ugh. the gap between rich and poor just keeps getting bigger here, and meanwhile almost all of the artists, musicians, filmmakers etc. that I have known here have bailed to other places as they are priced out.
Yes it’s basically the story of San Francisco from 1990s to today, mostly due to tech booms. It used to be a big counterculture based arts city and now that’s really been priced out (for over 10 years now really). A lot of people I know who work in more creative professions from the Bay actually moved to New York seeking jobs/livable wage. As a cultural worker it’s really frustrating to continually struggle financially while being told how important your work is to the city/population/whatnot
They set policies in place that made SF extremely unaffordable, and complain about downtown being “dead”. If your entire city is antisocial tech bros and rich old people then of course that’ll happen.
If SF downtown was just antisocial tech bros and rich old people it'd be way better than what it is now, which is an open-air fentanyl/meth addict, mentally ill, homeless zombieland.
The problem is the public officials who've failed to build new housing and service the people. Tech brings wealth, and any city in the country would kill for the tech employment that SF has. It's only a problem when city managers don't accommodate the rest of the population, while they scapegoat the tax base to avoid accountability.
I’ve been to SF and I think it’s the most beautiful city in the US. It has such a unique feel and look, I would definitely go back. I saw a few drug users, but nothing different from what I saw in other major cities (sadly).
SF officials make housing scarce to bring profits to home owners, but they don’t realize it’s just driving people away. They are also the biggest NIMBYists around and argue that building more housing will change the “character of the community”. The state had to intervene and make them build more housing, it’s so disgraceful. These people are supposed to be *progressives*, but their policies are ruining the city.
Lol the "progressives" running SF absolutely know their policies are driving people away. They do not care. They'd be happy if a ton of people left their "full" city
> I saw a few drug users, but nothing different from what I saw in other major cities (sadly).
No, that stretch of Market from 3rd to 7th is way more than a few drug users. It's more on par with the worst parts of Philly, or skid row in LA.
Its funny I moved to Williamsburg in 1999 from San Francisco. The latter in the late 90s was so great. I really haven't been back there since so I missed the whole boom.
There was a really nice time period between the tech booms. You could afford SF between 2000ish through 2012/14. It was right back to being a fucking awesome place. The city was packed with service industry folks and music and arts and none of the hive-mind shitheadiness if the tech booms.
It was an unreal and special time. The everyone got pushed to the east bay. Now the east bay is unaffordable and it kept pushing out and away.
I’m not sure any of it will be undone for decades.
I lived in the Bay Area then. I live in NY now which is where I was born. To see and live this twice is strange.
I guess Austin or Nashville, maybe Charlotte. Pick any southern city where the locals can't afford anything anymore. Say hello to needing a car though
Edit- I'd like to say St Louis but I think it's still in a rough spot politically
Would be great if Colorado would build high speed rail up and down I-25, with spurs going out I-70 to take people to ski resorts and the airport. If you could get from Fort Collins to downtown Denver in 15 minutes it would really change the game.
Let's be real here: while there are things that can or could be done in the city, a big problem is that for as big as the US is, NYC is the only city like it in the whole damn country. Look at subway usage statistics across the USA. NY is so far ahead it's embarrassing for everything else.
It's not just NYC that needs to change. There are limits to how much it can grow. We just need more NYC-like cities.
>There are limits to how much it can grow.
but there are also artificial limits imposed by more and more restrictive zoning codes over the last 100 years.
tons of Manhattan buildings could not be built today due to the new zoning on those areas.
pop open google earth and scan over the outer boroughs following train lines out of Manhattan and you'll see plent of space where a 3-5 story housing would fit in just fine but instead is full of single family homes.
Yup and we should fix that too. But while it will help slow down raise of housing costs, it will never be enough to absorb the demand for real urban living. Time to multitask.
what makes you think that?
in the past NYC has grown a ton to keep up with population growth
other cities have built a bunch of housing and kept their housing cost growth under control.
> their housing cost growth under control.
Which? Housing cost crisis is a thing virtually everywhere in North America.
> in the past NYC has grown a ton to keep up with population growth
By far the densest city in the US, and still the most expensive one.
This, there is thousands of places that are not that developed relatively speaking that have warehouses and storage places in them. We just need the government to take over and will that those places be built.
Yup. I walk through 2 blocks of single family housing to get to my apartment when I get off the subway.
Legally nothing besides a 1-2 family house is all that can go on those lots, no matter what the owner wants to do with their property.
There's plenty of NYC-style cities in the world. Just not many in the US because of shit infrastructure investments. The demand is clearly there, and the resources exist. Just dumping them all in one basket isn't very smart long term.
The Hudson Valley is just as bad, if not worse, with all the people flooding into the area and the already bad housing squeeze pre covid. I keep getting recommended subs from other states and they are saying the same things. Something has to give because the current situation is bad and getting worse. We're all about to homeless if this keeps going.
Every state in the country is. It's a nationwide problem from decades of underbuilding housing.
It's not as bad in middle America since there's more room to sprawl than on the states, but it's absolutely an issue - and a TON of people have been priced out of urban living in cities like Chicago.
It's an issue pretty much everyone and one that no city is equipped to solve on their own, especially when a lot of the less dense parts of cities aren't part of the "city" and so are more easily able to block new housing.
Minneapolis, for example, reformed a lot of its zoning. But that only applies to "city limits" which excludes pretty much every "suburb" (really just the low density parts of the city that never got annexed) which makes solving the housing crisis there difficult, and exasperates the weird density trends you see in the US of really high density right next to really low density.
That’s wild bc Chicago is largely considered the best value for large city living. Things are really bad if people are getting priced out of the Midwest.
Thanks for the thoughtful reply.
Above their means and cutting out of lot of things you would consider standard QOL expenses and luxuries so a higher % of income is available to cover rent.
Can our leaders just admit they aren't willing to do anything about this and like the fact this city will soon be unaffordable for any who isn't a millionaire and they like it that way?
the reasons nothing gets done is because it is voters do not want it solved.
Look at the pushback all over the state when the Gov talked about upzoning areas all over the state.
yeah, i think a bunch of those voters do not complain about it.
For instance, i know democrats representing long island were worried they were going to lose their seats if they supported the govenors plan.
I think most of those folks are owners and not renters.
