Where is Cuomo, in his "moral clarity," living these days? And would he be forefronting this issue if he had scored the nomination, as he'd expected? I think it's only because Mamdani got the nomination that Cuomo talking about rent-stabilization, which is a problem, but not one that could be solved by trying to guilt-trip the beneficiaries of it to move out of their apartments.
This reminds me of the time Hillary Clinton tried to shame Donald Trump out of using the tax advantages that are written into the law:
You need to change the law. Did Cuomo criticize the law before he saw how it could be used in a focused attack on Mamdani, who's just doing what everyone else in his position does?
Here's a NYT article about the current foofaraw: "Cuomo’s Attack on Mamdani’s Apartment Struck a New York Nerve/The attacks in the New York City mayor’s race may have veered into the personal, but they also reflected a larger debate on who should benefit from government regulation of housing costs." Excerpt:
Mr. Cuomo accused Mr. Mamdani of “callous theft” and proposed a new law named after him to means-test who can live in the city’s roughly one million rent-stabilized units.... Mr. Cuomo, a moderate Democrat who lives in an $8,000-a-month market-rate apartment, supports incentivizing new private housing construction but has said government resources should be steered to the neediest....
How can it work politically to threaten middle-class people with sudden loss of the rent-stabilization they've relied on and direct them into a market that asks — what? — $8,000?
About half the city’s apartments are considered stabilized, meaning they are subject to regulation by a board appointed by the mayor that limits how much rent can rise in a given year. Though most tenants in these units have incomes below the city average, anyone can apply to live in them. Mr. Cuomo’s so-called Zohran’s Law proposal, which he rushed out just hours after first mentioning it, would effectively allow units in the program to be leased only to New Yorkers who pay at least 30 percent of their income a year in rent, the threshold at which households are generally deemed to be rent-burdened. For example, if an apartment rents for $2,500 a month, or $30,000 for the year, the tenant’s income can’t be more than $100,000, according to the proposal....
“In our disgraced former Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s mind, these units, these buildings, these tenants are a political pawn,” Mr. Mamdani said on Tuesday. “He believes that New Yorkers, in order to experience that stability, they must be rent-burdened.”
Posts
35 comments:
You newly minted economists out there should sink your teeth into this issue. Rent control is a self-perpetuating failure…
…in that context it’s disturbing to hear major politicians from anywhere debating nuance of a destructive policy…
This is why "rent control" fails every time it is implemented. The rich and powerful hog all the available apartments and no one wants to give them up. The none-controlled units can only be afforded by rich tenants, so rent control squeezes the poor out of an area entirely.
Leftists hate capitalism so much because the exchanges are voluntary, based on individual choice and needs. Those things cannot be controlled by government without distorting the free exchange of goods and services. Distorting the markets means they work less efficiently. In the real world that friction adds costs.
No one "invented" capitalism they (Marx) just made up a name for what people automatically do in societies since the dawn of time: exchange goods and services with friends and neighbors in order to maximize self-preservation. That same self-preserving impulse also strengthens the community in general. It requires no boss, no government, no rules.
None of the pro-rent control crowd can ever point to an example where the rent is affordable for working poor in a rent-controlled city. Not one. "Affordable" housing is always where leftist policies have not distorted the market so much, if any.
$2,300 for a one bedroom is Queens seems expensive.
30% of gross income for rent is high. Live somewhere else
Cappy said...
Will Mayor Mamdami celebrate the 25th anniversary of 9/11?
8/13/25, 9:11 AM
Of course he will because it was a great victory!
“He believes that New Yorkers, in order to experience that stability, they must be rent-burdened.”
Wasn't "rent-burden" the premise behind imposing rent control in the first place?
Hillary had to think she had Trump on the tax issue, but Trump owned it. He takes every deduction he can, like anyone would.
How will Mamdani respond? If people think of him as wealthy, then it looks like he is taking a spot from someone else.
Cuomo is circling the drain on this one.
$2,300 for a one bedroom is Queens seems expensive.
