Is the Rent Too Damn High? (1 Viewer)

[samsmart]

 

[Slartibartfast]

I would love to have that guy in an office (not in my state). He would be very entertaining.

 

[Sidgaf]

I would have to agree with him
manhattan all apartments classifieds - craigslist
and his mutton chops should run as Deputy Mayor!

 

[MaggieD]

Well, this guy's a joke, but still the rent IS too high.

Our economy is so broken, and has been for a loooong time, that many middle-Americans need two jobs to pay their bills. Some parents are both working two jobs just to make ends meet. There's something intrinsically wrong with that picture.

 

[TheGirlNextDoor]

Oh wow. Where'd they find this guy?

I have no idea if the rent is too high - I own.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Well, this guy's a joke, but still the rent IS too high.

Our economy is so broken, and has been for a loooong time, that many middle-Americans need two jobs to pay their bills. Some parents are both working two jobs just to make ends meet. There's something intrinsically wrong with that picture.

He has a good point, but making a fool of himself is not the way to solve the problem.

 

[Cephus]

That's ridiculous, apparently some people don't comprehend the basics of capitalism. If people are willing to pay high prices, that's what will be charged. If these apartment owners have 50% empty apartments, they'll lower prices to attract new renters. It's supply and demand. When people are willing to buy at high prices, prices stay high.

 

[justabubba]

loved the black leather gloves
another entertainer seeking to enter the political arena
smart move. where else do people spend millions to obtain a position which pays thousands
it must be lucrative ...

 

[Josie]

I've never had rent that I thought was too high. Too low, yes.

 

[MaggieD]

That's ridiculous, apparently some people don't comprehend the basics of capitalism. If people are willing to pay high prices, that's what will be charged. If these apartment owners have 50% empty apartments, they'll lower prices to attract new renters. It's supply and demand. When people are willing to buy at high prices, prices stay high.

I take this guy's statement to mean beyond rent-is-too-high. The cost of living is too high. As to the basics of capitalism, ask the landlord in Manhatten that suffers from rent control. ;-)

We've screwed the basics of capitalism -- as soon as the government took control of interest rates. Look at interest rates right now. Have money you want to earn interest on? Well, that's 1%. Have to put stuff on your credit card? 29% and counting. Where's the capitalism there??

 

[Cephus]

I take this guy's statement to mean beyond rent-is-too-high. The cost of living is too high. As to the basics of capitalism, ask the landlord in Manhatten that suffers from rent control. ;-)

We've screwed the basics of capitalism -- as soon as the government took control of interest rates. Look at interest rates right now. Have money you want to earn interest on? Well, that's 1%. Have to put stuff on your credit card? 29% and counting. Where's the capitalism there??

Oh, I agree with you on government overregulation, but who elected the asswipes who did it? We did. Who didn't demand it be changed? We didn't. We're ultimately responsible as a people for what the government does. Besides, if you don't want to pay 29% on your credit card, don't charge things on your credit card. Live within your means. By charging, you're agreeing to the terms of the card. Don't like them? Tear up your card and get one you like better. Further, I never understood the idea that money just sitting in an account somewhere is supposed to make you more money. Why? It's doing nothing. If you want to earn a higher return, find a higher return investment. A bank account is just a safe place to keep your money while you're not using it, it's not an investment strategy.

 

[MaggieD]

Oh, I agree with you on government overregulation, but who elected the asswipes who did it? We did. Who didn't demand it be changed? We didn't. We're ultimately responsible as a people for what the government does. Besides, if you don't want to pay 29% on your credit card, don't charge things on your credit card. Live within your means. By charging, you're agreeing to the terms of the card. Don't like them? Tear up your card and get one you like better. Further, I never understood the idea that money just sitting in an account somewhere is supposed to make you more money. Why? It's doing nothing. If you want to earn a higher return, find a higher return investment. A bank account is just a safe place to keep your money while you're not using it, it's not an investment strategy.

