Submitted by broadcastterp t3_zekqks in nyc
mrpotatoe3044 t1_izakav8 wrote
Reply to comment by HEIMDVLLR in Influential NYC comedy club Caroline's closing after 40 years by broadcastterp
Ironically, NIMBYism is major driver of gentrification. Most people in lower income neighborhoods don't own their property and they get priced out when the supply can't keep up with the demand.
HEIMDVLLR t1_izanx38 wrote
Gentrification is definitely behind the YIMBY shit. They avoid the local mom and pop establishments and open/support the new businesses. Unless one of them “discovers” the spot and gives the okay via an IG reel or local blog write up.
The local businesses are forced to make upgrades to their façade and stock new/artisanal products, to accommodate the transplants. If they don’t, they go out of business because their loyal customer base has been priced out of the neighborhood.
mrpotatoe3044 t1_izaqlwk wrote
You have the directionality wrong. Locals won't be priced out of neighborhoods if the city actually built adequate housing stock to keep up with demand. Not expanding housing stock doesn't prevent gentrification, it actually worsens it. High income earners will still flock to these neighborhoods because even they get priced out of the more "attractive" neighborhoods, which they then push out the people who have lived there.
If there was enough housing stock in the first place, there would be no pressure on these neighborhoods. If these neighborhoods had adequate housing stock, then they could absorb these transplants without displacing the people who formerly lived there.
The only benefactors from NIMBYism are property owners, as it artificially inflates their asset. Unfortunately this demographic is one of the most consistent voting blocks, which is why the city council is almost entirely NIMBY, and they'd prefer shit like a parking garage then approving high density housing.
HEIMDVLLR t1_izaugvm wrote
> Locals won't be priced out of neighborhoods if the city actually built adequate housing stock to keep up with demand.
The demand will never go down unless the city goes bankrupt and NYC becomes the “City of God”, like in the late 60s, early 70s.
Explain the real reason why gentrification exploded. People are getting priced out be the new residents are willing to pay 2x-3x the rent. They avoid the established businesses that the locals supported. They complain about the local customs/activities/noises, in turn criminalizing/punishing the locals.
Just look at the mircomobility movement. NYC always had cyclist of all ages. But after gentrification popped up, they became anti-car and swear the MTA has no flaws.
mrpotatoe3044 t1_izaw4bl wrote
You're right, the demand for NYC will never disappear, but that doesn't mean it's impossible to keep up with demand. In fact, NYC hasn't even been trying. Construction growth has mostly flatlined since the 1990s and NYC issues fewer housing permits then nearly every other large city, clearly under-building is not working. We can't stick our heads in the sand and pretend like people won't flock to NYC, people will, and it will only displace more residents if we do nothing.
Yes, transplants may like different things than long term residents, but like I said, if we had adequate housing stock they wouldn't displace the locals in the first place.
You seem like you're arguing a strawman of the micromobility movement, something I am only loosely aware of. I'll eat my hat if you can find anyone who claims "the MTA has no flaws".
It's ironic you cite car ownership as a trait unique to lower income locals, considering the majority of new yorkers don't have a car, and those that do tend to have higher incomes. Car ownership is directly correlated with income in NYC, which means the "transplants" you have been deriding are the population most likely to own a car.
https://wellango.github.io/posts/2021/06/who-owns-cars-in-nyc/
HEIMDVLLR t1_izb7nct wrote
I see you drank somebodies koolaid. Your comments reek of a realty broker transplant. No level of vacant properties will decrease the demand. As someone else stated there’s a lot residential and commercial vacancies in the city currently.
Gentrification is pushing out local low-income and middle-class families. Not because of a “stock” shortage, but because they can afford to pay 3x the asking price.
You’re right, not everyone owns a car but we understand pumping more money into the MTA isn’t the answer. Transit deserts, have been ignored by the MTA and the micro-mobility advocates. Thats because the transit deserts are undesirable to the transplants, “because it’s too far from the subway”. Even though those communities have zero congestion.
mrpotatoe3044 t1_izbrw6z wrote
>. As someone else stated there’s a lot residential and commercial vacancies in the city currently.
Ah, I see my mistake was presuming you had any amount of good faith in commenting. It's obvious you don't. But just to go through why you're so incredibly wrong.
NYC vacancies are at all time low https://www.globest.com/2022/09/12/nyc-multifamily-vacancy-rate-hovers-at-two-decade-low/?slreturn=20221107175941. This is a neglible amount of vacancies. 97% of NYC office buildings aren't viable for conversion to apt buildings.
"Not because of a “stock” shortage, but because they can afford to pay 3x the asking price"
This is factually wrong, once again. 97.7% percent of homes were sold for approximately the asking price.
"Thats because the transit deserts are undesirable to the transplants, “because it’s too far from the subway”. Even though those communities have zero congestion"
Sounds a lot like someone drank the "pro-car" koolaid, your comment reeks like that of an entitled driver. I'm assuming you own a car lmao? The obvious answer here is to expand the MTA to these deserts and bus service.
Your entire argument is based on your anecdotal feelings & emotions. There is no merit to them, whatsoever. But i'm sure you will ignore this comment and call me a good for nothing transplant.
[deleted] t1_izd9jqf wrote
[deleted]
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments