Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
11 minutes ago, We’reTexas said:

I had atl at least one post specifically breaking down his housing policy in way too much detail to the point where I apologized for derailing the thread. If that was incoherent to you, that’s a personal problem. As Donald Trump should show, simply being loud and insulting does not mean you are right. 

I'd be interested in reading this post, enough that I went back a month but didn't find it.  Did you post it here or Daily Texan?

Posted
3 hours ago, Bullneck said:

I'd be interested in reading this post, enough that I went back a month but didn't find it.  Did you post it here or Daily Texan?

Was extremely brief for the topic, but it was last month (below). As housing affordability is my top political issue, I find the blowback on this thread (not from you) quite amusing. 
 

Quote

That’s interesting - why? I say this from the perspective of a Texpat in San Francisco (a market sometimes more expensive than NY, despite the assertions of some). Not to get too in the weeds on housing policy, but Mamdani’s platform consists of (1) doubling down on rent control, perhaps the most widely panned economic policy besides tariffs, (2) fully subsidized BMR housing (that’s going at around $1.3m per 1k sq ft unit in SF and DC - I’d assume NYC is the same and they need 1 million units in the next decade. The math doesn’t math.) and (3) allowing market rate development only to the extent it is weighed down by interest group concessions to the point it isn’t economically feasible.

My apologies, that was still too much in the weeds, but the upshot is that the progressive approach has a very low likelihood of success because it is simply not realistic regardless of any level of support. More fundamentally, it is not designed to succeed because it is based on a politics of scarcity that favors incumbent residents at the expense of future ones, which is a fair summation of blue city progressive politics overall. I don’t think this scarcity mindset is necessary, so I vote against it. To his credit, Zohran is a very positive guy who, unlike most DSA types, tries to avoid the zero sum class warfare game when it comes to affordability.

 

Posted
4 minutes ago, We’reTexas said:

Was extremely brief for the topic, but it was last month (below). As housing affordability is my top political issue, I find the blowback on this thread (not from you) quite amusing. 

OK, let's take a look:

1) doubling down on rent control, perhaps the most widely panned economic policy besides tariffs,

As already pointed out, rent control is a long established thing in New York City.  You say he's "doubling down."  What does that mean?  More of the status quo?

(2) fully subsidized BMR housing (that’s going at around $1.3m per 1k sq ft unit in SF and DC - I’d assume NYC is the same and they need 1 million units in the next decade. The math doesn’t math.) 

Do you know how PPP affordable housing works? If you say "yes" give a brief synopsis (then I'll set you straight)

(3) allowing market rate development only to the extent it is weighed down by interest group concessions to the point it isn’t economically feasible.

Tell me what the 'interest group concessions' are. 

************************************************

This below is all opinion or gibberish or both:

My apologies, that was still too much in the weeds, but the upshot is that the progressive approach has a very low likelihood of success because it is simply not realistic regardless of any level of support. More fundamentally, it is not designed to succeed because it is based on a politics of scarcity that favors incumbent residents at the expense of future ones, which is a fair summation of blue city progressive politics overall. I don’t think this scarcity mindset is necessary, so I vote against it. To his credit, Zohran is a very positive guy who, unlike most DSA types, tries to avoid the zero sum class warfare game when it comes to affordability.

 

 

 

 

Posted (edited)
26 minutes ago, Bullneck said:

OK, let's take a look:

1) doubling down on rent control, perhaps the most widely panned economic policy besides tariffs,

As already pointed out, rent control is a long established thing in New York City.  You say he's "doubling down."  What does that mean?  More of the status quo?

(2) fully subsidized BMR housing (that’s going at around $1.3m per 1k sq ft unit in SF and DC - I’d assume NYC is the same and they need 1 million units in the next decade. The math doesn’t math.) 

Do you know how PPP affordable housing works? If you say "yes" give a brief synopsis (then I'll set you straight)

(3) allowing market rate development only to the extent it is weighed down by interest group concessions to the point it isn’t economically feasible.

Tell me what the 'interest group concessions' are. 

************************************************

This below is all opinion or gibberish or both:

My apologies, that was still too much in the weeds, but the upshot is that the progressive approach has a very low likelihood of success because it is simply not realistic regardless of any level of support. More fundamentally, it is not designed to succeed because it is based on a politics of scarcity that favors incumbent residents at the expense of future ones, which is a fair summation of blue city progressive politics overall. I don’t think this scarcity mindset is necessary, so I vote against it. To his credit, Zohran is a very positive guy who, unlike most DSA types, tries to avoid the zero sum class warfare game when it comes to affordability.

