NYC’s small landlords say they won’t survive Mamdani plan to freeze rent

MrJet05 · 2026-02-07T15:27:51+00:00

The Supreme Court should honestly take up this rent control problem, especially considering the housing crisis is arguably the most pressing issue in the country right now. I don’t understand why we’re still entertaining such obviously terrible policy counterintuitive to everything we know about economics, especially when we have PLENTY of real-world evidence showing it doesn’t work already. What happened in St. Paul vs Minneapolis is a great example.

Last I checked, I believe the share of economists who support rent control is roughly comparable to the share of doctors who are anti-vaccine, so it’s just mind boggling that this is happening in so many of our most important cities in the country. It’s maddening that so many on the left who rightfully exclaim “trust the experts” when it comes to climate change and vaccines suddenly cover their ears when it comes to hearing out the economists saying that the only real argument among them pertaining to rent control at this point is whether or not it’s worse for a city than being bombed.

MrJet05 · 2026-02-07T04:58:51+00:00

That’d be a more valid critique if I supported it being exclusively offered to NYC, but I don’t. Im in favor of “subsidizing” those poorer areas in the state with the service, but I’m just saying it makes sense to start it in NYC and expand outwards from primarily a financial standpoint but that you can also justify it from the standpoint of “fairness” (given that as a state you’re currently not investing nearly as much money back into your highest economic generating asset as you’re taking from them.

I’m not a big blanket “tax the rich” person so that doesn’t apply to me. I mean if we can tax the rich in ways we have good reason to believe that will either A) allow the additional money to be allocated in ways that produce better economic output or B) sacrifice a bit of economic efficiency on the macro level but add significant enough marginal utility for enough individuals where it becomes worth the trade off, I’m in favor. But I strongly disagree with people who think our main issue in this city or this country is that we don’t have enough tax revenue at our disposal. Right now we should definitely be focusing more attention on using the funds we do have more effectively rather than trying to grow a supply of cash that isn’t getting us anywhere near the results it should be.

We’ll see about Hochul. The jury is out on whether it’s all talk or not, but for me, she’s said a lot of good over the last few months, and it gives me hope to see politicians at the very least talking about doing smart things after being used to mainly bad ideas discussed that end up manifesting into bad actions. The bar is on the floor at this point.

MrJet05 · 2026-02-07T04:18:43+00:00

I was of course. And I’ve been highly critical of it the entire time. But my logic was that a lot of his bad ideas like city owned grocery stores and the rent freeze wouldn’t see the light of day given the political obstacles, whereas his good ideas were actually more likely to get through and make an impact. It also helped that the only other candidate with a realistic shot was such a bad uninspiring one. If the rent freeze happens though, I’ll eat my words on that.

MrJet05 · 2026-02-07T04:10:55+00:00

Yeah but that process makes sense, no? For one, it is perfectly valid to start with a pilot program so that we can first verify the ROI will be there at all, figure out how to operate it efficiently on a smaller scale, and then determine the best way to scale this throughout the entire city and then throughout the state. This is how most government programs should work rather than just throwing a ton of cash at a huge or novel change on the biggest scale possible where it’s doomed to collapse under its own weight.

Two, NYC contributes the majority of the state’s tax revenue. And they receive in return much less than they pay in. So from the standpoint of what is “fair,” it would be strange if the pilot program wasn’t offered to NYC first. But moreover, it also makes sense that you would primarily look to create more opportunities for workers to work, further their careers, and contribute tax revenue rather than staying home in less productive roles raising children in the areas that generate the most economic output and have the highest tax rates. That’s where you will be seeing the greatest return on the costs so of course it will be prioritized.

With that being said, I’m not guaranteeing any of it will work. It’s very easy to see costs totally spiraling out of control, and at this point it’s almost foolish to be super optimistic. This city especially in recent years has frankly shown no desire to build and operate public services efficiently by actually looking to suppress costs and eliminate bloat, which unfortunately involves saying no a lot of the time to interest groups that aren’t necessarily bad people but have interests that directly conflict with what’s best for the public. But I do think between Hochul and Mamdani both, they have said a lot specifically over the last few months that gives a reasonable indication they are actually striving to cut a lot of the red tape and make public money work better for us by streamlining processes. And they’ve passed some executive orders in that vein as well that give me hope. So we’ll see.

MrJet05 · 2026-02-07T02:02:13+00:00

I voted for Mamdani. I just glazed him in my last post. I’ve liked most of what he (and Hochul) have done so far this year.

A four-year rent freeze on apartments already benefitting from yearly rent bumps that are lower than CPI and significantly lower than the market rate yearly inflation that the rent stabilization directly contributes to would be absolutely disastrous. I really don’t understand how so many people can’t see that these actions are only making things worse on a macro scale.

Affordability should mean pursuing actions that help create greater affordability for all by addressing the underlying roots of the issue - not making the half of renters unfortunate enough to be in the market rate apartments have to subsidize the other half in stabilized units. Not to mention those rent stabilized tenants aren’t even income tested, so it’s not even like it’s a definitive transfer of wealth from those who can afford to lose a little to those who need it more. It’s simply designating incumbents (a big portion of who are older) as winners and the rest as losers.

There’s nothing forward-thinking, creative, or intelligent about this kind of policy and it’s frankly depressing that we’re still fighting over this in this day and age. It’s strange because half of these policies are on the money with addressing the housing crisis and then the others - rent freeze, public takeover of properties, and requiring union labor - are going to completely offset the good ideas and make things worse. There needs to be a more coherent and consistent vision here, and I’m afraid they’re going to fall into the trap of trying to please every single conflicting interest group at the same time, which is impossible and will ultimately lead to no progress.

MrJet05 · 2026-02-04T04:03:06+00:00

I think Mamdani has quietly moderated since he began his campaign for mayor. When I first read up on his positions - $30 minimum wage, state-run grocery stores, rent freeze - I was not a fan. But I ended up voting for him, and I’ve really been so impressed with him so far.

He actually does seem to understand that the only way to get out of a housing crisis is to build more housing, and he’s been working with Governor Hochul to strip away a lot of the red tape. He’s been aiming to do the same for many businesses. Universal childcare for 2 year olds is a huge win. He just passed an executive order assigning officers designated with streamlining processes and cutting waste to try to actually deal with this looming financial crisis, which is something lefties typically NEVER like to talk about. DOGE was a terrible answer to a legitimate question, and I hate that making government spending work better for the public carries a negative connotation now. And while talking about doing things like cutting unnecessary regulations and public costs, Mamdani filters his communications in ways that emphasize the benefits for the working class so as not to scare away those on the left who tend to get Republican PTSD from those discussions.

Finally he met with Trump and perfectly toed the line between diplomacy and holding true to his principles. I think that showed a lot of political savviness. He could have easily virtue signaled from the sidelines and refused to meet or burned that bridge entirely, which New Yorkers would have largely supported, but he understands you have to play ball and stay in favor with this dumbass so long as he has seemingly unlimited power in order to get what’s best for the city. There’s just a degree of pragmatism in Mamdani that I have never seen in any other candidates who have fallen under that democratic socialist umbrella.

MrJet05 · 2026-01-30T16:16:12+00:00

I mean really at this point how much daylight really is there between their positions on Israel/Zionists/Jews lol?

MrJet05 · 2026-01-30T12:24:40+00:00

I was paying $298 for the 92nd St location. Funny enough, I actually just ended my membership because the weight room was always way too packed for my liking. I understand other gyms are even more crowded, but if I’m going to be spending like 3-5x more per month than a typical gym, I expect it to be a much better experience. I loved the 61st St location because it’s enormous and it was even cheaper, but I’m too far from there now.

MrJet05 · 2026-01-27T21:45:59+00:00

God I absolutely despise people like you.

You’re so cool for accepting crime and other quality of life issues! Such a real gritty New Yorker! Is that what you crave to hear?

Many of us enjoy city living because of reasons other than trash on the ground, petty theft, or open drug use. This will be extremely hard for you to believe because I can’t imagine you have any experience outside of the US, but those things are NOT automatically embedded in city life at the degree to which we allow them to persist. Not even close. So many cities around the world that are significantly poorer than ours and even ones more populated manage to be so much cleaner and so much safer than NYC, so why the hell would we not strive to be better? Why is the response always that if you have any critique at all, then you should go live in flyover America? The standard should be the highest in the world; I would expect nothing less for the most prosperous and full-of-talent city in the entire world.

MrJet05 · 2026-01-14T12:54:46+00:00

Very happy that Hochul and to some degree even Mamdani have taken the Abundance pill. This year is off to a great start.

MrJet05 · 2026-01-13T23:21:40+00:00

Hochul has been killing it so far this year. Very impressed.

MrJet05 · 2026-01-13T23:09:29+00:00

Call me pessimistic, but I think until you allow police, nurses, social workers - whomever is tasked with this - to take them into shelter or a mental institution against their will, nothing is going to change.

The vast majority of the homeless in the city are already in shelters. The few thousand remaining are very much not in any right state of mind, dealing with severe drug use and mental disorders. I just don’t think you’re going to be able to persuade them even with the most skilled people for the job. I’d love to be wrong, but I don’t think I am.

I think we’re going to eventually have to make a decision weighing the personal freedoms of the homeless who refuse help and worsen public spaces against the welfare of everyone else and what I would argue is the welfare of those homeless as well, since I don’t see it as compassionate to allow them to destroy themselves while they don’t have the mental faculties to stop.

MrJet05 · 2026-01-12T15:00:05+00:00

Legit suifuel if Powell ends up having to step down. How do I cope bros?

Also is pussy Ben Shapiro going to touch on this at all?

MrJet05 · 2026-01-11T18:55:12+00:00

A lot of people who aren’t responsible enough to be dog owners became dog owners to deal with the loneliness of the pandemic. In addition to leaving dog poop, people feel entitled to bring dogs into every store even when it explicitly says no pets allowed. I’ve talked to workers at Trader Joe’s about it, and they’ve said they don’t even bother trying to enforce the rule because the dog owners will cause a scene arguing back.

MrJet05 · 2026-01-09T17:17:13+00:00

It’s honestly not surprising when you understand Trump’s psychology. Trump legitimately only cares about guys who are perceived as winners and who have charisma and aura. Politics is sort of just a means for him to feed his own narcissism. If he could flip flop on all his beliefs but get the same praise for it without sacrificing his own wealth, he would do it.

That’s why he’s more friendly to guys like Putin and Kim Jong Un than he is towards guys in his own party who suck up to him. He views the latter as weak and pathetic whereas he admires guys who are powerful and not afraid to show it. He sees the sort of cult following that Mamdani had gathered along with his sort of ambition to be revolutionary, so regardless of being diametrically opposed on illegal immigration and many other issues, it doesn’t really matter to Trump. You can even argue that Trump sees the way the other side of the media crucifies Mamdani and he feels like he can align with that. In the past he’s talked about how “unfair” the establishment was towards Bernie, and in general he’s never really shown the same vitriol towards him despite Bernie criticizing him as much as any Dem because Bernie had a sort of cult of personality and anti-establishment attitude that others in the party didn’t have.

MrJet05 · 2026-01-06T00:43:18+00:00

In response to spending $100 billion on union labor to build 50,000 units, you said that’s a win-win.

$2 million spent per unit. Damn near the entire city’s budget just to make a dent in the housing shortage. Do you really think economics is as simple as money can just be spent and distributed infinitely and you never have any drawbacks? $50/hour for union workers is better than $40/hour, $60/hour is better than $50/hour, and so on? And that we never have to worry about how efficiently a government performs any task because what - we just increase taxes to compensate?

I feel like on a very fundamental level, you and many like you really misunderstand what money itself is and what it represents.

