Hacker News Reader

Comment by idle_zealot | Hacker News Reader

No? The policy is to freeze the rent in rent-controlled units for his entire term, which is as long as he can. The long-term solution is of course to build more units.

View on HN

The freeze will have the same effect that rent control has always had, for the past decades in NY and elsewhere: make the situation worse. It being "temporary for his entire term" just means that the negative consequences will be "temporary for his entire term"; is that supposed to be a selling point?

What was the definition of insanity again?

It will have the same effect it always had if we proceed to do the same thing. i.e. fail to build more affordable housing.

How about this time we actually do it and stop blaming glue for not being a welding mold? Rent controls aren't supposed to be long term. Mamdami realizing that is already a good sign. So I'll see if he can get housing projects off the ground next.

Worse for who? Better for who? I guarantee you the people who live in the rent control apartments aren't thinking they are worse off from it.

The NYC Rent Guidelines Board is already tasked with keeping rents lower for rent stabilized tenants, except with long term sustainability in mind. A pledge to put your thumb on the scale to freeze rent for 4 years is a clear sign of prioritizing short term political optics. The clever part about this is even if tenants suffer, he can just blame any negative effects on "greedy landlords."

It is worse for anybody looking for an appartment. Of course the person already living in one isn't worse off, but that has never been the issue that rent control creates. It disincentivises repairs and new constructions.

I think the core of the critique against rent control is that it mostly is a wealth transfer to the already wealthy, and that doesn't seem sensible. Or very leftist.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com