 

 

 

 

Yeah, no. 

1. Doubling down on rent control - yes, maintaining status quo and advocating for more (rent control on all housing regardless of construction date and vacancy control as well). We have decades of research on how disastrous this is, with St Paul providing us with real time data. Pure Left NYMBYism.

edit: you had this absurd notion that rent control being long established it was a good thing - to be clear all data has shown is has not been overall except for the direct incumbent renters who benefited. No HCOL jurisdiction with rent control has maintained affordability over the last few decades. They also usually downzoned. What a coincidence. 

2. lol You’re not going to set me straight with anything. Market rate development is about $1k/sq ft in San Francisco and when the city gets involved it goes to $1.3k/sq ft. Same elsewhere - No one disputes this. No one serious, at least. You cannot spend your way out of the housing crisis. 

3. “Concerned neighbors” and labor unions. Google CEQA and have yourself a time. Still riding high off this victory:

 

Edited by We’reTexas
Posted
3 minutes ago, We’reTexas said:

Yeah, no. 

1. Doubling down on rent control - yes, maintaining status quo and advocating for more (rent control on all housing regardless of construction date and vacancy control as well). We have decades of research on how disastrous this is, with St Paul providing us with real time data. Pure Left NYMBYism.

2. lol You’re not going to set me straight with anything. Market rate development is about $1k/sq ft in San Francisco and when the city gets involved it goes to $1.3k/sq ft. Same elsewhere - No one disputes this. No one serious, at least. You cannot spend your way out of the housing crisis. 

3. “Concerned neighbors” and labor unions. Google CEQA and have yourself a time. Still riding high off this victory:

Per my previous post, so do you understand the difference between market rate and affordable (and supportive) housing?  Simple "yes" or "no" will do.  I'm assuming you don't.  No one gives a shit about St. Paul or San Francisco. We're talking about NYC here, right?  Also, the "C" in CEQA for California, right? Please don't litter this discussion with sound bite-sounding things like "You cannot spend your way out of the housing crisis."  How would you know?

You need to make a pass at the bolded part above before we can discuss further.  Thanks for your attention to this matter.

  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Bullneck said:

Per my previous post, so do you understand the difference between market rate and affordable (and supportive) housing?  Simple "yes" or "no" will do.  I'm assuming you don't.  No one gives a shit about St. Paul or San Francisco. We're talking about NYC here, right?  Also, the "C" in CEQA for California, right? Please don't litter this discussion with sound bite-sounding things like "You cannot spend your way out of the housing crisis."  How would you know?

You need to make a pass at the bolded part above before we can discuss further.  Thanks for your attention to this matter.

Yes, chief, I just explained the difference to you. You are on the wrong side of history on this one by basically every metric.

edit: lol “how would you know” it’s just math at a very direct point that we in California hone in on every year. lol “but it’s NYC” like 2/2s in Palo Alto don’t go for $2m, GTFO. 
 

IMG_9918.thumb.webp.0ce8839049387575e545de9097f90b16.webp

Edited by We’reTexas
  • Haha 2
Posted

I don't understand why liberals are afraid of Mamdani. The status quo sucks. Either he implements positive things or he doesn't. It will be good for this country to see what a "socialist" leader looks like, instead of the constant fear mongering bullshit rhetoric.  We already see the tangible and horrific results of the Trump/GOP/authoritarian right, time for the opposite to have some power and see where it actually leads. What do we have to lose at this point?  If it's a disaster, then lesson learned. If it's a success, then LFG. 

 

 

 

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
On 8/7/2025 at 6:35 PM, softlynow said:

The problem is too many people are squeemish about such tactics, and it's never going to happen. Even if it did, you'd probably end up with a third party and a GOP supermajority of . . . everything. On the other hand, they're basically governing like that already, so why not take that shot?

They’re really not. 

Posted
8 hours ago, We’reTexas said:

Was extremely brief for the topic, but it was last month (below). As housing affordability is my top political issue, I find the blowback on this thread (not from you) quite amusing. 
 

 

Who is campaigning on ending rent control?

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
21 hours ago, Texas Fight said:

I’m pretty sure this is already being/been done. No one believes it because the democrats are just shitty liars. 
 