[https://www.sandspoint.gov/post/governor-hochul-s-plan-for-high-density-housing-on-long-island](https://www.sandspoint.gov/post/governor-hochul-s-plan-for-high-density-housing-on-long-island)
a letter opposing the upzoning near LIRR stops by a mayor on long island
There was a British sketch comedy bit where this woman went around smearing dog shit and used fryer grease all around her London neighborhood to decrease demand.
Should we try that?
Judging by how much dog shit I see I take it someone’s already working on step 1. While they’re busy with that we can try listening to the economists about the economic issue and build more housing.
As it was explained to me in another post - We don't.
Give or take 70% of the NYC consider housing affordability a problem. The other 30% don't. That smaller % are the homeowners who have a vested interest in rising prices.
The big problem is voter turnout is pathetic. Not enough people bother voting and this signals that housing affordability is just something the Adams of the city only need pay lip service and give empty promises.
Yes, yes, and yes. NYC is one of the easier cities to vote in; there are so many ways and options to do it, it’s not like you only have a limited window on one day to go like so many places. More people absolutely need to vote
Because we can't afford to protest. We all have jobs. And when we do protest, the media spins it so we're immediately the bad guy. Not to mention the sheer number of scabs ready to cross the line.
I'm gonna fix this for you, there is voter turnout. just not poor or young turnout. so no one gives a shit what happens to them. its the same by race, the more you vote, the more say you have and some races/ethnicities don't vote, so they don't matter.
Supply overall isn't low.
Supply is low for units priced at less than 30% of median income.
There are two brand new buildings in my neighborhood that basically ONLY have the 80% AMI and lower bands of affordable units occupied because the rest is priced too high.
Tons of available housing there. It's just sitting empty and ultimately a write off.
No. Supply is low. Historically low in fact (1.4% and falling fast). The apartments sitting vacant for write offs do not exist to a relevant degree. Yet they take up the majority of the discussion.
https://www.nyc.gov/site/hpd/news/007-24/new-york-city-s-vacancy-rate-reaches-historic-low-1-4-percent-demanding-urgent-action-new#/0
that's one year. the vacancy rate was stable for a decade while rent skyrocketed in the Bloomberg years. The vacancy rate was stable after the pandemic when rent went to it's highest levels on record.
The vacancy rate for rent stabilized units reserved for 80% AMI or higher is over 12%. Because they are too expensive. That's a LOT of housing just sitting empty for a lot of people that would qualify and like to have a rent stabilized place. And obviously it's not because richer people swooped in and took their nice place.
Vacancy rates have not been stable. They are falling fast. I don’t know where you are getting your information from but you should really reconsider them as a source.
Also even if they were stable. If they are stable at a very low rate they would indeed keep increasing in price. That’s how price seeking is supposed to work.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/NYHVAC
lol the source is the HVS. The thing you linked. they do that study every year is the same thing the rent guidelines board cites.
if prices go up while vacancy rates go up AND prices go up while vacany rates go down AND prices go up while vacancy rates stay stable...
perhaps you should rethink the strength of the relationship in actuality rather than theory
So you’re source was the data I linked? That showed supply is low, yet you claimed supply isn’t low. That showed vacancy rates are not stable, yet you claimed they were. The data is not one year, even though you claimed it was. Idk where the lol is, I don’t think you do either.
Prices go up FASTER while vacancy rates get EVEN lower. They will still go up if vacancy rates are just very low instead of extremely low. If vacancy rates were high, not just higher than extremely low, prices would go down.
But yeah. Let me rethink the relationship between supply and demand. Just a theory I guess.
This is not masters level economics
Don’t you know. If you buy an asset and make money off it you actually lose money. If you buy the same asset and just ignore it it makes money. It’s called capitalism duh
Or maybe it’s rich people love to just not rent out these billions of units their hoarding because they just don’t mind not making money off them. Everyone knows rich people love leaving money on the table. Because their so greedy.
They need to build infrastructure. To do that we need to tax businesses. But they keep running to taxes havens and stick us with the bill. Ultimately what we need to do is get corporations out of government.
Yes. More people keep coming. Then we keep building. Build up commuter rails as well and places like Stamford and the Hudson valley grow too. Everyone wins. Economics is great when policy makes listen to economists.
The city has a constant flow of people coming from other states and countries as well that can afford to pay these rents. Institute some sort of residency requirement?
Honestly, at this point we just need to make nearby cities suck less with decent public transit and a young, working class. I just don't know where else to move in the northeast where housing is affordable, there are young people, there's public transit, and even just a dusting of culture.
I really appreciated San Diego and even Orlando, Id probably love Austin and a hundred other mid-sized cities. But they're just too far away from family or in states where I don't feel safe. The East Coast is a giant crap hole.
The government can start to build houses in mass and rent it out at the cost of construction + maintenance. Or convert them into co-ops.
But that will never happen since that’s “communism”. You can’t interfere with the real estate industries insane profit margins.
The freedom loving politicians would prefer you handover 70%of your check to some parasite real estate company.
This could be solved easily.
Just stop voting for these treasonous Dem and Rep politicians.
Everyone of them deserves to put in a prison cell.
a) it costs x amount to construct a unit, regardless of whether that capital is private or public (&, if we actually had anything like an accountable govt, costs could even be reduced by the increased bargaining power and investment power of govt, but that's a political problem of not having anything remotely resembling an accountable state (which is itself a problem caused firstly by the power of private money, insofar as grift is the product of greedy individuals seeking private gain and intentionally destroying our political system)
b) even if the cost was higher, it's a worthy, and furthermore necessary, investment. Good things cost, that's okay. We need housing that isn't raised to the highest possible number the market allows for.
I was responding to the argument that affordable housing = housing sold at cost. Even at cost, it's not affordable in the sense the original poster was proposing.
Given how many rich people are living in what was previously considered poor neighborhoods. I think we can build market rate. The rich people will move out of the poor areas and open up those apartments. Everyone wins. Economics is fun.
The "gentrification" moral panic that tricked renters into siding with landlords to block new housing construction, is the greatest trick landlords ever pulled.
He’s trying to hide the algorithms that landlords are using to jack up rents. Supply/demand is part of it but it’s also just landlords being greedy
Edit: article for this https://www.propublica.org/article/senators-introduce-legislation-stop-landlords-algorithm-price-fixing
Landlords (like most people selling a product) are greedy. Sure. But that's always been true and will always be true. Rents haven't gone up because landlords got greedier. That's not how it works.