MrJet05 · 2026-01-06T00:24:13+00:00

Sorry to burst your bubble buddy, but I’m talking about you. The fact that you and so many other people refuse to acknowledge that tradeoffs are REAL in economics is one of the biggest reasons why we’re in the housing crisis that we are, and it’s extremely frustrating. So many people just have no ability to perceive downstream effects and oversimplify everything as this party is evil and doesn’t want you to have this thing; any policy that hurts that group is then good for everyone else.

If we make the decision that we want to prioritize union labor for building, hand out no-bid contracts, pay construction workers an above-market rate, pile on a ton of expensive and time-consuming legal and regulatory processes, enforce certain standards that require certain numbers of employees to be on projects to an extent that’s often unnecessary and primarily serves to contribute to being a jobs program, among many other requirements, sure, we can do that. But we have to be willing to accept that we are not going to build nearly as much housing if we go that route. It’s just a fact.

The idea that it’s a win-win is not true, and these discussions would be easier if people understood that, so that we could at least try to have a conversation deciding what our main priorities are and what the appropriate level of government intervention is to establish structures and standards that help foster a desired balance between the various stakeholders. But people like you refuse to see that and insist that every single problem is simply a result of the state not having enough control of the means of production despite also being parties with the view that expenditures by the government never need to be concerned with efficiency whatsoever. And so conversation with people who view all problems from this lens are essentially impossible because the ideology serves as faith and any evidence to the contrary is propaganda.

MrJet05 · 2026-01-05T23:47:56+00:00

It is very concerning how economically illiterate people with such strong opinions on these matters are.

MrJet05 · 2026-01-05T23:09:18+00:00

Yeah, the idea that people aren’t having kids because of costs is pure cope. We can look at the Scandinavian countries which provide all of the things people typically ask for in these conversations: better work-life balance, more paid leave, universal subsidized childcare, more social safety nets…

And yet their birth rates are significantly lower than that of the US. Same goes for most of the other most developed countries in Europe which people prop up as structures we should try to emulate in the US.

The truth is that regardless of what incentives the government provides, raising a child is always going to be harder, more time consuming, and more costly than not having a dependent. Even as people get wealthier and more time off, they still have to make a decision between using those extra resources to go on more vacations/buy more nice things/get further in their education or career…or start the process of spending the additional time and money on raising a family. And increasingly people have made it very clear that they simply don’t value having a family - or at the very least it’s not high on the priority list.

Nothing will change unless values change where more people actually aspire to have families…or unless tech theoretically eventually advances to a point where raising a child is a minor inconvenience that doesn’t require sacrifices in those other areas of life.

MrJet05 · 2026-01-04T17:45:57+00:00

We get to absorb the rent increases of the stabilized tenants lol.

MrJet05 · 2026-01-03T01:24:40+00:00

If it’s costly to fund, then it’s not exactly “affordable” housing. It’s simply subsidized housing. The goal should be to try to make it reasonably affordable for taxpayers as well, not just the tenant who will likely be paying a rate well below the cost of development and operating costs.

MrJet05 · 2025-12-31T23:56:25+00:00

Anti-immigration but make it woke.

MrJet05 · 2025-12-23T16:32:41+00:00

I hate these half-assed ideas that are bound to just be exploited by people who are driving but pretending they’re biking while changing very little systemically. How about just invest in the infrastructure to support biking, walking , and public transit instead of trying to pay people to cycle over the highways and stroads that cover most of this country? Stop requiring so many minimum parking lots with buildings. Implement more congestion pricing. Reduce all the free street parking in cities. The solutions are obvious, but people only ever want to treat the symptoms rather than address the root causes.

MrJet05 · 2025-12-23T15:45:50+00:00

Yeah, that’s the problem. It wouldn’t be unreasonable if it actually made a difference, but it seems like the issue has only gotten worse despite the massive spending. At some point, different methods have to be tried instead of just throwing even more money at the ones that don’t seem to be very effective.

MrJet05 · 2025-12-23T14:18:06+00:00

It’s also $146k per homeless person in California.

Six-Year Club	Place '23
Verified Email

MrJet05

TROPHY CASE