If you tell people Trump took a golden shower in Russia, make sure someone can’t easily disprove it was a paid for lie. If you are going to lie on warrant applications, maybe have someone more experienced. If you have the entire intelligence community sign a letter saying something was Russian/fake, make sure there aren’t pictures of the bosses son’s dick to disprove.  And when you do get caught lying, using excuses like, “that depends on what the definition of “is” is.” That is just some JV shit. 

It’s because democrats don’t have one voice. When republicans push something they’re all in line with the message. That makes it far more effective 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
4 hours ago, Hank Kingsley said:

I don't understand why liberals are afraid of Mamdani. The status quo sucks. Either he implements positive things or he doesn't. It will be good for this country to see what a "socialist" leader looks like, instead of the constant fear mongering bullshit rhetoric.  We already see the tangible and horrific results of the Trump/GOP/authoritarian right, time for the opposite to have some power and see where it actually leads. What do we have to lose at this point?  If it's a disaster, then lesson learned. If it's a success, then LFG. 

 

 

 

Because democratic leadership loves status quo due to being able to profit off of it

Posted
3 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Because democratic leadership loves status quo due to being able to profit off of it

That’s correct. They don’t dislike Trump because of his embrace of right wing politics. They hate Trump because his policies are so insane that they even hurt their bottom line. But they’d still would rather take a chance on trying to educate Trump and his idiot minions out of their more insane policy ideas than they would voting for a Bernie or a Mamdani against them. 

And they’re very committed to that idea, too. You could show them all the pie charts in the world that show Mandani/AOC/Bernie policies are not only better for the average American than Trump, but also the establishment Democrats. Wanna know what their response will be? If they don’t find a way to mute their opposition, what they’ll say basically amounts to “well you see, the facts may very well seem to indicate Y, but I prefer to believe X.”

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
7 hours ago, David Dennison said:

It's going to be hilarious watching people lose their minds when he wins.

He’s going to win. He’s the best option. That doesn’t mean I have to be happy about it, and since I currently pay more for my daughter’s half of a 600sf 4th floor walk up on the Lower East Side than I do for my mortgage in Austin, I have skin in this game. 

5 hours ago, Hank Kingsley said:

I don't understand why liberals are afraid of Mamdani. The status quo sucks.

What you don’t understand, apparently, is that the entire Mamdani phenomenon IS the status quo of Housing in NYC, repackaged for TikTok. 
 

5 hours ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Either he implements positive things or he doesn't.

Promise to defend it either way, please. I know you guys are watching the details super closely. I mean look at this:

5 hours ago, Hank Kingsley said:

We already see the tangible and horrific results of the Trump/GOP/authoritarian right, time for the opposite to have some power and see where it actually leads

Bravo- this is a super relevant point of comparison. So Mamdani is the opposite of Trumpism? So the tide turns here? Do I have that right? Does that mean NYC is a microcosm of America? Great stuff. You should be on Joy Reid’s podcast or something.

5 hours ago, Hank Kingsley said:

What do we have to lose at this point? 

Time. We lose time to deal with the housing shortage in New York. I’m not sure what you lose. Probably nothing. 
But that’s the American Progressive in a nutshell: the privilege to fail without consequence. 
 

Posted (edited)
53 minutes ago, hpslugga said:

But they’d still would rather take a chance on trying to educate Trump and his idiot minions out of their more insane policy ideas than they would voting for a Bernie or a Mamdani against them. 

And they’re very committed to that idea, too. You could show them all the pie charts in the world that show Mandani/AOC/Bernie policies are not only better for the average American than Trump, but also the establishment Democrats.

Y’all realize Mamdani isn’t running for Mayor of America, right? Local issues are local. 
Jesus. 

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Y’all realize Mamdani isn’t running for Mayor of America, right? Local issues are local. 
Jesus. 

The criticisms are no different and it’s not like they would be if he was running for a national office. Don’t kid yourself. This lot that I referred to in that post you quoted isn’t nearly that nuanced

Edited by hpslugga
Posted
1 minute ago, hpslugga said:

The criticisms are no different and it’s not like they would be if he was running for a national office. Don’t kid yourself

Oh. Well then by all means you should lean into such stupidity. 

Posted
8 hours ago, We’reTexas said:

Yes, chief, I just explained the difference to you. You are on the wrong side of history on this one by basically every metric.

edit: lol “how would you know” it’s just math at a very direct point that we in California hone in on every year. lol “but it’s NYC” like 2/2s in Palo Alto don’t go for $2m, GTFO. 