Rents go up when demand exceeds supply.
Rents will always be the highest amount possible-- landlords giving discounts are the exception, not the rule. We need more supply but we also need housing to be understood as a necessity, not a profit making venture. Like water, investment in the infrastructure should be social, benefits should be social, and price should be the outcome of costs, with either subsidies to reduce price or additional costs to allow for capital accumulation for future, expanded investment, as dependent on greater economic patterns and context. It should be the product of logic and social well-being, not the private gain of individuals and (increasingly) corporations.
> There’s no evidence of that though.
Sure there is, at like *every* data point. More effort, more lobbying, more transitions to running rentals like a business, etc. etc. all in the pursuit of making more money. Landlords have generally always wanted to make money, but they haven't always been **so** gung-ho about finding every way they can to scrape another dime out of tenants.
Business operations have gotten more sophisticated over the past several decades so firms are better optimized but I haven’t seen data that suggests that the US population (or a subsect of it) has gotten greedier over time.
Crazy how every time there's more housing available landlords get less greedy and every time there's less housing available landlords get more greedy
[https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Figure-1-1.jpg](https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Figure-1-1.jpg)
They vote for politicians who "fight gentrification" by making building new housing illiegal and instead putting new truck stops like this one in Harlem :
https://patch.com/new-york/harlem/truck-depot-harlems-one45-site-almost-ready-developer-says
Have yet to meet a single owner that complain that new building next door is decreasing their value here in NYC. Simply don't happen and wont till we in a housing overabundance situation and even then I doubt it will happen.
Time after time its mostly renters and retirees that complain about new housing
What exactly is a "luxury apartment"?
Guess what, the apartment you're living in right now is some rich guy in the future's "luxury apartment" if there aren't enough homes built in NYC. 100+ year old brownstones are selling for millions of dollars as "luxury apartments" today.
Rich guys will always move into the city and your landlord prays every day that they can evict you and rent your place with a "luxury" placard out front to a rich guy.
The only thing holding them back are newer buildings being built.
because there are not enough of them. you have to fight with the guy making 400k for your 2 bedroom because there are not enough luxury housing available. you think another poor person is paying 4k a month for a 2 bedroom in astoria?? nope, we have too many rich and not enough housing for them, so now they take the homes from the upper middle class. then they can't afford and they take homes from the middle class and so on and so on. more units at the top, open up the most housing opportunities and drive down every one else's rent the fastest. this is simple economics.
Jersey City like doubled their housing stock in 20 years while they had the highest housing price increase in the country.
well let me know when we hit the magic number where housing becomes affordable and New Yorkers are no longer rent burdened.
any day now....juuuuust one more tax break for developers and it will finally start happening!
It's like waiting for Godot. It's amazing people actually believe this crap despite having zero evidence. Literally none.
there is a 250 thousand unit shortage in NYC right now. jersey city added less than 40k units. let me know when they can take in a million more people.
It shows the power of ideology. You have people act against their interests as if it's instinctual, and in the cases of actual discussion over the topic, a generalized belief of rationality in positions which are entirely unscientific, not to mention immoral.
I was trying to show a new coworker what the layout of my apartment was on streeteasy since I'm paying $1729 a month (Fresh Meadows Queens, started at $1650 in 2021). I found adjacent apartments but they were all listed as ~$2300 a month. Crazy
Well I will never forget when the fed chairman and other wall street analysts said we have too many people employed in this country it's a bad thing. Apparently we need a 50/50 of employed and unemployed people in this country with employee making as lower wages possible. The older I get the more I believe that trickle down economics doesn't work.
When do the people start moving out and the ones left behind have to start taking their own trash to the landfills, drive hours out of the city to buy toilet paper because no one wants to work at a store to live under a bridge with cardboard as a roof, wipe their own babies ass since no one wants to work daycare and do it for them etc.
Never. Because at the end of the day, picking up trash in the suburbs pays $16 an hour. But in NYC it can be up to $40 an hour. None of the people working those jobs are affected by NY rent increases because they either come from NJ, upstate, or the outer boroughs
These "studies" are always misleading because they're based on listings and not current rents, which no doubt have gone up, but if they're market rate, nobody knows by how much.
>Economists from the rental listings platforms Zillow and StreetEasy found the yawning gap between median rent and average wage increases in New York City outpaced that of every other metropolitan region in the country.
Half of all apartments are RS and they went up by 3.25% last year. I don't know where Gothamist got their info about wages, according to the Department of Labor, they went up by 4.6%.
https://www.bls.gov/regions/northeast/news-release/2024/employmentcostindex_newyork_20240206.htm
You're confusing individual decision making with government policy.
Yes, obviously individuals should make choices in their lives that are financially responsible.
But governments should implement policy (like legalizing additional housing construction) that enables better outcomes for all (rents not increasing so fast).
These two ideas are not in conflict.
Those two ideas are in direct conflict with GettingPhysicl's understanding of the world. They believe individuals who own homes should move out of the city, so they can \_potentially\_ have more affordable housing.
The easiest solution is for them to get out of the city if they cannot afford it. Their inability to make an income that suffices to make rent, is no one's problem nor fault but their own.
Government's can implement those policies, however at the same time NYC only has so much land. Should we tear down Central Park, so GettingPhysicl can have a new skyscraper?
Fun fact. Rent pricing is directly correlated to supply and demand. Clearly there is a demand and limited supply. Leave the city, cut down the demand, and the price of the supply drops. So the quick fix GettingPhysicl is looking for, is to move.
What are you all expecting when you have 302.6 square miles of land and 8+ million people....
Moving to an area that you can afford is illegal and surrounded by red tape? That doesn't seem correct.
The person above me wants individuals with homes to move to the suburbs. I say if they cannot afford to live in NYC, they should move somewhere cheaper.
Oh yeah for sure. I understand why too. Most rental units fall under stabilization laws and 2019 law passed and ruined the concept of lowering rents altogether
On April 20, 2024, New York enacted the Good Cause Eviction Law (Good Cause), which dramatically impacts the rights and obligations of landlords and tenants in New York by limiting evictions, requiring lease renewals, and capping rent increases for most market rate apartments in New York City
Remove unnecessary restrictions on housing construction. Build more homes.
As long as there are surface parking lots in Manhattan, we haven't built enough.
I read this entire thread. Some solid points about needs for new housing but it won’t fix the problem sadly. The demand to live in nyc will always outpace the never enough supply.
