It also overstates that problem. It’s definitely a problem. But I could tell you with a lot of anecdotal experience over the last few years: I never see illegal PEVs outside of a 10 mile radius of Herald Square. (And, more like 5mi) They just don’t exist on bike trails and greenways elsewhere

Blaming “developers” for bad housing policy is too easy. A lot of people don’t consider that they live somewhere that long ago was created by a different developer in a different time. So that was good? But a new building is bad? We need better answers for this disinfo.

People who are upset that Williamsburg didn’t stay chill are looking for answers as to why. That is something YIMBYs should talk about more, even if it seems like a childish reason to suddenly be interested in zoning. NIMBYs know how to quickly answer this with “developers”

Bet the Times never talked about the Sacklers like this. Maybe not until wayyyyy down the line. Maybe not at all.

That’s gutting. I’m really sorry

I'm fine with a non-profit bailout or generally reducing expenses for all landlords. (It's not the only business that is dealing with financial predation)

I do not agree with the amount of noise made that keeping rents low (with 1-2% increases) under any circumstance is a calamitous move

And the thing with bailouts is, they create moral hazard and worsen bubbles. If there is a debt problem in multifamily rental ownership in NYC it needs to be unwound, not paid off with a crooked RGB

As I said in a quoted thread, this is less "basic financing" and more "bailout". These landlords took aggressive mortgages as the first step. Step 2: ?????? Step 3: profit!!!

I don't think this is the case with every landlord, but we certainly don't speak of any other business this way

Where The People Resisting Fascism Are Getting It Wrong

I bet it makes the meat real tender