$2500 for tiny 2-bedroom apartment in Redlands, CA is also crazy. SoCal is becoming unaffordable for young people, like my niece. That is slightly higher than I was paying for my mortgage on a 4-bedroom 2750 sq. ft. house I sold for $725K (December 2023) before moving here to Florida.
However, like all socialists/communists, Mamdani prefers to give away other people's money and property.
Well when Mandami moves into Gracie Mansion the taxpayers will foot the entire bill for his housing. So there is that. In the meantime--for the low income folk in New York City--developers are starting to convert the hotels where "migrants" aka illegal immigrants--were housed into apartments. Big story in the WSJ today.
Cuomo is right here.
Mamdami is a hypocrite and a wealthy fraud.
What is Mamdani's net worth? Odd, how a politician running on a Socialist platform, while coming from showcased luxury means, manages to escape that obvious question. How did you come by your wealth, how much are you worth, and how does this shape the policies you envision for everyone else? And what do you propose to do with your wealth? A capitalist would not be ashamed to say: "Make it bigger".
"This is why 'rent control' fails every time it is implemented. The rich and powerful hog all the available apartments and no one wants to give them up."
Wrong. The rich do not get to keep rent-controlled apartments, (unless they break the law and conceal their incomes).
There are presently only about 15,000 or so rent-controlled apartments left in NYC, and about 960,000 rent-stabilized apartments, (with different rules applying to each). This is fewer than 1,000,000 tenants under any kind of rent control in a city of eight (or more) million people.
I lived in a rent-stabilized apartment for 40 years in NYC, (until we moved out of NY just under four years ago). Every time the lease comes up for renewal--either annually or every two years, depending on the tenant's choice--the rent increases, the percentage of increase determined by the Rent Guidelines Board. Once the rent reaches a certain threshold, and the income of the tenant also increases to a stated threshold, the rent-stabilization is removed from the apartment. This prevents someone making hundreds of thousands of dollars annually from retaining a low rent designed to make living affordable to working tenants with modest or low incomes. I never made more than a five-figure income in they years I lived in NYC.
Rent control laws are necessary in NYC to keep a working population in residence in the city. Without such protections, the city would become empty of middle-class (or lower-class) working tenants, and NYC would become a city inhabited only by the rich. As it is, the multi-million and -billion apartments being built in the city currently and in recent years are often empty. This is not to say they don't have owners, many or most do. They just are ultra-rich buyers--often foreigners--who buy these mega-apartments as investments. Many of the owners "reside" in their apartments only days or weeks a year, and many never appear in "their apartments" at all.
Even, many young people moving to NYC now cannot obtain rent-controlled apartments and they have to pile up in multi-roommate situations to afford their apartments. (I had to have a roommate for over half of my 40 years living in NYC, until my income increased such I could afford my rent on my own.)
Move to New Jersey, like other workers.
Mamdami makes 140K+ per year (doing what?) - comes from a very wealthy family and his wife is wealthy.
New Yorkers want a Hamas representative as their leader.
That Mamdami is a communist / anti-capitalist - is just gravy.
That's a lovely description, assuming that nobody ever games the system and nobody ever calls on a personal connection, and nobody else has a housing subsidy from some other program. I think you should try harder to be even handed in your treatments. I think that keeping 'workers in the city' is just BS window dressing used to dupe the voters into agreeing to the scheme in the first place, and like all East Coast City big government themes, it can never get smaller, only bigger, more complicated, with additional regulations to make sure there are plenty of jobs created, and enough rules so that anybody can be subjected to 'enforcement', when necessary.
The whole point of the rent-controlled, rent-stabilized schemes is to put into place a system of control, whereby what you own is subject to somebody else's preferences and whims. Because with these kinds of schemes, the House always wins. And the game becomes, how do I work my way inside the House Club?
foofaraw: A fuss or commotion over something trivial: Describes a brouhaha or disturbance about something insignificant, akin to a "storm in a teacup."
BTW, Brouhaha is French in origin, which suprised me since I thought it was Irish like "Donnybrook".
Yah, Hoboken or Metro North- both good options…
Mamdami is now campaigning on Trump Hate.