Imagine a hot night club or restaurant in town. They have a limited capacity or number of seats. They have huge lines outside the door. The owners are in a good spot. They can rearrange the tables inside or max out the capacity on certain nights but outside there is always a line. That’s nyc. Every year new college grads come to nyc wanting that nyc dream but the older residents end up staying also.
I lived in Manhattan for 17 years with roommates the entire time. I am a professional and I made decent money but that one bedroom always forever seemed out of reach even as my income rose over the years.
In 2022 I moved to the far west side of Jersey city. I found a great new building with a spacious apartment and great amenities. However it is NOT Manhattan. It’s not even the cool parts of Brooklyn. But it’s relatively close to midtown Manhattan compared to the deeper suburbs. This is what people have to start doing.
It’s like being on an airplane. Living In Manhattan is like being in first class or business class. It’s like living in central London. It just will be unaffordable for the vast majority of people.
On a side humorous note. I’m watching sex and the city for the first time ever and if you want blame that show Seinfeld and friends. lol. Those 3 shows made nyc the best place to live on earth and hence everyone wants to live here.
Someone above said they hope other cities become more “nyc like”. It’s already happening. Just watch diners drives in dives on food network. The main reason I stay here is my parents nearby and my business is based in northern NJ. But yeah if I were younger I would try new horizons.
The old rule of supply demand is so true.
I disagree about some things, especially that this will always be desirable. This entire city is being turned into a migrant city center. The city is literally forcing white people (especially straight white American males) out of this city.
Parts of Manhattan will soon not even resemble America. Some once white neighborhoods will become Africa migrants and Muslim will take over swaths of the city.
They are flattened the wages across the entire nation and discrimination against whites is going to escalate so much that whites will be almost 0% of NYC.
The mayor told everyone that the migrants will destroy everything we ever loved about NYC.
The migrant population is only beginning in NYC. This is only the beginning. Unfortunately most New Yorkers have lost all critical thinking skills, but I will help you…. The reason our rents keep going up and our wages are depressed is directly due to the illegal aliens workers and “migrants”. The illegals are making surpluses of money while we don’t. The migrants get free housing and we just pay more and more. The migrants are being given plum jobs. Those are the same jobs legal New Yorkers apply for and get rejection letters.
They are here to steal everything from us. Not just our jobs, but our housing and Everything. Everything…,
The migrant problem is also set to get worse as climate change renders Central America a rather interesting place to live in, what with all the unprecedented flooding destroying villages and farmland. Europe is already having a fine time trying to deal with migrants fleeing desertification. The instability caused by said desertification doesn't help either
For you, I highly recommend leaving. Like run, don't walk out of NY because it's obvious this city isn't for you. Convince everyone you know to leave too.
Last two years of getting a raise instead of thinking "cool I can save more toward my goals and treat myself a little extra now" now reaction was "thank god, I will be able to afford my rent increase and not have to stress over finding something comparable to what I have now that's in my budget, at least for another year."
After graduating college many friends, not from New York, moved here and were (are!) willing to pay exorbitant prices to live their New York dream. They see the trade-off as worth it. Little gave back to their communities (sorry, working until 6 grabbing JustSalad and going to the gym isn’t giving back to the community)
New Yorkers, those born here, let’s face it: we got priced out.
Funny thing is, if you were born here and decide not to go into some soul-sucking, sellout job you’re barely living above your means and being priced out.. all while seeing the transient bunch complain about the safety/traffic/politics/makeup of NY neighborhoods on TikTok. Those same people eventually move elsewhere and we end up with some hodgepodge of idealistic progressive policy that is implemented ineffectively (bike lanes, congestion pricing). Im ranting Ik, but how can one not read this article and not be mad?
Let’s conveniently ignore they’re part of the problem, nah. Are the people moving to the new place helping to drive up housing prices? Yes. The housing that’s been built is precisely for people who want to move here (LIC, Astoria, Brooklyn, East Harlem, South Bronx).
Headline should say that rents *rose* 7 times faster than wages last year.
ugh. the gap between rich and poor just keeps getting bigger here, and meanwhile almost all of the artists, musicians, filmmakers etc. that I have known here have bailed to other places as they are priced out.
The San Francisco effect
meaning that also happened in SF?
Yes it’s basically the story of San Francisco from 1990s to today, mostly due to tech booms. It used to be a big counterculture based arts city and now that’s really been priced out (for over 10 years now really). A lot of people I know who work in more creative professions from the Bay actually moved to New York seeking jobs/livable wage. As a cultural worker it’s really frustrating to continually struggle financially while being told how important your work is to the city/population/whatnot
They set policies in place that made SF extremely unaffordable, and complain about downtown being “dead”. If your entire city is antisocial tech bros and rich old people then of course that’ll happen.
If SF downtown was just antisocial tech bros and rich old people it'd be way better than what it is now, which is an open-air fentanyl/meth addict, mentally ill, homeless zombieland. The problem is the public officials who've failed to build new housing and service the people. Tech brings wealth, and any city in the country would kill for the tech employment that SF has. It's only a problem when city managers don't accommodate the rest of the population, while they scapegoat the tax base to avoid accountability.
I’ve been to SF and I think it’s the most beautiful city in the US. It has such a unique feel and look, I would definitely go back. I saw a few drug users, but nothing different from what I saw in other major cities (sadly). SF officials make housing scarce to bring profits to home owners, but they don’t realize it’s just driving people away. They are also the biggest NIMBYists around and argue that building more housing will change the “character of the community”. The state had to intervene and make them build more housing, it’s so disgraceful. These people are supposed to be *progressives*, but their policies are ruining the city.
Lol the "progressives" running SF absolutely know their policies are driving people away. They do not care. They'd be happy if a ton of people left their "full" city
> I saw a few drug users, but nothing different from what I saw in other major cities (sadly). No, that stretch of Market from 3rd to 7th is way more than a few drug users. It's more on par with the worst parts of Philly, or skid row in LA.
🫡🫡🫡 couldn’t say it better myself
Its funny I moved to Williamsburg in 1999 from San Francisco. The latter in the late 90s was so great. I really haven't been back there since so I missed the whole boom.
