>That explains why real estate is so pricey in Nassau County, but it doesn't explain Jersey City, which is a completely different market.

They are different markets, but they are still interconnected. Places like Jersey City are getting more expensive in part because places like Nassau County have essentially become exclusive enclaves with hardly any new construction compared to the post-WWII years, when new suburban houses were going up left and right on previously undeveloped land.

Today, large minimum lot size requirements and low-density zoning in NYC's suburbs mean that there is very little capacity for new development. People who would have bought starter homes in the suburbs 20 or 30 years ago are now finding themselves priced out. So younger affluent people are increasingly choosing to live in apartments in places like JC, which contributes to higher housing prices.

It doesn't help that we basically stopped expanding our public transit infrastructure in the middle of the 20th century. Which means that the cheaper, farther out areas are essentially off limits to people who want a reasonable commute to NYC.

Perfectly said. It's an area where Democrats and Republicans are an agreement, by being nimby's. Republicans are all for small small government, but when it comes to strictly dictating What you can do on most of the land rather drastically, They are all of a sudden big government lovers.

Then you have liberals who are all about a more equitable society with wages and health care and housing but when it comes to the one solution that will actually help housing prices, building more were people actually need and want to live, they quickly change their minds about everybody's problems.

Amenities also can't replace space. I live in a 3-story, 4br house with a sizeable backyard, half a block from Lincoln Park, and my mortgage doesn't come close to $3500 a month.

And for $3500 a month, that island better have a palm tree on it.

$2000 in cash every month

Agreed. As a registered Democrat, I have to say that Democrats' inability to take serious actions to deal the housing crisis in major cities is a major embarrassment.

I roll my eyes anytime anytime things like expanded rent control get floated as potential solutions. SF, which probably has the strongest tenant "protections" in the country has already tried that along with a bunch of other band aid hippy-dippy solutions and they have all failed horribly.

Every time someone gets priced out of an expensive Blue state and moves to a suburb in a Sunbelt state is a win for Republicans.

It is one of THE defining social issues of our time. Inability to access affordable housing is at the root so many problems in our country. It is very disappointing that our most "progressive" cities have let this problem get so out of hand.

People need to stop making emotional arguments about the big evil landlords and developers and listen to the experts. Our major cities need more housing plain and simple.

I did a few work lunches there pre-COVID and it was pretty empty even back then.

If I recall correctly, they also have a second floor that didn’t seem to get much use. So maybe the space is a bit too big or expensive for them.

Also, I think it’s a little too far away from the waterfront office buildings to pull in the type of lunch crowd that a place like Honshu can.

We went in once on a Friday for lunch a couple months ago as we live close and I think we were the only ones in there, or close to it. The waiter said they hadn’t gotten the work lunch crowd back yet which probably killed a chunk of their business

Flew out a few times and they only had one lane with huge lines. Took over a half hour to get through.

You're forgetting more people are still being born. You're forgetting that our market isn't isolated.

If Manhattan, Brooklyn, and Queens aren't building and we are, we start to make sense for people to move here which drives up prices. We are a secondary market to Manhattan and would need to see a ton of housing built in Manhattan for our rents to be affected. A ton.

With that said, the velocity at which these new buildings fill is further evidence of the shortage of supply.

accidentally damage

Some people are happy their pizza came cold from sitting out at the pizzeria because they prefer it cold. Doesn’t mean I’d recommend somebody order a cold pizza though. Most people would like it hot. Congrats on being a quirky outlier but please try not to dismiss quality general advice.

Same. We were lone soldiers in the neighborhood then. I always loved seeing the fun lights in the dining room windows from my apartment. When nothing was in the neighborhood, it was always a comforting site. My how the neighborhood has changed. And due to change more.

>You are the one who is arguing that the basic rules of supply and demand somehow don't apply to the housing market.

Cool, show me the evidence it does. I've looked it up a bunch of times. It isn't there. There's no correlation to the locales that have had the most development and the rent in said locales. It flat out is not there.

There's clearly another force behind simply "create more units" that all y'all don't want to bring up, which is greed.

I've shown the very basic steps elsewhere, so I'll copy/paste for you.