Your money is just sitting in an account doing nothing? What planet are you from? Come on....fess up. My money isn't "sitting" anywhere. The bank is loaning it out -- at an average today of 14.48%. They're investing it in government bonds. They're loaning it out alllll over the place. Banks are required to keep a 3% to 10% reserve. Beyond that, their purpose is to loan your money to someone else. They don't print it, after all. HowStuffWorks "How Banks Work"

As for paying off one's balance very month to avoid interest charges, of course that's the way to manage your debt. But, unfortunately, the statistics are just plain awful. The average family has 3.5 credit cards and carries a revolving balance of $15,788. There are over 609 million credit cards currently active....with an outstanding balance totaling $2.42 trillion. And that $2.42 trillion belongs to me and others who have their money in the bank.

http://www.creditcards.com/credit-c...ustry-facts-personal-debt-statistics-1276.php

 

[Slartibartfast]

http://www.rentistoodamnhigh.org/

 

[Cephus]

Your money is just sitting in an account doing nothing? What planet are you from? Come on....fess up. My money isn't "sitting" anywhere. The bank is loaning it out -- at an average today of 14.48%. They're investing it in government bonds. They're loaning it out alllll over the place. Banks are required to keep a 3% to 10% reserve. Beyond that, their purpose is to loan your money to someone else. They don't print it, after all. HowStuffWorks "How Banks Work"

Yes, the bank is loaning it out, they are making interest in their loans and giving a very small part of that interest to you as an incentive to keep your money there so they can use it. You're not doing a thing with it, you're just sticking it there and letting someone else do something with it, which was my point, even if it was unclearly made.

As for paying off one's balance very month to avoid interest charges, of course that's the way to manage your debt. But, unfortunately, the statistics are just plain awful. The average family has 3.5 credit cards and carries a revolving balance of $15,788. There are over 609 million credit cards currently active....with an outstanding balance totaling $2.42 trillion. And that $2.42 trillion belongs to me and others who have their money in the bank.

Unfortunately, it doesn't belong to you. You get your tiny cut of it, but try going into a bank and demanding the rate that they make from the money they loan. They'll laugh at you. One of the problems we have such a massive problem in this country is that the people are irresponsible with their money. If people would just learn to live within their means, they wouldn't need credit cards, or would only use them for emergencies. Instead, they put extra mortgages on their over-valued houses and blew the money on SUVs and big screen TVs and now that we're finding out they can't sell the house for what they owe on it, they're whining about it. Hey... news flash, you did it to yourself.

 

[MaggieD]

Yes, the bank is loaning it out, they are making interest in their loans and giving a very small part of that interest to you as an incentive to keep your money there so they can use it. You're not doing a thing with it, you're just sticking it there and letting someone else do something with it, which was my point, even if it was unclearly made.

MY point is that interest rates being kept as low as they are is just another form of a bank bailout. The interest rates are being kept low for their benefit, not ours. OUR rates aren't decreasing much at all.

Unfortunately, it doesn't belong to you. You get your tiny cut of it, but try going into a bank and demanding the rate that they make from the money they loan. They'll laugh at you. One of the problems we have such a massive problem in this country is that the people are irresponsible with their money. If people would just learn to live within their means, they wouldn't need credit cards, or would only use them for emergencies. Instead, they put extra mortgages on their over-valued houses and blew the money on SUVs and big screen TVs and now that we're finding out they can't sell the house for what they owe on it, they're whining about it. Hey... news flash, you did it to yourself.

I totally agree that people have caused their own problems. That's not the point I'm making, though. As to your statement, If people would just learn to live within their means...." I think you'll find that would be the WORST thing for the economy. Best of me and you, but the worst thing in the world for the economy.

Your, "Hey, newsflash..." - not everyone did it to themselves. I'm a Realtor. I have plenty of clients I sold homes to three years ago who put 20% down on their homes and are now upside-down.