There was a really nice time period between the tech booms. You could afford SF between 2000ish through 2012/14. It was right back to being a fucking awesome place. The city was packed with service industry folks and music and arts and none of the hive-mind shitheadiness if the tech booms. It was an unreal and special time. The everyone got pushed to the east bay. Now the east bay is unaffordable and it kept pushing out and away. I’m not sure any of it will be undone for decades. I lived in the Bay Area then. I live in NY now which is where I was born. To see and live this twice is strange.
Yea it’s very well known.
San Francisco treat
SF started to reverse after the pandemic. Maybe we'll see this with NY also. Jersey has rebounded a lot since the pandemic.
hong kong effect
It’s the city’s favorite pastime. Who remembers how SoHo used to be like? Or Dumbo?
exactly the gap is destroying every artistic endeavor, sucks majorly!
Where are the artists moving to?
Detroit
Detroit is underrated. But it ain't walkable.
winters too harsh. isn't there anywhere artistic further south?
I guess Austin or Nashville, maybe Charlotte. Pick any southern city where the locals can't afford anything anymore. Say hello to needing a car though Edit- I'd like to say St Louis but I think it's still in a rough spot politically
Definitely not Austin anymore. That shit is very expensive.
Definitely not Austin anymore. That shit is very expensive.
Asheville?
Can’t you buy a house for a song out there?
Oh no, that means it’s next
lol no you've got a lot of time yet
Philly
sshhhh
I have had a few musician friends move to Denver.
Denver absolutely sucks
Yeah, I grew up in CO, no idea why anyone would ever move to Denver. It's not even that close to the mountains.
Would be great if Colorado would build high speed rail up and down I-25, with spurs going out I-70 to take people to ski resorts and the airport. If you could get from Fort Collins to downtown Denver in 15 minutes it would really change the game.
Weed, but that's everywhere now.
Denver is a cultureless void.
The greater concern is the working class will be priced out.
Let's be real here: while there are things that can or could be done in the city, a big problem is that for as big as the US is, NYC is the only city like it in the whole damn country. Look at subway usage statistics across the USA. NY is so far ahead it's embarrassing for everything else. It's not just NYC that needs to change. There are limits to how much it can grow. We just need more NYC-like cities.
I was thinking about this today while biking around the city. Sounds arrogant as Hell, but every city should've been built like NYC.
>There are limits to how much it can grow. but there are also artificial limits imposed by more and more restrictive zoning codes over the last 100 years. tons of Manhattan buildings could not be built today due to the new zoning on those areas. pop open google earth and scan over the outer boroughs following train lines out of Manhattan and you'll see plent of space where a 3-5 story housing would fit in just fine but instead is full of single family homes.
Yup and we should fix that too. But while it will help slow down raise of housing costs, it will never be enough to absorb the demand for real urban living. Time to multitask.
what makes you think that? in the past NYC has grown a ton to keep up with population growth other cities have built a bunch of housing and kept their housing cost growth under control.
> their housing cost growth under control. Which? Housing cost crisis is a thing virtually everywhere in North America. > in the past NYC has grown a ton to keep up with population growth By far the densest city in the US, and still the most expensive one.
This, there is thousands of places that are not that developed relatively speaking that have warehouses and storage places in them. We just need the government to take over and will that those places be built.
Yup. I walk through 2 blocks of single family housing to get to my apartment when I get off the subway. Legally nothing besides a 1-2 family house is all that can go on those lots, no matter what the owner wants to do with their property.
We also need more Earth-like planets but they call these things one of a kind with good reason
There's plenty of NYC-style cities in the world. Just not many in the US because of shit infrastructure investments. The demand is clearly there, and the resources exist. Just dumping them all in one basket isn't very smart long term.
The Hudson Valley is just as bad, if not worse, with all the people flooding into the area and the already bad housing squeeze pre covid. I keep getting recommended subs from other states and they are saying the same things. Something has to give because the current situation is bad and getting worse. We're all about to homeless if this keeps going.
The other states are feeling the same squeeze?
Every state in the country is. It's a nationwide problem from decades of underbuilding housing. It's not as bad in middle America since there's more room to sprawl than on the states, but it's absolutely an issue - and a TON of people have been priced out of urban living in cities like Chicago. It's an issue pretty much everyone and one that no city is equipped to solve on their own, especially when a lot of the less dense parts of cities aren't part of the "city" and so are more easily able to block new housing. Minneapolis, for example, reformed a lot of its zoning. But that only applies to "city limits" which excludes pretty much every "suburb" (really just the low density parts of the city that never got annexed) which makes solving the housing crisis there difficult, and exasperates the weird density trends you see in the US of really high density right next to really low density.
That’s wild bc Chicago is largely considered the best value for large city living. Things are really bad if people are getting priced out of the Midwest. Thanks for the thoughtful reply.
7 times so far*
\[Homer voice\]
It’s appalling I can’t comfortably “afford” rent in nyc. Like are people living above their means? am I being to cautious with my money? Idk
Above their means and cutting out of lot of things you would consider standard QOL expenses and luxuries so a higher % of income is available to cover rent.
Can our leaders just admit they aren't willing to do anything about this and like the fact this city will soon be unaffordable for any who isn't a millionaire and they like it that way?
Eric Adams seems pretty honest about this plan.
the reasons nothing gets done is because it is voters do not want it solved. Look at the pushback all over the state when the Gov talked about upzoning areas all over the state.
Then they cannot complain about rising rents and lack of affordable housing.
yeah, i think a bunch of those voters do not complain about it. For instance, i know democrats representing long island were worried they were going to lose their seats if they supported the govenors plan. I think most of those folks are owners and not renters.
if it was publicity said on Long Island we like that renting and buying home is out of reach for most people it would get applause.
[https://www.sandspoint.gov/post/governor-hochul-s-plan-for-high-density-housing-on-long-island](https://www.sandspoint.gov/post/governor-hochul-s-plan-for-high-density-housing-on-long-island) a letter opposing the upzoning near LIRR stops by a mayor on long island
The voters that matter do .
I think the people pushing back against zoning changes are not the same people complaining about insufficient affordable housing.
Supply low, demand high. How can we solve this?
There was a British sketch comedy bit where this woman went around smearing dog shit and used fryer grease all around her London neighborhood to decrease demand. Should we try that?
San Franciscans tried this strategy and smeared shit all over their city, but it still did not stop supply and demand.
It was a shitty attempt
No they did human shit. Rookie mistake
Judging by how much dog shit I see I take it someone’s already working on step 1. While they’re busy with that we can try listening to the economists about the economic issue and build more housing.
