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.”
पोस्ट्स
६४ टिप्पण्या:
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.
I lived in a rent-stabilized apartment for 40 years in NYC
Are you braggin', or complainin' ?
Sympathy or congratulations?
..."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...."
What a lovely, shiny little nugget, right there. Because as we all understand, individuals should contribute to the best of their abilities, and the permanent-but-necessary underclass should receive according to their needs. We will decide these things, comrade. Forward ! With Equity !
Vito Corleone had some thoughts on rent control in Godfather II. Compare and contrast.
Having a very tight and expensive building permit process necessitates rent control. That way you go out favors on the supply and the demand side of the equation. A perfect government scam. Sold as progressivism it produces the most regressive income inequality
Having a very tight and expensive building permit process necessitates rent control.
And what is your bright idea for producing more affordable housing in NYC?
You need to change the law
Would love to, but lack that ability.
Mamdani claims to care about others, Trump never claimed to believe that taxes should be higher.
If Mamdani actually gave a damn about people poorer than him, he wouldn't be in a "rent stabilized" place, he's leave that for someone worse off than him.
He's a hypocrite, and a scum bag, and this is a perfectly valid attack on him
For all Mamdani's crazy ideas that nobody worries about, this might actually resonate with a decent-sized block of voters.
People like Cook, who had his comfortable sinecure, may not understand how much resentment there is among people who aren't lucky enough to score a rent-stabilized (few can even dream of rent controlled) apartment.
"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."
Oh that's so sad. Had the same person owned for 40 years, he would've paid off his mortgage after about 20-25 years, leaving him with no costs except taxes and upkeep. Meanwhile rents would've been climbing every year at 3 percent or more. And the value of his property probably went up 10x in value.
But oh the poor landlord. Why you're "Stealing from him" because he can't jack up the price 10 percent a year. LOL.
When are you losertarians and "free-marketeers" ever going to admit real estate and health care aren't "The free market". People need to have shelter and medical care. The landlords are just just "Rent seekers". They skim off a huge portion of the rent as profit and provide nothing that a Government owned apartment couldnt.
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.
According to the NYC Comptroller, there are 2.2 million rental units in NYC, which accounts for 63% of all NYC housing. Of the 2.2 million units, about half (again, according to NYC) live in rent-regulated places.
Cuomo is being a hypocrite the same way that Hillary was being a hypocrite. Not only did Hillary never lobby to change the tax laws, the odds are extremely high that she took advantage of them.
Mondami is being a hypocrite because a rich person taking advantage of a program to help poor and middle class renters is something that he would condemn if it weren't him. Remember that his public persona is all around eating the rich.
Trump is the only one here who was not being a hypocrite. Trump had no problem with anyone, including himself, taking advantage of those tax breaks. Instead of condemning people who took advantage of those tax breaks, he supported them. He also didn't call for the abolition of the tax breaks. He said that if Hillary and the Democrats didn't like them, they should have eliminated them.
Greg The Class Traitor If Mamdani actually gave a damn about people poorer than him, he wouldn't be in a "rent stabilized" place.
Ironically this is one reason to vote for Mamdani. If he wins the election he would be moving to Gracie Mansion and presumedly would be giving up his apartment….
According to the NYC Comptroller, there are 2.2 million rental units in NYC, which accounts for 63% of all NYC housing. Of the 2.2 million units, about half (again, according to NYC) live in rent-regulated places.
What is the point of this post. You are just repeating Robert Cook's point in different words.
My point was that Cook was making it look like only 1 out of 8 apartments was rent-regulated, when in reality it is 1 in 2 (I think Cook conflated units with tenants). The problem with this is the cost pressure it places on all of the non-regulated units - anyone moving to NYC, including poor and middle class workers, are effectively shut out from rent-controlled units because tenants (such as Mamdami, who I suspect will not be giving up his cheap apartment if/when he moves into Gracie Mansion) keep them forever, or illegally sublet them to friends/family while keeping their own name on the lease (I know of one such person, single and retired municipal worker living in someone else's 3-bedroom in the lower east side of Manhattan). So if you are new in town, you are competing for only one out of every two apartments that might otherwise be available. When half are kept artificially low, the other half will end up being artificially high.
Rent control in Los Angeles is only on apartments built before 1978. They can be raised 3% a year.
What are the odds that these cities are capping property tax increases to the max that rent can be increased?
"Rent control in Los Angeles is only on apartments built before 1978. They can be raised 3% a year."
There are no new apartments being built in NYC that fall under rent controls. In fact, I believe no new apartments are being built at all that are intended to be rentals. The small number of rent-controlled apartments remaining in NYC are shrinking year by year, and, eventually, they will vanish.
Wow. I pay $2100/month for a four bedroom two storey house on a quarter acre lot here in San Antonio. If that's a rent controlled price for Queens, I'd hate to see what market rates are. I wouldn't trade for all the world.
Rent control is Communism.
“He believes that New Yorkers, in order to experience that stability, they must be rent-burdened.”