You're wrong to be quite so blaming. Not everyone got into this mess through their own actions. Not by a longshot, in fact. Homeowners in trouble represent a small fraction of owners. Yet every single owner lost 20-30% or more home equity virtually overnight. And most of those did nothing to cause their dilemma.

 

[Cephus]

MY point is that interest rates being kept as low as they are is just another form of a bank bailout. The interest rates are being kept low for their benefit, not ours. OUR rates aren't decreasing much at all.

You're probably right, but again, I don't see the majority of people voting to change the system either. We're in control. We just exercise that control very, very badly.

I totally agree that people have caused their own problems. That's not the point I'm making, though. As to your statement, If people would just learn to live within their means...." I think you'll find that would be the WORST thing for the economy. Best of me and you, but the worst thing in the world for the economy.

Only because we've created an economy, over the past 20-30 years, based on irresponsibility. Instead of producing products that people need, we've turned into an advertising-based economy where they try to make everyone keep up with the Jones', even if the Jones' are an artificially created concept. In the end, if everyone acts irresponsibly, as they have over the past decade or so, you get an economic crash like the one we're currently going through and will continue to go through for years to come. There are aspects to this collapse that haven't even started yet, it's going to get much worse before it gets better and if we don't fix the system, we can look forward to another collapse in another 20 years or so.

You're wrong to be quite so blaming. Not everyone got into this mess through their own actions. Not by a longshot, in fact. Homeowners in trouble represent a small fraction of owners. Yet every single owner lost 20-30% or more home equity virtually overnight. And most of those did nothing to cause their dilemma.

I'm not saying they were personally responsible for their own home's loss, the system, represented by the people collectively, was to blame. You had sellers raking in cash from buyers who were paying through the nose at rates that simply were not justifiable. People didn't lose 20-30% of their home's equity, that equity was artificially inflated in the first place. It was a numbers game and lots of people fell for it. I can take a $1 bill and write $100 on it in black marker, that doesn't mean it's actually worth $100.

One of the problems is you had lots of people falling for the mortgage scam where fly-by-night companies gave mortgages to people who couldn't possibly afford them, knowing they were just going to sell a bundle of those mortgages to the big lenders who didn't look at them when they bought them and are now lounging on the beach on some tropical island with their ill-gotten billions. Once those teaser rates went up, you had tons of people losing their homes, homes they shouldn't have had in the first place. Unfortunately, in the midst of the boom, housing prices across the board went through the roof, there was a huge building spike as construction companies tried to keep up with the artificial demand and, once it crashed, many went out of business. We still haven't seen the crash that's coming from the business real estate market which will probably be as large or larger than the residential crash. The entire market desperately needs to be revalued, but you have cities that refuse to do it because it'll cut into their real estate tax income. There's plenty of blame to go around for everyone.

 

[MaggieD]

I'm not saying they were personally responsible for their own home's loss, the system, represented by the people collectively, was to blame. You had sellers raking in cash from buyers who were paying through the nose at rates that simply were not justifiable. People didn't lose 20-30% of their home's equity, that equity was artificially inflated in the first place. It was a numbers game and lots of people fell for it. I can take a $1 bill and write $100 on it in black marker, that doesn't mean it's actually worth $100.

Anyone who bought a home in the last four-five years lost 20-30% of their home's equity -- regardless of whether they paid cash, put 30% down, or financed with zero down. Those people who were responsible borrowers (who probably sold a smaller home and bought a bigger one) put 20-30% down....and lost it all!! It was a numbers game that destroyed responsible people right along with the chaff.