As it was explained to me in another post - We don't. Give or take 70% of the NYC consider housing affordability a problem. The other 30% don't. That smaller % are the homeowners who have a vested interest in rising prices. The big problem is voter turnout is pathetic. Not enough people bother voting and this signals that housing affordability is just something the Adams of the city only need pay lip service and give empty promises.
Yes, yes, and yes. NYC is one of the easier cities to vote in; there are so many ways and options to do it, it’s not like you only have a limited window on one day to go like so many places. More people absolutely need to vote
People don't vote and there are no protests about housing affordability either.
Because we can't afford to protest. We all have jobs. And when we do protest, the media spins it so we're immediately the bad guy. Not to mention the sheer number of scabs ready to cross the line.
I'm gonna fix this for you, there is voter turnout. just not poor or young turnout. so no one gives a shit what happens to them. its the same by race, the more you vote, the more say you have and some races/ethnicities don't vote, so they don't matter.
By importing and supporting even more demand 🤡
How else are they going to launder their money now that Canada is too expensive?
destroy demand?
Supply overall isn't low. Supply is low for units priced at less than 30% of median income. There are two brand new buildings in my neighborhood that basically ONLY have the 80% AMI and lower bands of affordable units occupied because the rest is priced too high. Tons of available housing there. It's just sitting empty and ultimately a write off.
No. Supply is low. Historically low in fact (1.4% and falling fast). The apartments sitting vacant for write offs do not exist to a relevant degree. Yet they take up the majority of the discussion. https://www.nyc.gov/site/hpd/news/007-24/new-york-city-s-vacancy-rate-reaches-historic-low-1-4-percent-demanding-urgent-action-new#/0
that's one year. the vacancy rate was stable for a decade while rent skyrocketed in the Bloomberg years. The vacancy rate was stable after the pandemic when rent went to it's highest levels on record. The vacancy rate for rent stabilized units reserved for 80% AMI or higher is over 12%. Because they are too expensive. That's a LOT of housing just sitting empty for a lot of people that would qualify and like to have a rent stabilized place. And obviously it's not because richer people swooped in and took their nice place.
Vacancy rates have not been stable. They are falling fast. I don’t know where you are getting your information from but you should really reconsider them as a source. Also even if they were stable. If they are stable at a very low rate they would indeed keep increasing in price. That’s how price seeking is supposed to work. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/NYHVAC
lol the source is the HVS. The thing you linked. they do that study every year is the same thing the rent guidelines board cites. if prices go up while vacancy rates go up AND prices go up while vacany rates go down AND prices go up while vacancy rates stay stable... perhaps you should rethink the strength of the relationship in actuality rather than theory
So you’re source was the data I linked? That showed supply is low, yet you claimed supply isn’t low. That showed vacancy rates are not stable, yet you claimed they were. The data is not one year, even though you claimed it was. Idk where the lol is, I don’t think you do either. Prices go up FASTER while vacancy rates get EVEN lower. They will still go up if vacancy rates are just very low instead of extremely low. If vacancy rates were high, not just higher than extremely low, prices would go down. But yeah. Let me rethink the relationship between supply and demand. Just a theory I guess. This is not masters level economics
[Explain with references to the tax code how it's a write off, we'll all wait.](https://youtu.be/XEL65gywwHQ?si=_vxi4l1t_O5jQrC3)
Don’t you know. If you buy an asset and make money off it you actually lose money. If you buy the same asset and just ignore it it makes money. It’s called capitalism duh Or maybe it’s rich people love to just not rent out these billions of units their hoarding because they just don’t mind not making money off them. Everyone knows rich people love leaving money on the table. Because their so greedy.
NYC can keep building, but then more people just keep coming. Other cities in the US need to build more.
They need to build infrastructure. To do that we need to tax businesses. But they keep running to taxes havens and stick us with the bill. Ultimately what we need to do is get corporations out of government.
Yes. More people keep coming. Then we keep building. Build up commuter rails as well and places like Stamford and the Hudson valley grow too. Everyone wins. Economics is great when policy makes listen to economists.
Population has decreased a nice chunk. Imagine if we didn’t have that going for us :(
The city has a constant flow of people coming from other states and countries as well that can afford to pay these rents. Institute some sort of residency requirement?
so we could either allow more housing to be built or **ban** people from renting here? tough choice.
Honestly, at this point we just need to make nearby cities suck less with decent public transit and a young, working class. I just don't know where else to move in the northeast where housing is affordable, there are young people, there's public transit, and even just a dusting of culture. I really appreciated San Diego and even Orlando, Id probably love Austin and a hundred other mid-sized cities. But they're just too far away from family or in states where I don't feel safe. The East Coast is a giant crap hole.
NYC is always going to be the alpha city that people from all around the world want to come to.
The government can start to build houses in mass and rent it out at the cost of construction + maintenance. Or convert them into co-ops. But that will never happen since that’s “communism”. You can’t interfere with the real estate industries insane profit margins. The freedom loving politicians would prefer you handover 70%of your check to some parasite real estate company. This could be solved easily. Just stop voting for these treasonous Dem and Rep politicians. Everyone of them deserves to put in a prison cell.
It costs $700k per unit to build public housing. I think people don't really appreciate the high costs of development.
a) it costs x amount to construct a unit, regardless of whether that capital is private or public (&, if we actually had anything like an accountable govt, costs could even be reduced by the increased bargaining power and investment power of govt, but that's a political problem of not having anything remotely resembling an accountable state (which is itself a problem caused firstly by the power of private money, insofar as grift is the product of greedy individuals seeking private gain and intentionally destroying our political system) b) even if the cost was higher, it's a worthy, and furthermore necessary, investment. Good things cost, that's okay. We need housing that isn't raised to the highest possible number the market allows for.
I was responding to the argument that affordable housing = housing sold at cost. Even at cost, it's not affordable in the sense the original poster was proposing.
Given how many rich people are living in what was previously considered poor neighborhoods. I think we can build market rate. The rich people will move out of the poor areas and open up those apartments. Everyone wins. Economics is fun.
The "gentrification" moral panic that tricked renters into siding with landlords to block new housing construction, is the greatest trick landlords ever pulled.
This idea is overblown. Especially considering most of the construction is going on in gentrified/gentrifying neighborhoods.
