Thanks to this essay, I will tell you about the history of the lease in New York; discussion / controversy around him in New York, including historical and real opposition, as well as historical and real support for her. In addition, I will discuss the opposition and support it in other US cities; my opinion on the opposition, as well as support for rent control.
What is rental management? It is a program administered by the administration of the New York City rental agency, which is responsible for regulating the rent of approximately 1.2 million private rental units across the country in accordance with four laws: the Emergency Home Rent Control Act, the Emergency Rent Control Act. Local Emergency Housing; Rental Stabilization Act; and Emergency Tenant Protection Act (ETPA). The four precedent laws are the basis of rental control systems, commonly known as Rent Management and Rent Stabilization (New York State Housing and Renewal, 2006). However, the focus of this essay will be on New York due to the limited scope of this article.
Rental control is usually applied to residential buildings until February 1947 in 55 municipalities (including New York, Albany, Buffalo and various cities, towns and villages in Albany, Erie, Nassau, Rensselaer, Schenectady and Westchester counties), which did not announce the termination of post-war Rental Emergency (New York State Housing and Rehabilitation Division, 2006). The rules are as follows: for a controlled rental of an apartment, the tenant (or his parents) was to live in this apartment permanently from July 1, 1971. If a rented controlled apartment should become vacant, it will either become rent-stabilized or, if it is located in a building with less than six units, it is generally excluded from the rules. In addition, an apartment in a single or two-family house without commercial units must have a tenant in a permanent settlement from March 31, 1953, so that it can be legally rented. As soon as he is released after March 31, 1953, he is no longer subject to regulation. Previously controlled apartments are usually deactivated for other reasons (Department of Housing and Renewal, New York, 2006).
Rent control restricts the right of the owner to evict tenants and limits the rent that the owner can charge for an apartment. It also requires the owner to provide basic services and equipment. For example, the owner must provide and maintain all services provided or required to be provided on a base date of May 1, 1950 for apartments controlled by rent outside of New York, and March 1, 1943 for those located in New York. In addition, after that, the necessary changes and necessary services were required, with appropriate adjustments to the rental. Basic services may include, but are not limited to: repair; maintenance; light illumination; heat; hot and cold water; elevator; kitchen; sauna, laundry and benefits; Janitorial Service and Waiver (New York State Housing and Renewal Department, 2006).
The New York State Department of Housing and Community Services (DHCR) outside of New York determines the maximum permitted rental rates in accordance with the aforementioned decree. Periodically, owners may apply for these promotions. On the other hand, this regulation operates within the framework of the Maximum Base Lease (MBR) in New York. The MBR allows you to set a maximum base rent for each apartment, which is adjusted every two years to reflect changes in operating costs. In addition, owners who certify that they provide basic services and eliminate violations can raise rents up to 7.5% per year before reaching the MBR limit (Department of Housing and Renovation of the State of New York, 2006). In turn, tenants may dispute an increase on the grounds that the building has irregularities or the owner’s expenses do not require an increase. They can do this by submitting a Re: Maximum Base Rent Order (form DHCR RA-94 MBR). Owners can challenge Maximum Base Lease Orders by submitting a DHCR RA-94 MBR form, as well as (New York State Department of Housing and Renewal, 2006).
“Rent can be increased in other ways: (1) if the owner increases the services or essentially restores the building or makes a significant capital improvement; (2) difficulties; (3) increase in labor costs; (4) in New York, increased fuel costs (passalongs) ”(New York State Department of Housing and Community Update, 2006). In turn, the DHCR may reduce revenues in some cases: substantial, intact code violations and reductions in services, including funds, space, or equipment or ancillary services (New York State Housing and Maintenance Department, 2006).
Paragraphs of the precedent reflect the background and law of rental housing controlled by housing, which contributes to the discussion / controversy. The main argument of the opposition to regulation is that it promotes developers from building new housing, as shown in the following quote,
“It’s hard to find an economist who supports rental restrictions. Price control, even if it is painstakingly changed, inevitably leads to inefficiency, reduces supply and causes bad side effects, by themselves in toxic relationships, because they are connected by law and not with voluntary renewable contracts. Unscrupulous owners go to dangerous distances to evict tenants in order to get a better-paid replacement, as a result, laws were in place to protect tenants, because of which it is almost impossible to evict even a scoundrel ”(Economist.com, 2003, para 10).