Like all creepy democratic a-holes - it's all he has.
I hate fakes like Cuomo. Has zero desire to change anything or do anything that might injure the Real Estate interests. But if he sees an advantage, he's outraged, I tell ya OUTRAGED over someone with a rent controlled apartment.
And I noticed he's using the new "Politically correct" word "Unhoused". Good for you Cuomo, here's a gold star and a cookie. you're a good little boy.
I love this Mandingo candidacy - he wont change anything if elected, he wont have the power, but he's ruffling the right feathers.
"Wasn't "rent-burden" the premise behind imposing rent control in the first place?"
Yes, from the other NYT article on the dispute:
"Under rent stabilization, by contrast, a nine-member board appointed by the mayor determines the percentage that rents in stabilized apartments can increase each year. In making its decision, the board considers the financial struggles of renters and how much money landlords need to keep their apartments in good shape.... More than 45 percent of rent-stabilized households spend over 30 percent of their income on rent, which is known as being “rent burdened.” That figure is about 40 percent for market-rate rentals."
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/12/nyregion/mamdani-cuomo-rent-stabilized-apartment.html
Richard Cook - thanks for explaination about Rent Control in NYC. Personally, I believe there's no reason for privately owned apartment building in NYC. They should all be bought out by the City and rented out by the city. Rents could be pegged to income. No more greedy landlords squeezing working folks.
ot:
Colorado has a huge budget hole. Thanks to one-party D-rule and their inability to stop spending on themselves.
Of course - the Dems blame Trump.
Colorado spends 50 million/ year on healthcare for illegals.
It's not MEDICAID - it's a medicaid-like program. Nothing to do with federal government. but Dems lie because they know they can get away with lying by the local democratic media.
Mamdami makes 140K+ per year (doing what?) - comes from a very wealthy family and his wife is wealthy.
Nope. Cook says this doesn't happen. Wealthy don't hog 'em.
I lived in a rent-stabilized apartment for 40 years in NYC
Exactly the stupid socializm I was referring to. For forty years, despite inflation and expenses and whatever, the State coerced the owner into NOT increasing the rent on YOU to keep up with HIS expenses.
And you socialists wonder why no one wants to invest their own money building "affordable housing" that they may or may not have any control of. Eventually you run out of other people's money Cook.
Nobody builds apartments if they're going to be rent controlled. Rent control gives shortage which gives a need for rent control. So it's stable but the outcome is no new apartments.
The Left: No greeedy landlords in our town!
The Crowd: Yay!
The Left: We need affordable housing.
The Crowd: Where is it?
The Left: The greeedy landlords sold it for condos!
The Crowd: We need a condo.
The Left: You can't afford one because of greeedy landlords.
The Crowd: Boo! Where can we live?
The Left: --
The Crowd: Where can we live?
[crickets]
The Left:
"$2,300 for a one bedroom is Queens seems expensive."
Not at all. Even in my town here, my rent got raised last year $400, to $2,050 from $1,650. For a 1/1, older apartment with no upgrades and no in-apartment laundry. I left. Moved 15 minutes north to a less crazy rental cost area. Not by much, tho.
Mamdami's inspiration.
Robert Cook says that NYC "needs" rent control,
because no one is building housing in NYC.
this makes sense.. to Robert Cook
RC Cola is thrilled with the idea of a Jew hating Hamas creep in charge.
Mike (MJB Wolf) - Can you explain your view on rent? You say you are opposed to rent control yet you say SoCal is becoming unaffordable. How would getting rid of rent control bring prices down? Rent control in Los Angeles is only on apartments built before 1978. They can be raised 3% a year. I live in Los Angeles. The area I live in has newer apartments for $3300 or more for a two bedroom. In the same neighborhood though is rent control and the cost is way more affordable. The apartments in rent control buildings are a bit beat up but working class families and some students live in them. If there was no rent control the rent would increase considerably and those families and those students could not live there. I see rent control as a positive. Also long term tenants are what many landlords want. Rent control helps with that.
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.