And Cuomo isn’t alone. I certainly agree with this premise. Could you perhaps set up a poll, Professor?
Rent control is Communism.
@Marcus, shhhhh. Cookie and Freder already like it. You don’t have to keep trying to make it attractive to them.
The average rent for 1 bedroom in Manhattan in 1995 was about $1 thousand a month. Its now $3.5 thousand. So, its gone up 350 percent in 30 years. But oh the poor landlords and their suffering under "Rent control communism". LOL!
I really hope NYC voters elect this guy. That's my only interest in this story. You know, in a trainwreck sort of way.
RCOCEAN: Richard Cook - thanks for explanation 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.
Sounds just like the Soviet Union.
I was there once. Left just before the coup. Even now I wonder if it was something I said.
Anyway — Moscow and Leningrad? Shitholes. The stack-a-prole blocks particularly awful, some notably out of plumb, all notably devoid of elevators, and nets around them because of chunks falling off the exteriors. Pedestrians walked as close to the curb as possible, to avoid getting brained.
Imagine the DMV as your landlord.
Anyone catch the fact that rcocean II does not know how to calculate percentage changes? Communists always fail at math.
The end of rent control in 1994 was one of the better things that happened to the City of Cambridge.
I lived in an owner-occupied three decker that was not subject to rent control. My rent did not go up. More condos became available for purchase. More apartment buildings got much needed renovations.
It was the end of the Cambridge Civic Association, which was what the communist party in the city was called. They held a surprisingly thin majority on the city council, and lost their reason for being with the end of rent control. The socialists came in after them, and have done a much better job running the city.
While the moving force to end rent control came from rental property owners in Cambridge, Brookline, and Boston, the political power to do so came from the outside, a statewide ballot initiative.
Also long term tenants are what many landlords want. Rent control helps with that.
Economic Ignorance 101.
There are no new apartments being built in NYC that fall under rent controls. In fact, I believe no new apartments are being built at all that are intended to be rentals. The small number of rent-controlled apartments remaining in NYC are shrinking year by year, and, eventually, they will vanish.
Gee, Cookie. Why do you think that is? For some reason all those "greedy landlords" don't seem to want to build rental apartments, even though they are supposedly rolling in dough from gouging their tenants.
Left Bank--no right winger--gets it.
I keep hearing the talking heads across the board saying that 'Yes, it's unfortunate but Mamdani is probably going to win.' And I keep asking myself, "what the f*ck? ??"
It's fait accompli, across the board ,with *not*one*single*person* expressing any curiosity whatsoever on how this has come to pass. It's as if they're treating like some natural force of nature. Why, it's just this tropical system, you see, it's just blown in from Africa, like they do !
Honestly, how can this kid just appear on the scene from nowhere and instantly be granted full-coverage access to the electoral system in this way? With everybody gushing over his shoe-in election, every media head from every political corner slathering on the hair oil and shining up the candidate to their level best, whether it's 'Brave New World' or the 'Old Booga-Booga' commie routine. And nobody asking, exploring, questioning, 'where did this kid come from? Who is financing him? What political force is so expertly pushing him through the system like a greased eel?
It doesn't happen without a plan and a production. He didn't come from nowhere and he isn't spending his own money, and he isn't clearing his own path. These things are coming from somewhere else. Where the hell is the media, and their 'finding out'? You cannot hate them enough for the deep disservice they are responsible for inflicting on society.
Sure Matt. Renting is a voluntary contract between the owner and the renters. The owner used his capital to build the property and has the right to sell the space at market rate in order to pay his expenses for making and maintaining the space.
Rent control actually seizes control of the asset from the owner and gives the government control of the negotiation. Price control of any external type like this distorts the market and creates shortages. Left alone the owner would have used the profits from the asset to create another apartment building making more housing available but that cannot happen when government takes away the profit motive.
What you are complaining about is the cost which is also largely driven by the same people who impose rent controls. The problem is that the government in LA is driven by hatred for private property and impose a myriad of laws, regulations, red tape, environmental regulations, building codes and permitting barriers that all add cost. They do it to discourage “growth.” But growth requires new investment and more housing. California slowed housing construction of all kinds by virtue of the stupid oppressive regulation and government interference and inefficiency. Just look how many Palisades homes that have rebuilt. That is standard leftist behavior in preventing it.
That caused the housing shortage. They welcome in 6 million immigrants but didn’t build any new housing. Scarcity is always and forever the reason for high prices like rent. The answer is build more but leftist are anti- sprawl and anti-developer. So who wants to risk hard earned capital investing in housing? Only those connected insiders who can get around the controls. Rent control is a short term parlor trick to win votes but has the effect of disincentivizing any new housing.
The cost of living in California is 100% due to crazy regulations and an elite rich tiny minority that controls everything and doesn’t give a fuck about solving problems. They got theirs! Fuck the rest of us. That is why I left for the free state of Florida. I have a beautiful 2 bedroom condo on a golf course for $1500 in beautiful low crime town with no homeless tents or street takeovers by street thugs.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा
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.