>I'll help you. Google up "US cities with the most development" (substitute some other synonym for development, such as "new buildings/homes" if you like). Now do the same for "Average/median rent by city in US". Hell, if you really want to get spicy, toss in a third factor and add in "US cities with the highest rent growth".

And the fact that you work with the exploiters of us is not a mark in your favor. You are stuck in your bubble that believes this whole cloth without actually looking at the very basics of the argument.

> I have been in meetings with housing strategists and investment professionals at large institutional investment firms. If I told them that there is zero correlation between housing supply and housing prices, I would be laughed out of the room.

Yea, no shit, they aren't around to want to hear the very underpinnings against their raison d'etre.

I mean you are really stupid at this point. There can't be a reduction of prices of an essential product that is so far behind in supply it's insane.

I'm surprised you can walk and chew gum at the same time.

As a progressive things like universal healthcare, higher wages, mandatory pay leave, reducing work hours, strict overtime pay, and other things, another huge goal of mine is to help solve the housing crisis we have that is destroying the middle and lower classes.

The only way to do that is to get towards an equilibrium of supply and demand. In the context of this issue it is so fucking basic that if people don't grasp this they are simply part of the problem.

You dummies keep arguing SUPPLY AND DEMAND like it's some miracle thing that solves it all. It isn't.

I'm showing my work.

I'm showing you how to view said work.

"Just build some more high rises, rents won't keep going up like this, I swear, just build more. Supply and demand, bro. One more building, we'll get there." You're like a drug addict who can't get off their high.

If it did, the numbers would not be what they are. Once you slow people get past the fact that this basic concept isn't the reason behind rent prices, then we can discuss further.

Let me know if you ever understand the concept of supply and demand and please show me a point in recent history where we haven't been millions of units short of demand in housing. It doesn't matter if you're building housing if you're so far behind demand. It's not going to do much until you get closer and closer and we're not even remotely close.

If you can grasp those simple concepts please let me know and then we can discuss further.

You're welcome to show me the correlation between more development and lower rents here in the US. Spoiler alert: there is none. I know because I've looked it up.

I'll help you. Google up "US cities with the most development" (substitute some other synonym for development, such as "new buildings/homes" if you like). Now do the same for "Average/median rent by city in US". Hell, if you really want to get spicy, toss in a third factor and add in "US cities with the highest rent growth".

There's no correlation. Look at my first response in this thread.

>Boston had the 3rd highest rent growth among the 100 largest cities in the country last month. NYC was 84th. Of the other two cities mentioned, DC was 69 and SF was 91. Jersey City clocked in at 38th.
>
>Median overall rent (not growth) has SF at 9, Boston at 13, NYC at 14, and DC at 22. Jersey City is 7.

The particular link had rent growth from last month. If you're completely unaware and clueless and don't know what rents have grown like over time, feel free to look those up, too.

Depends on personality. I did the exact same thing once and as an introvert was very glad to be saving the money despite living in an older people neighborhood

This kid is coming for an internship. It would be a wise investment over living in that area. Downtown is the only place I’d even consider recommending for someone coming out of college looking to start a life/career. Even then, eh.

Avian flu isn't the reason I can't find reasonably priced food downtown. Avian flu didn't close Tender Shoot Farms or the Polish deli, or the three Bodegas within a block or two of my house.
I guess we didn't build enough 4 story luxury rentals with ground floor rental on Newark. I'm sure any day now they'll fill with family owned restaurants and grocers with fresh affordable produce as the market rises to meet my needs

After city tax plus slightly higher rent vs living with roommates here, for a high earner it could easily be a $400-500 premium to live in the city

How exactly does a developer "open up Jersey Avenue to Turnpike traffic." A "developer" is not in charge of that, the state of New Jersey is, and the state of New Jersey already stopped Leonia when Leonia tried to ban interstate traffic from local streets.

You're welcome.

1. The median overall rent says absolutely nothing about whether a very recent building spurt lowers rents relative to the status quo.
2. The median Jersey City unit is much newer than in any of those big cities. Unless you account for this your number will be biased high. Compare the rent of an old Jersey City unit to an old Boston unit, Jersey City is not more expensive. A new centrally located luxury unit in Boston is more expensive than a new centrally located luxury unit in Jersey City. Except Jersey City has way more of them. You're only observing Simpson's Paradox.