One of the problems is you had lots of people falling for the mortgage scam where fly-by-night companies gave mortgages to people who couldn't possibly afford them, knowing they were just going to sell a bundle of those mortgages to the big lenders who didn't look at them when they bought them and are now lounging on the beach on some tropical island with their ill-gotten billions. Once those teaser rates went up, you had tons of people losing their homes, homes they shouldn't have had in the first place. Unfortunately, in the midst of the boom, housing prices across the board went through the roof, there was a huge building spike as construction companies tried to keep up with the artificial demand and, once it crashed, many went out of business. We still haven't seen the crash that's coming from the business real estate market which will probably be as large or larger than the residential crash. The entire market desperately needs to be revalued, but you have cities that refuse to do it because it'll cut into their real estate tax income. There's plenty of blame to go around for everyone.

You've got an accurate grasp of the problem, for sure. You're wrong, though, about "it'll cut into their real estate tax income." Providing they re-evaluate properties all at one time, it will make no difference at all.

 

[Cephus]

It was a numbers game that destroyed responsible people right along with the chaff.

Yes it did, but they didn't lose 20-30% of their home's value, those homes never had that value to begin with, people simply overpaid 20-30% for homes that were never worth that much to begin with. That was the problem, people acted like it was a wave that would never end, home prices would keep going up forever and there was an endless amount of money to be made. I, and many, many people, predicted the downfall of the housing market years before it happened. It was blatantly obvious, but nobody wanted to see it.

You've got an accurate grasp of the problem, for sure. You're wrong, though, about "it'll cut into their real estate tax income." Providing they re-evaluate properties all at one time, it will make no difference at all.

Sure it will, they're taking a percentage of the home's value. Revalue all the homes and they're getting a percentage of the home's new, lower value. Since many, if not most homes are only really worth 50-60% of their purported values, cities are going to lose 40-50% of their tax revenue and no city is going to do that willingly. The banks certainly won't, they don't want to admit that the values on their books are imaginary, the CEO and the board members would be on the streets the next day, ousted by angry stockholders. So everyone is going to keep the fantasy going, collecting more money and keeping their jobs and people are going to keep losing their homes because the houses they're living in just aren't worth what everyone tells them they are.

 

[Ockham]

NY would be better off with the bulldog that skateboards.

This guy is ripping off Mr. T's rap and vocal delivery. T should sue.

 

[Coronado]

NY would be better off with the bulldog that skateboards.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Whoever get's the "rents to damn high" t-shirts out is going to make bank. :lol:

 

[phattonez]

Our economy is so broken, and has been for a loooong time, that many middle-Americans need two jobs to pay their bills. Some parents are both working two jobs just to make ends meet. There's something intrinsically wrong with that picture.

Because they're buying more stuff than ever and more expensive stuff than ever.

As for rent, the problem is zoning laws. It's an example of restricted supply, pure and simple.

 

[MaggieD]

Because they're buying more stuff than ever and more expensive stuff than ever.

As for rent, the problem is zoning laws. It's an example of restricted supply, pure and simple.

I sure agree with your first sentence. That is soooo true. To many's detriment, I'm afraid. We've listened to well to the government who calls us "consumers." I really don't have much to say about rentals....they're probably just fine, actually. I think his statement, at least to me, resonated to the whole cost-of-living thingie.

 

[Hoplite]

That's ridiculous, apparently some people don't comprehend the basics of capitalism. If people are willing to pay high prices, that's what will be charged. If these apartment owners have 50% empty apartments, they'll lower prices to attract new renters. It's supply and demand. When people are willing to buy at high prices, prices stay high.

Not quite. There is a built in demand for housing and the market prices can be manipulated by a lack of people providing housing at a lower value.

 

[Morality Games]

That's ridiculous, apparently some people don't comprehend the basics of capitalism. If people are willing to pay high prices, that's what will be charged. If these apartment owners have 50% empty apartments, they'll lower prices to attract new renters. It's supply and demand. When people are willing to buy at high prices, prices stay high.

Capitalism only works when people are culturally conditioned to value decency, so that some sense of community moderates the pursuit of their material self-interest. Greed without any moral limits only leads to the injury and destruction of society, and by extension, to capitalism.