I hope Mamdani wins and people have to charge fair rents and feel like they are suffering.
This is what fascist media does: they bullshit you to death.
Mom and Pop NYC landlords. I immediately want to balk at this statement but then I remembered two things. Firstly I remember “How to with Jon Wilson”. He made an episode about buying the house from his landlord and that the only way to pay for it was to turn it into a rental property. His landlord was an old lady who wanted to move out.
Secondly, I remember meeting a couple who sold a brownstone before the pandemic, moved to Montclair NJ, and then purchased a home and turned their second floor into an apartment.
Do mom and pop landlords exist? Yes. Are they opportunistic? I don’t think those single family homes should be allowed to be turned into apartments. I’ve seen some pretty heinous abuses of some people essentially turning a closet and a hallway into a “studio”.
Maybe “Mom and Pop” landlords shouldn’t exist.
Maybe private landlords shouldn’t exist.
“mom and pop” landlords should literally be a mom and pop, renting to their kid before they can afford their own place.
Good?
Gotta read between the lines.
They won’t be sellable… AT A PROFIT. They might have to sell them to PEOPLE so they can LIVE IN THEM instead of as a perpetual resource squatting investment.
You get to escape from this exploitation with the ill-gotten rent-profits you’ve already got and your heads still attached to your bodies… this is already the compromise. Take the win.
They might not be sellable at “break even”. A lot of people bought places to short-term rent on places like Airbnb. The prices might be extra inflated because of that revenue generation. Remove the ability to make a profit and the value crashes. Suddenly they cannot sell it for what they owe and it doesn’t make enough to cover the mortgage.
My guess is that a lot of these mom and pop landlords will lose or sell their properties and investment funds will gobble them up for cheap… Never lose faith in the system’s incomparable ability to fuck over the common people.
NYC already has heavy restrictions on short term rentals like airbnb, enforced since 2023. They need to be registered, there’s a 2 guest limit, it must be a shared space (no full unit rentals), the hosts must be present for the full stay, and it’s in an approved building.
Local law 18.
People who wanted to literally abuse the system (and the people in it) will get fucked up by a new system. So sad.
Did you read the whole post? Their point is it could make it even worse in the end.
Isn’t that the point of everything in the US?
Lately it would seem so. And by lately I mean most of my lifetime, so possibly forever. Though I doubt that.
I’m far from being an authority in the matter, and I’m not even from the US, but it’s a recurring trend since at least the 80s/90s after a brief attempt at making things a bit better (some of which, to be fair, did persist for some time before being crushed or just withering), so it kind of depends on your age I suppose.
Investments carry risk, and when you invest in leaches, expect people to have little sympathy when the endevor fails.
If you’re investing to make highly leveraged profit off of a concept in a legal grey area, you’re are not some “mom and pop” land lord. If that comes to pass they messed up their risk management because of greed.
and investment funds will gobble them up for cheap…
If that happens then it was a badly implemented policy to begin with.
Society is not responsible for insuring someone’s investment works out well for them.
Government should not be prevented from removing a thumb from the scale because a handful of people made a 30 year bet on it remaining there.
deleted by creator
The fundamental issue is that people and corporations are buying himes for the sole purpose of profiting off them
It’ll suck for some people, but it’s a necessary part of making housing affordable again. Housing needs to be a place for someone to live, not an investment that always gets more expensive
Housing needs to be a place for someone to live, not an investment that always gets more expensive
Too late
ya it’s crazy how having their mortgage paid for by their tenant is not enough, they also want to sell the property for high price than they “paid” for.
deleted by creator
They might have to sell them to PEOPLE so they can LIVE IN THEM instead of as a perpetual resource squatting investment.
So, condos? Not inherently bad, but I would expect that to make living in NYC even more impossible except for the already wealthy with enough capital to buy one.
If you’re renting a property, it is not unsellable. I’m sure someone will be happy to buy it for $1.
My “mom and pop” landlord owned 3 buildings, one in Chelsea, one on 3rd avenue, and one in red hook. Managed the properties themselves, cheap as fuck, but kind. When they liquidated their buildings they got about $40 million dollars. No such thing as a mom and pop nyc landlord.
If your promary concern when buying a hime is selling it, your housing market is fundamentally broken
Landlords can still make a profit offering a service (rental profit) without needing the underlying asset to perpetually appreciate in value. Japan makes it work
it’s not my primary concern, but it’s my third.
which one of you said “rent’s due”?
Tomorrow’s already the Tenth
Reminds me of when the former German gov tried to enforce heat pumps for heater replacements to phase out gas heaters.
Someone wrote their experience with a homeowner meeting in a small city to discuss that topic and at some point a man complained that doesn’t know if he could afford to replace gas heaters with heat pumps in all 36 of his houses…
awww the poor babies
This would be funny to read in a political satire novel or something if we weren’t living in it.
mom-and-pop parasites fear promising antiparasitic
I was ALL IN on Mamdani until I read THIS! CANT we just think of the RICH LANDLORDS PLEASE! THOSE are the Only Ones who Matter! I’ll GLADLY pay DOUBLE the Rent just to make Sure my Mom And Pop Landlord with 30 Buildings in NYC can stay Afloat and I Expect ALL Mamdani Supporters to do the Same! This is EYE OPENING!
