Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

[deleted] OP t1_j6dm43n wrote

[deleted]

79

OGPants t1_j6e5im9 wrote

I ever see you at a bar, drinks on me

5

[deleted] OP t1_j6drv88 wrote

NYC is out of the country

−36

JeffeBezos t1_j6dtscm wrote

NYC and Santa Monica are actually in the same country believe it or not.

25

degen-69 t1_j6dqtmv wrote

Other areas in NYC more affordable. Too many transplant love living directly in the city.

17

[deleted] OP t1_j6ds8ho wrote

Not a transplant just moved back last year after 3 years in LA

−8

ejpusa t1_j6e85dk wrote

That was the biggest wipe out of a post have seen on Reddit in a decade. Crushed on the spot.

Seeing delete delete delete. The entire account is now deleted.

NYC locals 1. Cranky transplant 0.

:-)

Tip? Your posting to over 600,000 people. Think before your post.

16

BringMeInfo t1_j6e3ubq wrote

The only leverage you have is a willingness to move.

7

flightwaves t1_j6dkpts wrote

Best way to increase housing stock is processing eviction backlog quickly. That will open up more apartments to the market. In addition to building additional housing of course as longer term fix.

5

BringMeInfo t1_j6e3pn3 wrote

That doesn't increase housing stock; it just redistributes it.

7

meteoraln t1_j6ep1pu wrote

Is it fair to redistribute to people who are paying instead of not paying?

2

BringMeInfo t1_j6epbrs wrote

I’m not talking about fairness or justice (and am not really interested in this conversation spiraling out into new topics). Evictions incontrovertibly does not increase housing stock.

−1

meteoraln t1_j6eq9e0 wrote

Your answer is short sighted. It’s like saying smoking one cigarette wont cause cancer, and it’s technically correct. In the long run, the policy of allowing people who dont pay their rent to stay guarantees no one will build new housing for low income families.

2

sanjsrik t1_j6dulon wrote

So, by "processing eviction backlog quickly" is a euphemism for kicking out people overpriced out of apartments they used to be able to afford so more gentrification can happen?

−6

movingtobay2019 t1_j6dvr8q wrote

Ok and? Are you saying people who don't pay rent should get priority to live in the most expensive city in the world over people who can?

13

koreamax t1_j6e2lyt wrote

I can't afford to live some places. I acknowledge that and live where I can afford.

3

[deleted] OP t1_j6e6ill wrote

[deleted]

1

meteoraln t1_j6epc2g wrote

As long as the population grows, someone will eventually get priced out, even if no one migrates in.

1

flightwaves t1_j6ec5d6 wrote

>euphemism for kicking out people overpriced out of apartments

No, it's means kicking people out who haven't paid their rent. Renting doesn't guarantee you get to live there forever.

3

George4Mayor86 t1_j6e9mu0 wrote

in your opinion, how long should deadbeats get to live rent-free before being kicked out? Because we’re at three years and counting.

0