You didn't do what I asked and thus you convinced me you don't know (posting a meme doesn't count).  I'll be brief here:

  • Market Rate - a developer has a site, raises money based on expected demand, hires engineers and architects to design for it, hires construction company to build it, leases up and either holds onto it or sells it,
  • Affordable Housing - same as above but some of the money comes from the sale of tax credits or direct investment from the government.  There are strings attached, typically either age-restricted or income restricted where residents have to make a certain percentage less than a average county income but enough to pay the rent.  Frankly, it's a genius program for a lot of reasons I can point out to anyone interested,
  • Public Housing -- AFAIK we don't build this anymore but there are still lots of them around (it's been replaced by the success of Affordable Housing).  Don't confuse this with Section 8, which relates to rent funding for qualified individuals for existing housing.  It doesn't build anything new.

As stated earlier Rent Control goes back a long way.  It helps people stay in their homes when a new landlord buys their building and would love to kick them out and make a huge profit.  What kind of asshole would do this?  You guessed it:

Spoiler

NEW YORK (AP) -- The hammering and drilling began just months after Jared Kushner's family real estate firm bought a converted warehouse apartment building in the hip, Williamsburg section of Brooklyn.

Tenants say it started early in the morning and went on until nightfall, so loud that it drowned out normal conversation, so violent it rattled pictures off the walls. So much dust wafted through ducts and under doorways that it coated beds and clothes in closets. Rats crawled through holes in the walls. Workers with passkeys barged in unannounced. Residents who begged for relief got a standard reply, "We have permits."

More than a dozen current and former residents of the building told The Associated Press that they believe the Kushner Cos.' relentless construction, along with rent hikes of $500 a month or more, was part of a campaign to push tenants out of rent-stabilized apartments and bring high-paying condo buyers in.

If so, it was a remarkably successful campaign. An AP investigation found that over the past three years, more than 250 rent-stabilized apartments -- 75 percent of the building -- were either emptied or sold as the Kushner Cos. was converting the building to luxury condos. Those sales so far have totaled more than $155 million, an average of $1.2 million per apartment.

"They won, they succeeded," says Barth Bazyluk, who left apartment C606 with his wife and baby daughter in December. "You have to be ignorant or dumb to think this wasn't deliberate."

 

Now I'll ask you an easy question: have you been to NYC lately? 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
6 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Oh. Well then by all means you should lean into such stupidity. 

You say this as if you’ve made a compelling case up until this point, or that you even understood what I was saying previously.

Posted
6 hours ago, Hank Kingsley said:

It will be good for this country to see what a "socialist" leader looks like, instead of the constant fear mongering bullshit rhetoric.

But they'll install an authoritarian regime where courts, the legislature, Army, and all bureaus are loyal to the leader rather than the country!

We don't want that here in America!

spacer.png

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, hpslugga said:

You say this as if you’ve made a compelling case up until this point, or that you even understood what I was saying previously.

I have no idea what Bozo is trying to say.  He's approaching an Anastasis-level Amoeba of Confusion in this thread.  

Posted (edited)
27 minutes ago, hpslugga said:

You say this as if you’ve made a compelling case up until this point, or that you even understood what I was saying previously.

I thought that the distinction between municipal government and the Republic was self-evident, my apologies. 
 

 

21 minutes ago, Bullneck said:

I have no idea what Bozo is trying to say. 

Let me help you with that:

1) Mamdani will win, and he’s by far the best of three bad options. 

2) What he proposes for housing in NYC is not bold change, but more of the same

3) Framing this race and the issues involved in terms of Trumpism and the country is a category error. 

4) Most of the people defending Mamdani on this thread don’t seem to know much about what he proposes or the issues involved, which makes sense because this is a University of Texas sports forum and Mamdani is running for mayor of New York City.

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
Posted

Way to pigeonhole everything in to your housing concerns. I wasn't even talking to you, just the general hysteria coming from Dems freaking out over what could happen with Mamdani while the entire country is already burning. 

 

 

Posted

How do you build new units in NYC, which is fully developed and surrounded by rivers and the ocean? You need to tear down existing homes and build upwards, which costs a lot of money and it displaces people and businesses in the process. The people who do that will only do it if they can get a return on their investment that exceeds the expected return on alternative investments, which won't happen unless rents and land values go up. That would not help the working class, at all.