Giving everyone affordable housing would be socialism! Bailing out corporations with hundreds of billions of dollars every decade or so is not socialism, though. That would be straight up communism, but pssst
That would be straight up communism
Not really though. Communism means that the workers own the means of production. Bailing out billionaire-owned corporations is not that.
Communism also means that the big companies get bail money whenever they struggle financially. It doesn’t matter if in capitalism the big corporations are billionaire owned. The money they are being bailed out with is tax money of the common people.
I mean. No. Like… No.
What?
If my landlord has to miss one trip in his giant RV I will just bawl my eyes out.
Poor guy.
What do you expect him to get a job like a peasant? He’s accustomed to a certain lifestyle
I know. It makes me so sad.
Something I will say about my landlord though, I’ve never seen a harder worker. That dude doesn’t stop.
Still though, he makes money for nothing across the board.
I have paid him for a whole ass house at this point. You know how many times he’s had to work on anything at my place? 0.
Just collect money and throw it in the bank for absolutely nothing.
I’ve actually single handedly paid for half of his one apartment building at this point.
It’s crazy to me that it’s like this.
Imagine how easily all of this could be fixed if we had affordable public housing that’s actually rent to own?
I can’t afford my own place, but I’m a temporarily embarrassed landlord! These policies will hurt ME very soon. The gall of this guy.
It’s funny how the system of owning extra properties to rent out as part of a person’s retirement is so unreachable for current generations that they don’t even really know about it. Being able to own things so you didn’t have to work when you were old used to be how the system convinced people to buy into it.
Now that this is now longer feasible for almost anyone, there’s little reason for people to feel the system is worth upholding. That’s what kept support for capitalism so strong after guilded age; a middle class supported by generous housing policies and strong unions. As such a reality becomes distant memory, people are more willing to reject capitalism and liberalism than every before.
It’s important to bring in the longer history. Before large numbers of Americans were reliant on rising housing prices, there existed these things called pension plans, which would pay out from when you retired until when you died, and you could live on that money. But the capitalists didn’t like that, because they didn’t want to pay people for doing nothing over the last few decades of their lives. So then we got the current system, which has people speculating on property and throwing money into IRAs. In other words, we had a system with guaranteed benefits and we replaced that with one based on gambling and the ridiculous belief that the value of property would always outpace inflation. And this all happened in our parents lifetimes, or in our grandparents lifetimes, depending how old you are.
I kind of have to be in awe of how some of these people will complain that pensions disappeared and retirement is based on gambling, but also vote against their own interests and call us (relatively) younger folks lazy complaining losers that can’t afford anything. Hmm…
The bourgeoisie are all dead, all we have left are capitalist oligarchs.
If you make money from owning something, like a landlord, then you are the bourgeoisie. The landlords want the same things someone like Musk does.
That’s what I’m saying. The petty property owning class has been completely replaced by the Elon Musks and Jeff Bezos. They pretend like they’re helping the bourgeoisie, but home ownership is already dead.
They are the bourgeoisie. The term basically means you get your income from capital (investments) and not from your labor.
There is the petite bourgeoisie. They’re the shop owners and such who tend to still work at those shops alongside their other workers. Historically, they have not been good allies of the working class, though there are a few exceptions.
Are you really an middle class city dweller when you don’t interact with cities or society at large at all? I think people with $10B+ in wealth, or people with political ties to Trump would be considered ruling class, not middle class city-dwellers.
“Middle class” does not map to the bourgeoisie. The whole lower/middle/upper class distinction is so poorly defined that you can say literally anyone is middle class. Might be upper middle class or lower middle class, but you’re never not middle class. Worker/bourgeoisie/nobility is more specific, and it’s a trap to try to see it as directly mapping over.
The term bourgeoisie was a distinction from the nobility who owned the land by right of birth. At the time, there was no other way to own land by purchasing it on the open market. The bourgeoisie emerged with early capitalism, and wanted to own land. The American and French revolutions were largely driven by the bourgeoisie with the help of the workers.
In chapter I of the Communist Manifesto, the bourgeoisie are the heroes. They did break the power of the nobility’s stranglehold on land ownership. Right-libertarians sometimes use this fact to say capitalism is great, but this is the wrong way to look at it. Marx and Engles never argued things should stay there just because anyone can theoretically aquire enough wealth to own land.
“We invented a relatable class of people to discredit an actually leftish politician”
I feel like this isn’t a new trick.
Yeah, this is just code for ‘hey middle-class people, Mamdani might be coming for you next!’
Won’t anybody stand up for the
leecheslandlords??I mean it’s still a democracy. Just don’t vote for him, if you don’t like him?
or we could slander him with red scare tactics and racism
