Rent Contol: Open-and-Shut Case?

Doug Henwood dhenwood at panix.com
Thu Jun 8 11:11:32 PDT 2000


Seth Ackerman wrote:


> You follow the urban scene, Doug. What do you think of rent control?

Compared to what? Compared to expropriation of greedhead landlords and their public humiliation? Or to an unregulated market?

Rent control does produce many strange phenomena. Near-identical apartments in my building in Manhattan can rent for $400 or $2400, depending on the vintage of the tenant. The "market" rate for my $950 apartment would probably be over $2000. Needless to say, I'm fond of paying half the "market" rate, but it's a privilege not available to newcomers. I put "market" in quotes because the market rate is the marginal cost of a very scarce commodity; people stay put who might otherwise move, so it's hard to say what a real free market in New York apartments would look like.

Still, anything that keeps a lid on rents is welcome; though the real estate industry loves to trot out suffering small-scale owners whenever rent regulation is up for renewal, you'd have to be an idiot to lose money on NYC real estate. Landlords have never opened their books to show how well or badly they're really doing, so you have to assume they're not doing to badly.

Rent-to-income ratios are very high in places like Portland and Seattle, and they have no rent regulations, right? New Yorkers already pay a high share of their income in housing costs - would Krugman have them pay more? I doubt NYC retailers would be happy if this were the case.

Doug



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list