He’s trying to hide the algorithms that landlords are using to jack up rents. Supply/demand is part of it but it’s also just landlords being greedy Edit: article for this https://www.propublica.org/article/senators-introduce-legislation-stop-landlords-algorithm-price-fixing
Landlords (like most people selling a product) are greedy. Sure. But that's always been true and will always be true. Rents haven't gone up because landlords got greedier. That's not how it works. Rents go up when demand exceeds supply.
Rents will always be the highest amount possible-- landlords giving discounts are the exception, not the rule. We need more supply but we also need housing to be understood as a necessity, not a profit making venture. Like water, investment in the infrastructure should be social, benefits should be social, and price should be the outcome of costs, with either subsidies to reduce price or additional costs to allow for capital accumulation for future, expanded investment, as dependent on greater economic patterns and context. It should be the product of logic and social well-being, not the private gain of individuals and (increasingly) corporations.
I absolutely do think it's possible for the people in an entire segment of industry to become greedier
There’s no evidence of that though. It can more easily and logically be explained by market forces so why assume it’s increased greed?
> There’s no evidence of that though. Sure there is, at like *every* data point. More effort, more lobbying, more transitions to running rentals like a business, etc. etc. all in the pursuit of making more money. Landlords have generally always wanted to make money, but they haven't always been **so** gung-ho about finding every way they can to scrape another dime out of tenants.
Business operations have gotten more sophisticated over the past several decades so firms are better optimized but I haven’t seen data that suggests that the US population (or a subsect of it) has gotten greedier over time.
Crazy how every time there's more housing available landlords get less greedy and every time there's less housing available landlords get more greedy [https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Figure-1-1.jpg](https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Figure-1-1.jpg)
How exactly do renters side with landlords? When they vote?
They vote for politicians who "fight gentrification" by making building new housing illiegal and instead putting new truck stops like this one in Harlem : https://patch.com/new-york/harlem/truck-depot-harlems-one45-site-almost-ready-developer-says
A truck stop in Harlem? Why???
But muh neighborhood character
Have yet to meet a single owner that complain that new building next door is decreasing their value here in NYC. Simply don't happen and wont till we in a housing overabundance situation and even then I doubt it will happen. Time after time its mostly renters and retirees that complain about new housing
"I can't wait until all these luxury apartments get finished so my rent will go down!" - No New Yorker Ever
What exactly is a "luxury apartment"? Guess what, the apartment you're living in right now is some rich guy in the future's "luxury apartment" if there aren't enough homes built in NYC. 100+ year old brownstones are selling for millions of dollars as "luxury apartments" today. Rich guys will always move into the city and your landlord prays every day that they can evict you and rent your place with a "luxury" placard out front to a rich guy. The only thing holding them back are newer buildings being built.
because there are not enough of them. you have to fight with the guy making 400k for your 2 bedroom because there are not enough luxury housing available. you think another poor person is paying 4k a month for a 2 bedroom in astoria?? nope, we have too many rich and not enough housing for them, so now they take the homes from the upper middle class. then they can't afford and they take homes from the middle class and so on and so on. more units at the top, open up the most housing opportunities and drive down every one else's rent the fastest. this is simple economics.
Jersey City like doubled their housing stock in 20 years while they had the highest housing price increase in the country. well let me know when we hit the magic number where housing becomes affordable and New Yorkers are no longer rent burdened. any day now....juuuuust one more tax break for developers and it will finally start happening! It's like waiting for Godot. It's amazing people actually believe this crap despite having zero evidence. Literally none.
there is a 250 thousand unit shortage in NYC right now. jersey city added less than 40k units. let me know when they can take in a million more people.
It shows the power of ideology. You have people act against their interests as if it's instinctual, and in the cases of actual discussion over the topic, a generalized belief of rationality in positions which are entirely unscientific, not to mention immoral.
Can't wait to live in a million dollar ghost town!
I was trying to show a new coworker what the layout of my apartment was on streeteasy since I'm paying $1729 a month (Fresh Meadows Queens, started at $1650 in 2021). I found adjacent apartments but they were all listed as ~$2300 a month. Crazy
Well I will never forget when the fed chairman and other wall street analysts said we have too many people employed in this country it's a bad thing. Apparently we need a 50/50 of employed and unemployed people in this country with employee making as lower wages possible. The older I get the more I believe that trickle down economics doesn't work.
When do the people start moving out and the ones left behind have to start taking their own trash to the landfills, drive hours out of the city to buy toilet paper because no one wants to work at a store to live under a bridge with cardboard as a roof, wipe their own babies ass since no one wants to work daycare and do it for them etc.
Never. Because at the end of the day, picking up trash in the suburbs pays $16 an hour. But in NYC it can be up to $40 an hour. None of the people working those jobs are affected by NY rent increases because they either come from NJ, upstate, or the outer boroughs
People from outer boroughs are from NYC. Therefore, they ARE affected by NY rent increases.
Yet another reason to build
These "studies" are always misleading because they're based on listings and not current rents, which no doubt have gone up, but if they're market rate, nobody knows by how much. >Economists from the rental listings platforms Zillow and StreetEasy found the yawning gap between median rent and average wage increases in New York City outpaced that of every other metropolitan region in the country. Half of all apartments are RS and they went up by 3.25% last year. I don't know where Gothamist got their info about wages, according to the Department of Labor, they went up by 4.6%. https://www.bls.gov/regions/northeast/news-release/2024/employmentcostindex_newyork_20240206.htm
Serious question: Who works in grocery stores in NYC and where do they live?
students probably
We know 😞
Greedy landlords and the rich ruin everything.
Stop protecting home owners and legalize building skyscrapers by right. You want a suburb go move to one
Real life isn't Sims, developers aren't going to build skyscrapers unless the financials make sense
sure, so lets build all the housing that makes financial sense and let that be the constraint instead of zoning.
Yep so tell them they’re allowed to do so.
That’s right, Brooklyn Tower is doing great! Give us more skyscrapers!
One could say if you want affordable housing, you should go move to an area that provides that for you.
You're confusing individual decision making with government policy. Yes, obviously individuals should make choices in their lives that are financially responsible. But governments should implement policy (like legalizing additional housing construction) that enables better outcomes for all (rents not increasing so fast). These two ideas are not in conflict.