In turn, the main argument in support of the law is that it creates stability, as shown in the following quotation,
“Now, in principle, I believe that rent management is great: people cannot be brought out of their homes, because the neighborhood is getting richer, but they are not. To begin with, they get the benefit [sic] from social progress in the neighborhood, not from our own efforts ”(Newman, 2003, para 1).
If we describe supporters of controlling the price of renting a dwelling house as good, and opponents as bad ... We call greedy, opportunistic and hypocritical flip-floppers ("do as I say, but do not do as I do") rent) - ugly? This is also true of Robert Nozick, author of the 1974 National Book Award: "Anarchy, State and Utopia," which strengthened the reputation of the professor of Harvard philosophy as an intellectual hero of libertarians. Dr. Nozick preaches the superiority of free markets, the key to a successful society, and capitalism should be given a free hand to work without external intervention, such as the economic interventionism of modern liberals (Tucker, 2003). However, like his conservative relatives (television evangelists) - Jim Baker and Jimmy Swaggart: preachers of the ugliness of sin - Dr. Nozick does not always practice what he preaches ... Then, again, he is living testimony to the saying: the pit is not an atheist, because everyone prays to God when their lives (personal interest) are on the line. ”
An example is Professor Nozick, an outstanding advocate for antitrust laws who successfully used rental price control laws in Cambridge, Massachusetts, against his landlord, a renewed academic scholar and author of Love Story, Eric Seagall. Eric Seagal was forced to settle a lawsuit in order to force Professor Nozick to leave the condominium apartment (Tucker, 2003).
The above paragraphs illustrate the composition of the discussion / dispute over rent. May they continue to struggle with such control in New York, beginning with its historical roots. According to Economist.com (2003), an anti-securities lawyer, the law on renting a dwelling house was one of many price controls bought during the dark, panic period between the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941 and America in 1943. in a full military economy. Like rubber, oil, coffee and shoes, housing was viewed as a vital commodity that needs to be regulated for a “good” citizen. during the war. The article Economist.com (2003) mentioned above continued to regret that by 1947 all price restrictions had been phased out, with the exception of the regulation of real estate prices. In particular, the website indicated that most cities have historically abandoned the case-law distortions of the market, other than capitalism — New York (Economist.com, 2003).
From its invasion into its current form, rent regulation is resistant to the ire of its opponents — mostly landlords and free-market economists. For example, the Swedish economist Assar Lindbeck compared the consequences of a city ruling in a city destroyed by bombing. Walter Block, holder of the Harold E. Wirth Economics Department at the Loyola University Joseph A. Butt, SJ College of Business Administration, offered an anecdote on his website illustrating that it was worse than bombing (Block, 2002). (Seriously, I’m surprised if Dr. Block considers it more destructive in the city center than the nuclear bombings of Nagasaki and Hiroshima or Washington DC and New York 9/11)?
The main complaints about rent restrictions in New York seem to focus on the following: first, it is government-controlled price controls, which is the law that sets the maximum price (rent ceiling) on which landlords can charge tenants . In turn, the rent ceiling leads to flaws, lower product quality and queues, as in the case of other price ceilings (Block, 2002).
Secondly, it diverts new investment, which otherwise would have gone into rental housing, to other profitable enterprises. Thus, leakage leads to deterioration of housing, reduction in the number of repairs and less maintenance. For example, the price ceiling destroyed entire patches of sound housing in the South Bronx in New York, whereas this led to deception and abandonment through all five urban areas (Blok, 2002).
Thirdly, it is often beneficial to the rich and politically connected long-term tenants, rather than the tenants who need it most — the tenants of the middle class and the working class. For example, multi-millionaire Ed Koch currently resides in rental-controlled apartments, which are maintained during his time at the city hall as mayor of New York.
Let's take a look at the support for the rental law in New York based on its historical roots. The rental ceiling program in New York, like most major cities in Western Europe and North America during World War I, was introduced to mitigate the destructive effects of war and prevent speculation. Subsequently, in some cities, programs were discontinued after the war, while they lingered in other cities. During World War II, rental freezes were introduced through the major cities of Western Europe and North America. Again, all North American cities were completely deactivated by about 1950, with the exception of New York (Arnott, 1997).
From its inception to its current form, the housing law has been tirelessly supported by its supporters - mainly tenants, liberal and socialist organizations and politicians. For example, Rachel Treyhler (an avid supporter) —the Green candidate in the New York Attorney General’s Office in 2006 made him in New York and affordable housing in general as one of her main boards on her campaign platform (Voterachel.org ). Another example is Betsy Gotbaum, a New York City public lawyer who critically campaigns against the deregulation of rent until the expiration of New York in accordance with housing laws in 2003 (Pubadvocate.nyc.gov, 2003).
The main praises for laws or regulations that control rental prices in New York seem to focus on the following: first, it allows working-class families and retirees to live in good quarters in New York. For example, the minimum wage will have to work 154 hours a week to afford a two-bedroom apartment on a market rental. Secondly, New York depends on the diversity of labor for its economy; without rent management, working-class families would have to move to other available cities. Third, it minimizes the hard decisions of the working class and retirees, for example, the choice between renting and eating or medicine (Pubadvocate.nyc.gov, 2003).
In other cities, opponents and supporters of laws or regulations that established control over rental prices expressed similar arguments. In Hoboken, New Jersey, his lawyers can successfully maintain the status quo, despite the fact that their community is subject to large gentrification. In Santa Monica, California, his attorneys were able to impose rental control into the community, while electing members of the city council for hire in 1979. In Baltimore, Maryland, his attorneys developed a city housing organization after the law on leased control was passed, which was banned by state courts. In San Francisco, California, his lawyers will indeed be a rental management law firm that faces many obstacles designed by opponents (Policylink.org, 2006). In Cambridge, Massachusetts, his opponent Jerry Cullen of Narsil.org (2003) reported that efforts to regain control of rent in Cambridge were broken down to just over 3 to 2 fields.
I personally unabashedly support the laws or regulations that impose price controls on rental prices in New York for all the reasons and arguments of his lawyers, which were reported in this essay, despite the fact that they were homeowners. My opinion on the positions of his opponents is similar to my opinion on the positions held by opponents of the minimum wage. For example, opponents such as Dr. Nozick, base their opinions in their own interests, and not on the interest of the common good.
Another personal example of a housing ordinance is illustrated in the case of my former professor and department assistant (Ph.D., University of Wisconsin-Madison), who co-authored the textbook with my other former professor (Ph.D., Massachusetts Institute of Technology). The textbook, like most economic textbooks, is very critical of the rent ceiling due to its attitude to the odiousness of price controls. However, the professor maintains a rented apartment in Manhattan along with his private home in New York State. Is my professor's case similar to that of Dr. Nozik? I think not ... although my answer is very biased. From my personal experience, my professorial ethics is impossible, and it has impeccable character. He is one of my best former professors (along with another mentioned professor). Continuing my disclosure, I earned A in one of his honorary classes because of his excellent teaching skills. He also chose me in college, which earned third place in a nationwide economic competition. Okay, so what's my point? My point is the rent of the ceiling, since the minimum wage has a gray space located between the extreme features of “black” (opponents) and “white” (supporters) - a gray area, best illustrated by the following quote:
"Lease management was presented to fifty-year-old economics students as
the lesson of the subject in bad politics. However, over this period, the nature of rent control changed from the moment the rent was frozen to the regulation of rent, which allowed each jurisdiction to choose its policy from the extended menu of provisions. At the same time, economic theory has become more complex and rational, and the standards of empirical testing of the theory have increased dramatically. As a result, the expert opinion on the impact of modern rental management strategies is becoming increasingly agnostic ”(Arnott, 1997).
A precedent quote is the best way to finish this essay as
it relates to the history and history of the debate on the management of rent.
