A lot of high-rise "luxury" rental buildings in Manhattan are 80/20, which means 20% is reserved for poor people while the 80% is rented at market rate. This smacks of socialism at its worst, allowing poor people to live in nice apartments because the government feels sorry for them. Do any of you guys live in one of these buildings? And doesn't it piss you off, knowing that you live alongside those making $30K?
Trending Content
Career Resources
Wow, you sound like such a douche. WHO the fuck CARES!?
********"Babies don't cost money, they MAKE money." - Jerri Blank********
You must be one of those poor people getting government subsidies and living in an 80/20 building. Did I hit too close to home?
Yea seriously what a jerk-off. I am as pro-capitalist and about as far right as they come but your condescending attitude is obnoxious. Wealth and poverty are all relative. As long as those people in your building go out and work hard each day to earn an honest living and provide for their family I have no problem with them. Now if you start talking about the welfare system and democrats trying to raise taxes to fund diversity/re-allocation of taxpayer dollars then we would be on the same page. Damn communists...
Your response doesn't make sense, given your professed political/social ideology. If you're pro-capitalist, you would believe that people should enjoy the benefits of their work-no more, no less. With regards to these 80/20 rentals, 80% of the residents make enough money to live in these nice buildings while the other 20% get to enjoy the exact same privileges without having earned it. The only reason they live there is because the liberal NYC government felt sorry for them and offered tax incentives to developers. If that's not socialism, I don't know what is.
Like how much of a markdown have you seen them getting?
I don't mind too much as long as they work hard and aren't bums, but rent is going to be your #1 expense and if the markdown is crazy high then that might be a bit "unfair"
I heard about this but I thought it was limited to select buildings downtown. I agree with you 100%, damn welfare-grubbing lazy, stinking hippies. What do you expect from a State that wants to give Driving licenses to Illegals ?
It's worse than you think. A TON of high-rise luxury rentals in Manhattan, regardless of neighborhood, are 80/20. The poor people make less than $35K and pay around $600/month for a 1-bedroom that goes for $3K at market rate! So these bastards get to live in a luxury building and enjoy all the amenities, at taxpayers' expense! It's NYC socialism gone amok. Why can't the city just let these poor bastards live in Bronx and Queens, where they belong?
"Welfare-grubbing lazy, stinking hippies" are not the people that JJC is refering to. These people have jobs and pay their bills. These people often hold under-appreciated/under-compensated positions as teachers, police officers, and firefighters and need a little bit of help to afford living in the city.
I agree that NY is terribly liberal and if Giulianni and/or Hilary win office we are screwed. However, there is no contradiction in my ideologies and political beliefs. These issues are not black and white. I can be pro-capitalist and still empathize with those who sacrifice wealth for other endeavors (i.e. teaching 3rd grade kids in the ghetto or running into burning buildings).
douchebag
Maybe they are teachers, or police officers or other people that make this city actually work. Or do you want to just have them all leave and us rich fat cats can police ourselves? Lock your PC and grab a firehose, we've got work to do!
Seriously, douchey thread topic.
ure a fucking idiot. if they leave then there will be no supply but the same demand. clearly prices with shoot up and the salary of a cop/teacher etc will be far, far higher. kids here don't even know basic economics. stop thinking with your pussy, oops I mean emotions and think logically.
Maybe they are even pensioners, you know once the rent control laws changed in the 1970's in NYC, it made it rather difficult for people to maintain a cheap apartment in the city. Don't be so quick to judge, you're not living in fucking section 8 housing. Asshole.
********"Babies don't cost money, they MAKE money." - Jerri Blank********
its funny how many individuals can hide behind capitalism and corrupt it in order to justify some pretty horrible ethics. We could get into a whole discussion about relative value in labor markets.... whereas those teachers, firemen, policemene, etc provide just as much if not more societal welfare than you do, just that their labor market has a large amount of participants (since we need a lot more of them as opposed to finance workers) and has not been restricted in the same way your labor market has. Here we see individuals using solely the market wage to determine the relative value of the individuals and therefore what the individual deserves in society. You claim yourself to be a capitalist, but it looks like you lack a lot of knowledge about the difference between theory and what occurs in practice.
Finally I would warn you to take your morality as a higher source of determining right and wrong policy as opposed to just using economics/capitlism. In a truly capitalist world, there are a huge amount of inefficiencies that market economics can't solve due to lack of incentives on one side or the other. These problems cannot be solve by free-market and the results would be more harmful than what you term as "socialist government feeling bad for poorly paid workers". Morality and Ethics looks to be something you should do some developing on if you want to not offend a lot of people or annoy them with your ignorance and arrogance.
It's the people not the specific policy that's important. Start from the premise that there are individuals for whom a particular opportunity would be ethical. Weed out those individuals who are not deserving enough to participate. This could involve the poor or the rich for that matter. One might propose that finance job opportunities, which can yield inordinate amounts of wealth, be open to only those who have a level of ethics and sensitivity for others which will generate the efficiecies of a well run society. Goodness begets greatness.
Police officers and firemen can live in the bronx or queens, which have plenty of affordable housing. One of the reasons people want to live in luxury buildings is to feel "exclusive." It's similar to going to exclusive clubs or restaurants. When 20% of your fellow residents make less than $35K, you're basically living in glorified public housing. What's the point of working hard, when others can enjoy the same privileges that you do because the city wants to subsidize them? At this rate, NYC will be a socialist shithole in ten years.
THe way you describe the situation makes you sound like an ahole. But in essence you are correct. The point of working your a off in high school, college, and grad school is to be able to afford the high rise apartments, expensive vacations, etc. As we've seen with Communism, giving people things does not help them in any way (take note Michael Moore), and only shows them that they can underachieve and achieve an address similar to that of people who work insane hours and have an post graduate degree. Though I don't believe that poor people should be regelated to the ghetto, I think the notion of sendingthem to "luxury" apartments is laughable. I know plenty of people who live in non-luxury apartments in NYC, and have to because they WORK at a lower paying job. If anyone should hve the 20% of the luxury apartments, it should be the middle class and blue-collar workers, like the police, that contribute to society rather than waiting for their government paychek- relegating themselves to the same life forever. Capitalism is what made America great- the avarice of men who want to achieve those apartments. Earned-not given.
I do agree with blubberfatty though. If this situation has to occur- it should go to "deserving" people (not drug dealers/users, families, single parents, and the peope- unless disabled- have to have a job. Work for welfare all the way!
My issue with the 80/20 split is that is screws up the supply demand ratio more. for the 20, these apartments are tough to get and are very desired. For the 80, if there were no 80/20 splits, the 20 cannot afford to live there, and live further away from the city. This would increase the available apartments for those who can afford them, and this should decrease rents slightly. In essense, its those who can afford to pay for the apartments are subsidizing those who cannot. Also, this artifical low rates incentivies people to sublease their apartment. I'm sure everyone has seen a rent controlled apartment subleased to someone 'pretending' to be a relative in order to keep rent down. This is plain fraud and cheating, but the way this 80/20 split is set up, this is a negative externality that is difficult to avoid.
There is enough "robin-hood" in new york already with it's triple tax. New york has an excellent transportation system and a commute from brooklyn or queens is not tough at all for someone that works 40-50 hour weeks. Let's save the prime real estate for those who are willing to pay for it the most, those working 90-100 hour weeks who are willing to pay an extra few hundred dollars a month to save 10 minutes on their commute.
In terms of actually living in one of these buildings, it's not much different than a regular luxury building.
BSD: Police officers can commute. IF (big if) it gets so bad that there are no affordable places to live within commuting distance such that nobody is applying for police dept jobs, then we will be forced to offer them higher salaries.
NDkid: "...whereas those teachers, firemen, policemene, etc provide just as much if not more societal welfare than you do, just that their labor market has a large amount of participants..." What a hilariously botched attempt at economic analysis. You are clearly a fucking idiot.
The whole reason why buildings participate in the 80/20 rule (and no they are NOT required to take part in it, it's truly the developers decision), is because the developer will then receive low interest bond financing, tax credits and other benefits which make it worthwhile for them to participate.
So for the poor, this is great....it's really not the poor, but I suppose it is the developers greed, politics (80/20 is nationwide, not just NYC), and ....the poor(?) which makes the 80/20 rule occur.
Therefore, you guys got beef with the 80/20 rule, complain to the developer. People love getting shit for free anyway.
********"Babies don't cost money, they MAKE money." - Jerri Blank********
People trying to do good by layering a market based system with distortionary 'incentives' has never worked. When popular opinion swings, the original layer is sticky therefore they just add another layer which opens up loopholes. As time goes on, the rich are able to exploit the loopholes (in this case the developers), the middle pay for it and most of the lower class are just shut out (except for the lucky few who make the front page of the paper).
Think back to the reason why teachers, policeman and fireman make so little in the first place.
My GF is going to be a kindergarten teacher at a private school in manhattan soon.
I'm going to have her apply, get a very nice place, and live with her as her "unemployed relative." I'll have her tell them I can't get a job because Im too mentally challenged. If the residents see me in the morning going down the elevator in my suit and tie I'll just give them a dumbfounded expression, drool a bit, and exclaim "Me like wear dress-up"
This information just increased by relative income substantially.
Oohhh which one? I used to go to private school in the city....I'll give a hint....it's on 92nd and mad.
********"Babies don't cost money, they MAKE money." - Jerri Blank********
to Nightingale-bamford?
Do you really want to be the poorest person in your building?
Si si nightingale. :) Anyone else a prep school kid here?
********"Babies don't cost money, they MAKE money." - Jerri Blank********
Ahh Nightingale. I went to a boys' school mere blocks away for 1-8 and another several blocks further for 8-12. We used to do those 5th-8th grade dances with Nightingale, Sacred Heart, Spence, Brearley, etc., where most people were awkward with boys staying to one side and girls to the other (until a couple brave ones made it to the center). What years did you attend? Small world.
HAH! I remmeber those!! We had one once at Loyola where the boys played games and the girls danced..because it was some weird thing where they had games and dancing....I was the only girl who wore jeans! I still hung out with the girls though.
I was there from 1989-1997. K-5. I still speak with a bunch of the girls there and am still friends with most of the UES boys I knew (although most are my brother's friends so they are a bit older than I)
My bros went to buckley.
********"Babies don't cost money, they MAKE money." - Jerri Blank********
Et in sed eum quibusdam nobis. Iste aut est qui. Sed ullam maiores ea qui odio consequatur. Adipisci qui nemo omnis sed laborum. Incidunt quam omnis voluptatem.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Laudantium dolor ratione eos eum. Alias quis nam fugiat nam est molestias et. Dolorem libero sunt hic ea magni quam.
Et saepe amet velit perferendis nesciunt commodi. Quis aut eum ratione repellendus aut. Non qui ut fuga aperiam eaque vel explicabo.
Nostrum accusantium ad et et temporibus maxime. Ullam placeat qui hic earum rerum et. Quia nihil aliquam error sed blanditiis et. Cupiditate sequi nihil est.