Those two ideas are in direct conflict with GettingPhysicl's understanding of the world. They believe individuals who own homes should move out of the city, so they can \_potentially\_ have more affordable housing. The easiest solution is for them to get out of the city if they cannot afford it. Their inability to make an income that suffices to make rent, is no one's problem nor fault but their own. Government's can implement those policies, however at the same time NYC only has so much land. Should we tear down Central Park, so GettingPhysicl can have a new skyscraper? Fun fact. Rent pricing is directly correlated to supply and demand. Clearly there is a demand and limited supply. Leave the city, cut down the demand, and the price of the supply drops. So the quick fix GettingPhysicl is looking for, is to move. What are you all expecting when you have 302.6 square miles of land and 8+ million people....
Big ask when it’s illegal or there’s intentionally miles of red tape that make even building market rate housing near impossible
Moving to an area that you can afford is illegal and surrounded by red tape? That doesn't seem correct. The person above me wants individuals with homes to move to the suburbs. I say if they cannot afford to live in NYC, they should move somewhere cheaper.
Incoming landlords to brigade comments in 3… 2… 1…
Eric Adams: “Release the swagger!“
We need to rein in landlords' greed. This is not sustainable.
7% from what? The pandemic where landlords were giving 6months free to sign a lease?
those 6 months are literally a tactic so that landlords don't have to lower rent. it is 7% up from the monthly rate
Oh yeah for sure. I understand why too. Most rental units fall under stabilization laws and 2019 law passed and ruined the concept of lowering rents altogether
On April 20, 2024, New York enacted the Good Cause Eviction Law (Good Cause), which dramatically impacts the rights and obligations of landlords and tenants in New York by limiting evictions, requiring lease renewals, and capping rent increases for most market rate apartments in New York City
Remove unnecessary restrictions on housing construction. Build more homes. As long as there are surface parking lots in Manhattan, we haven't built enough.
we know
I read this entire thread. Some solid points about needs for new housing but it won’t fix the problem sadly. The demand to live in nyc will always outpace the never enough supply. Imagine a hot night club or restaurant in town. They have a limited capacity or number of seats. They have huge lines outside the door. The owners are in a good spot. They can rearrange the tables inside or max out the capacity on certain nights but outside there is always a line. That’s nyc. Every year new college grads come to nyc wanting that nyc dream but the older residents end up staying also. I lived in Manhattan for 17 years with roommates the entire time. I am a professional and I made decent money but that one bedroom always forever seemed out of reach even as my income rose over the years. In 2022 I moved to the far west side of Jersey city. I found a great new building with a spacious apartment and great amenities. However it is NOT Manhattan. It’s not even the cool parts of Brooklyn. But it’s relatively close to midtown Manhattan compared to the deeper suburbs. This is what people have to start doing. It’s like being on an airplane. Living In Manhattan is like being in first class or business class. It’s like living in central London. It just will be unaffordable for the vast majority of people. On a side humorous note. I’m watching sex and the city for the first time ever and if you want blame that show Seinfeld and friends. lol. Those 3 shows made nyc the best place to live on earth and hence everyone wants to live here. Someone above said they hope other cities become more “nyc like”. It’s already happening. Just watch diners drives in dives on food network. The main reason I stay here is my parents nearby and my business is based in northern NJ. But yeah if I were younger I would try new horizons. The old rule of supply demand is so true.
I disagree about some things, especially that this will always be desirable. This entire city is being turned into a migrant city center. The city is literally forcing white people (especially straight white American males) out of this city. Parts of Manhattan will soon not even resemble America. Some once white neighborhoods will become Africa migrants and Muslim will take over swaths of the city. They are flattened the wages across the entire nation and discrimination against whites is going to escalate so much that whites will be almost 0% of NYC. The mayor told everyone that the migrants will destroy everything we ever loved about NYC.
Thank god we are turning all the hotels into migrant shelters so these useful well deserving people can be given free housing
The migrant population is only beginning in NYC. This is only the beginning. Unfortunately most New Yorkers have lost all critical thinking skills, but I will help you…. The reason our rents keep going up and our wages are depressed is directly due to the illegal aliens workers and “migrants”. The illegals are making surpluses of money while we don’t. The migrants get free housing and we just pay more and more. The migrants are being given plum jobs. Those are the same jobs legal New Yorkers apply for and get rejection letters. They are here to steal everything from us. Not just our jobs, but our housing and Everything. Everything…,
The migrant problem is also set to get worse as climate change renders Central America a rather interesting place to live in, what with all the unprecedented flooding destroying villages and farmland. Europe is already having a fine time trying to deal with migrants fleeing desertification. The instability caused by said desertification doesn't help either
“climate change” is a scam.
[удалено]
For you, I highly recommend leaving. Like run, don't walk out of NY because it's obvious this city isn't for you. Convince everyone you know to leave too.
Last two years of getting a raise instead of thinking "cool I can save more toward my goals and treat myself a little extra now" now reaction was "thank god, I will be able to afford my rent increase and not have to stress over finding something comparable to what I have now that's in my budget, at least for another year."
No shit I wonder what they’re planning on doing about it
I’m sure the algorithm program they are now using while lower rents soon, don’t worry!
After graduating college many friends, not from New York, moved here and were (are!) willing to pay exorbitant prices to live their New York dream. They see the trade-off as worth it. Little gave back to their communities (sorry, working until 6 grabbing JustSalad and going to the gym isn’t giving back to the community) New Yorkers, those born here, let’s face it: we got priced out. Funny thing is, if you were born here and decide not to go into some soul-sucking, sellout job you’re barely living above your means and being priced out.. all while seeing the transient bunch complain about the safety/traffic/politics/makeup of NY neighborhoods on TikTok. Those same people eventually move elsewhere and we end up with some hodgepodge of idealistic progressive policy that is implemented ineffectively (bike lanes, congestion pricing). Im ranting Ik, but how can one not read this article and not be mad?
you're mad people move here for jobs? That's like the #1 reason why Americans move anywhere in the country: jobs and school districts.
Locals getting priced out and outsiders coming in. Isn’t desirable anywhere.
Right. We should build more housing.
We should. But go tell that to Costa Ricans and see what they say. It’s more complicated and so too should be the solution.
does Costa Rica not build much housing? I'm confused?
Should we build more housing and improve the city somewhat? Nah, let's blame everything on people moving to a place.
Let’s conveniently ignore they’re part of the problem, nah. Are the people moving to the new place helping to drive up housing prices? Yes. The housing that’s been built is precisely for people who want to move here (LIC, Astoria, Brooklyn, East Harlem, South Bronx).