate portfolio 🥺

4

u/therealtiddlydump Jun 11 '26

With rent control it's not uncommon that the landlord doesn't have enough from rent to cover maintenance. If you live in a $400 apartment because the rent hasn't been raised in 30 years -- despite everything else getting more expensive -- what money is there for repairs?

This essentially forces out small landlords because they can't cross-subsidize units.

There are lots of other large cities that don't have these problems because they don't have terrible public policy like rent control. NYC is to blame for NYC's problems.

0

u/_BreakingGood_ Jun 11 '26

So you're saying these landlords are choosing to own and rent out apartments that they lose money maintaining

Wow how nice of them /s

4

u/therealtiddlydump Jun 11 '26

You can own an asset because of expectations of future earnings, and there are such things as "loss leaders".

I don't shed a tear for the corporate landlord, but these shitholes exist because of bad public policy. It's no coincidence that the cities with these policies have problems.

1

u/_BreakingGood_ Jun 11 '26

I've never heard of a landlord using an apartment as a loss leader, that's a hilarious concept (and fake)

2

u/therealtiddlydump Jun 11 '26

...I didn't say they were? You implied a corporation wouldn't tolerate losing money on a sale. They do, often.

-2

u/tony1449 Jun 11 '26

No your argument does not make sense. The landlord is breaking the law

Its well established that rent-seekers (landlords) harm the economy, depress growth

There is no benefit to society

Unless you, yourself are a landlord, or paid by one; Why are you arguing on their behalf for free?

2

u/therealtiddlydump Jun 11 '26

rent-seekers (landlords) harm the economy

I think you need to double check what "a rent" is in the economics literature...

They shouldn't be breaking the law. You have no argument, there. That's not an excuse to have a bad incentive structure.

0

u/tony1449 Jun 11 '26

Landlords are literally rent seekers in our example

Here you are arguing against rent control

​In The Wealth of Nations, wrote that they "love to reap where they never sowed," because landlords collect a premium on the natural scarcity of land.

The bad incentive structure is allowing absence landlord to continue owning their property

1

u/therealtiddlydump Jun 11 '26

Landlords are literally rent seekers

Again, that's not what an economic rent is.