Posted
53 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Let me help you with that:

1) Mamdani will win, and he’s by far the best of three bad options. 

2) What he proposes for housing in NYC is not bold change, but more of the same

3) Framing this race and the issues involved in terms of Trumpism and the country is a category error. 

4) Most of the people defending Mamdani on this thread don’t seem to know much about what he proposes or the issues involved, which makes sense because this is a University of Texas sports forum and Mamdani is running for mayor of New York City.

What housing policy do you want to see implemented in NYC?

Posted
35 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Let me help you with that:

1) Mamdani will win, and he’s by far the best of three bad options. 

2) What he proposes for housing in NYC is not bold change, but more of the same

3) Framing this race and the issues involved in terms of Trumpism and the country is a category error. 

4) Most of the people defending Mamdani on this thread don’t seem to know much about what he proposes or the issues involved, which makes sense because this is a University of Texas sports forum and Mamdani is running for mayor of New York City.

Thank you for the clarity, that helps.  Here are my questions:

1) Why is Mandami a bad option? 

2) I don't think you're giving enough weight to the "I care about you and your problems" v. "Fuck you, I do whatever I want because I'm Mayor" equation.  BTW, there are already some bold plans in the works (see below)

3) Hey, it worked in the last election in Canada.  Also, you have to fight off the barbarians at the gates before cleaning house in the palace,

4) I don't know anything about Mandami and I'm not a defender.  He doesn't have to know every in and out of process and policy in order to affect change (there are staff people for that).  

Back when I was the "dirt dog" for a Florida affordable housing company it took about two to three years from the first time you saw a site and put it under contract until Grand Opening -- maybe four years if there were issues.  In NYC I see projects that are 10 years old all the time from when they went in for permit until groundbreaking.  I see projects where the developer has broken ground and doesn't have the building drawings finished because of expiring entitlements.  

Remember that in NYC every site has been built on, all have P&Z hurdles, and many are contaminated.  That makes development a slow process.  

image.thumb.jpeg.a15e88bde52853113e4d9400c612dd3c.jpeg

I found this website that posts different scenarios of participants:  https://www.racetothewh.com/nycmayorpolling

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

I thought that the distinction between municipal government and the Republic was self-evident, my apologies. 
 

 

Let me help you with that:

1) Mamdani will win, and he’s by far the best of three bad options. 

2) What he proposes for housing in NYC is not bold change, but more of the same

3) Framing this race and the issues involved in terms of Trumpism and the country is a category error. 

4) Most of the people defending Mamdani on this thread don’t seem to know much about what he proposes or the issues involved, which makes sense because this is a University of Texas sports forum and Mamdani is running for mayor of New York City.

Also, weren't you the guy saying "you have to find good candidates, ones that connect and people like and trust" and "policy is unimportant in elections, all that matters is the candidate."

Excuse my paraphrasing, but please explain this.

Found it:

On 2/15/2025 at 9:53 AM, Bozo_Casanova said:

1) abandon all issue based litmus tests and racial or gender representation goals in favor of the single objective of winning races, recruit candidates who are the most credible and appealing person who lives in and is a product of the community on the 2-3 most tangible and immediate problems the community has. 

Edited by Bullneck
Posted
30 minutes ago, Bullneck said:

Also, weren't you the guy saying "you have to find good candidates, ones that connect and people like and trust" and "policy is unimportant in elections, all that matters is the candidate."

Excuse my paraphrasing, but please explain this.

Found it:

Classic move….

Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Classic move….

What's a "classic move?" Me not remembering Bozo's exact quote (but remembering the intent) or finding his exact quote from February?

Edited by Bullneck
Posted
2 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Say what you found but not preach it because something effects him. 

Say what you found

But not preach it

Because something affects him

image.gif.8466c7d8baef836871bbdde9e3ab74c0.gif

 

 

 

Posted
1 hour ago, Bullneck said:

Also, weren't you the guy saying "you have to find good candidates, ones that connect and people like and trust" and "policy is unimportant in elections, all that matters is the candidate."

Excuse my paraphrasing, but please explain this.

Found it:

Oh My God Wow GIF

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Way to pigeonhole everything in to your housing concerns. I wasn't even talking to you, just the general hysteria coming from Dems freaking out over what could happen with Mamdani while the entire country is already burning. 

