Recent comments in /f/jerseycity

Nuplex t1_j9gszyg wrote

How many times does it need to be said that building housing reduces the rate at which prices increase. It does not guarantee lower prices. Without new housing rent would just shoot up even faster.

A great analogy I heard: Saying building more housing doesn't help is like free-falling from an airplane and complaining the parachute hasn't completely stopped you mid-air.

30

bodhipooh t1_j9gok50 wrote

> but it's indicative of a much larger problem

But... It is not. You simply feel that way because you are struggling to keep up, but that's the way an unregulated market is supposed to work. You may not be able to afford it, but others will. Since we are not building enough units to absorb the population growth, we will continue to see increases in housing costs. Until population growth slows down, or some other shock to the system comes (like with the pandemic) we will continue to see higher rents.

9

bodhipooh t1_j9gocuo wrote

What an odd take... the *correct* take is that we are NOT building enough. For all that "nonstop new building" people love to bemoan and criticize, we are getting MORE people than actual housing units, which is why prices DON'T come down or remain stable. Just to illustrate the issue, consider this: in 2000, it was estimated that JC's population was 240K. By 2010, it was estimated to be 247K (an increase of ~3% over 10 years) and then by 2020 it was estimated to be 292K (a increase of over 18% over 10 years, or 6x the growth of the previous decade). In the same period, the number of housing units did not grow nearly enough, so our vacancy rate of available housing units actually went down, demonstrating that we are not keeping up and instead are facing a market that is further constrained.

27

pixel_of_moral_decay t1_j9gnihk wrote

That’s slightly below inflation actually.

Right now inflation nationwide is about 8%. But for service/labor it’s substantially more, especially in NJ where minimum wage is going up on a predefined schedule.

Then you’ve got taxes.

The costs to operate a building went up above 10% due to labor alone.

10% means your landlord is taking a smaller percentage profit. There’s no other way to look at it.

6

PhilipRobertson t1_j9gm2r2 wrote

10% was roughly where we were able to negotiate down to after several years of being “invited” to sign a new lease every year or two in a high rise. Eventually became aware that the high rises were not a home and were merely a number of a form and left. It’s not sustainable long term and probably wasn’t designed that way. Unfortunately. Good luck.

42

cmc t1_j9gge2y wrote

I disagree with almost everything you've said here, most especially using private security for small/private institutions as a comparison point for a 911 dispatch system which manages all public services for an entire city. This is, to me, apples and oranges.

2