Comments on: Economakonomics: E Pluribus Mansion

By: Frank

Frank — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 23:57:08 +0000

Paul, I wanted to use “masters of the universe,” but was afraid people would miss the Wolfe reference! Ubermenschen’s more easily google-able. . . . but I admit it only makes sense in the context of other claims I’ve made about the increasing power of money to command biotechnological enhancements and life-extension.

By: Paul Horwitz

Paul Horwitz — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 23:51:09 +0000

Characteristically interesting post, Frank. But doesn’t “ubermenschen” strike you as somewhat strong language in this context?

By: GMUSL Alum

GMUSL Alum — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 18:10:37 +0000

Gee Frank, maybe if they could actually raise the rents on those rent-stabilized apartments in response to vastly-increased demand, they wouldn’t be going through this process in the first place?

What’s the incentive to bring new rental housing online or maintain buildings if the owner isn’t going to profit from it? Sure, building codes present a stick, but with the vast majority of landlord-tenant laws favoring the tenant instead of the landlord, there has to be some sort of carrot for the landlord.

By: A.J. Sutter

A.J. Sutter — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 05:02:13 +0000

Kip,

I think you could make your comments in a more civilized tone. If there’s substance to your remarks, it should be able to stand on its own, without being packaged in ad personam rhetoric. If you want to use your own blog to indulge your style, that seems more appropriate.

By: Sam B.

Sam B. — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 00:55:55 +0000

Kip,

Although I don’t follow housing laws too much, I sincerely doubt that today the new rich of New York are exploiting rent-stabilization. It appears to me (as someone who came here within the last 10 years) that it doesn’t favor the rich or the poor so much as the people who moved here a long time ago; that is, whether you’re rich or poor, you’re probably not getting rent-stabilized unless you got here twenty years ago.

(Of course, if I’m wrong, please, please let me know. And also, of course, let me know how I get in on it.)

By: KipEsquire

KipEsquire — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 23:32:31 +0000

Given that rent stabilization laws in NYC were implemented as “emergency“* (i.e, temporary) programs, for you to lament their “erosion” — after more than 60 years — is deliciously asinine.

Note also that rent-stabilization in New York is not means-tested. Rich New Yorkers can — and do — exploit it (and that’s definitely the right word) as much, indeed more, than their lower-income neighbors.

But don’t let facts stop you from defending your “class diversity” fantasies.

(*Much like our schizophrenic employer-based health benefit tax code was also fraudlulently peddled by Washington as “temporary” — which doesn’t stop people like you from classifying it, somehow, as a “private sector” failure.)