Well, again, since I pay for housing in NYC, and housing costs are the engine that drives his candidacy, his positioning of housing seems pretty salient. 
That said, the Dems freaking out about what could happen are just as silly as the Mamdani defenders who frame him as some kind of counterpoint to Trump in a country that’s burning: the ascendancy of Mamdani is mostly irrelevant to the Federal situation. And at the local level Mamdani is just more of the same old shit NY and other high priced big cities have been doing since the GFC, warmed over. It’s just a CTRL+C, CTRL+P of DeBlasio. 
 

2 hours ago, Bullneck said:

1) Why is Mandami a bad option? 

Because at this point it looks like there’s nothing coming from him that will really move the needle on housing costs. Maybe that doesn’t seem bad to you, but the one thing everyone with skin in the game agrees about is that the rent is too damn high in NYC.

2 hours ago, Bullneck said:

3) Hey, it worked in the last election in Canada.  Also, you have to fight off the barbarians at the gates before cleaning house in the palace,

I can’t imagine a less comparable thing than a Federal election in Canada and a Municipal election in NY. 
 

 

2 hours ago, Bullneck said:

4) I don't know anything about Mandami and I'm not a defender.  He doesn't have to know every in and out of process and policy in order to affect change (there are staff people for that

Well, I do, and I’ve seen this movie before, except with better, more serious people than him and his staff. I wish him well, but my expectations are low. People predicting disaster right now are approximately as silly as those who did the same thing when DeBlasio was elected. But the people who expect good things from Mamdani have even less reason to expect them than those who thought DeBlasio would transform the city for the better.

 

2 hours ago, Bullneck said:

Also, weren't you the guy saying "you have to find good candidates, ones that connect and people like and trust" and "policy is unimportant in elections, all that matters is the candidate."

Excuse my paraphrasing, but please explain this.

Yep, all true. That’s why Mamdani will win, and you don’t get to do anything unless you win.
 But that’s not in conflict with anything I said. And we can be honest about what’s happening here: a deeply unserious, lightweight nepobaby is about to take charge of the biggest and most complicated municipal enterprise in America. This guy makes Steve Adler look like a mindmeld of Robert Moses and Fiorello LaGuardia. He ran a great campaign, and I hope he does great things, but my expectations are under the floor. 

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
Posted

Every one of those answers was either so obtuse or a false equivalency or self-congratulatory or evasive. I don't think I'll ever take anything you post seriously.  

 

Posted
3 hours ago, Bullneck said:

Back when I was the "dirt dog" for a Florida affordable housing company it took about two to three years from the first time you saw a site and put it under contract until Grand Opening -- maybe four years if there were issues.  In NYC I see projects that are 10 years old all the time from when they went in for permit until groundbreaking.  I see projects where the developer has broken ground and doesn't have the building drawings finished because of expiring entitlements.  

Totally- I meant to respond to this earlier. You are absolutely right, but there are two issues conflated here:

1) proceedural friction related to all housing and 

2) procedural friction for capital A Affordable housing, which is typically higher than market rate housing. 
 

in most cities, the housing shortage is universal and the greatest pain is in middle income bands.  That is a shortage of market rate housing, which therefore means the top of the market MUST be met before housing is available to middle incomes. In other words, NYC needs a lot more “luxury housing” because of “Elite Overproduction.”
Mamdani is trying to address housing as a bottoms up problem of poverty. Not only is that the most time and cost intensive approach, it also doesn’t meet the general shortage annd therefore the bulk of the local workforce unless a general recession wipes out the middle of the market. In which case your affordability problem gets worse since prices fall, but more slowly than income. 

Posted
23 minutes ago, Underdog said:

In a NY Minute is a myth when it comes to construction or opening a business. 

I thought NY Minute was about Trump's prowess in the bedroom.

Posted
3 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

But that’s not in conflict with anything I said. And we can be honest about what’s happening here: a deeply unserious, lightweight nepobaby is about to take charge of the biggest and most complicated municipal enterprise in America. This guy makes Steve Adler look like a mindmeld of Robert Moses and Fiorello LaGuardia. He ran a great campaign, and I hope he does great things, but my expectations are under the floor. 

Are you talking about Cuomo or Mamdani?

Posted
1 hour ago, David Dennison said:

Are you talking about Cuomo or Mamdani?

Cuomo is a serious, heavyweight nepobaby. Seriously flawed and problematic, but he’s got a track record of bureaucratic management.

Why are you guys so protective of Mamdani? It’s super weird. 



×
×
  • Create New...