Economics Thread
- Thread starter sturg33
- Start date
acesfull86
Well-known member
sturg33
I
I was one of those march buyers
Tapate50
Well-known member
We are pulling the trigger this month.
acesfull86
Well-known member
https://nypost.com/2025/06/21/us-news/rents-jump-shocking-15-after-nyc-ditches-broker-fees/
The city ditched broker fees last week in a supposed win for tenants, but landlords had the last laugh — wasting little time sending rents skyrocketing in an effort to recoup their anticipated losses.
Rents shot up a shocking 15% in the week since the controversial FARE Act took effect, with the average rental in the Big Apple jumping from $4,750 to $5,500, according to an analysis by real estate analytics firm UrbanDigs.
“The Manhattan rental market has seen a sharp reaction,” said John Walkup, UrbanDigs’ co-founder.
The FARE Act, which prohibits agents representing property owners from charging renters a “broker fee,” also requires that all fees a tenant owes be included in rental agreements and real estate listings.
But the rising rents “suggests that landlords may be attempting to incorporate broker fees into the rent, which would transfer the cost to renters in a less direct, but very real way,” added Walkup.
The law change has created what insiders tell The Post is a “shadow market” — apartments that aren’t listed so landlords can still get tenants to cover the fee.
“We’re going to be looking for apartments again like it’s 1999 … where you have to know who to call and when to call,” said Jason Haber, co-founder of the American Real Estate Association and a broker at Compass.
“It’s going to be an odyssey.”
And listings dried up overnight with an estimated 2,000 vanishing from website StreetEasy on June 11 — the day the FARE Act took effect — while UrbanDigs found available apartments dropped by an eye popping 30%
-------
I disagree with the use of the word "shocking" in the 2nd sentence. Rather predictable. It's laughable how badly the government has screwed up the NYC housing market with one "good intentioned" policy after another. Too many to list. Fortunately, the city is going to elect a socialist mayor later this year so everyone will finally have access to affordable housing.
Edit - ha, sturg beat me to it
The city ditched broker fees last week in a supposed win for tenants, but landlords had the last laugh — wasting little time sending rents skyrocketing in an effort to recoup their anticipated losses.
Rents shot up a shocking 15% in the week since the controversial FARE Act took effect, with the average rental in the Big Apple jumping from $4,750 to $5,500, according to an analysis by real estate analytics firm UrbanDigs.
“The Manhattan rental market has seen a sharp reaction,” said John Walkup, UrbanDigs’ co-founder.
The FARE Act, which prohibits agents representing property owners from charging renters a “broker fee,” also requires that all fees a tenant owes be included in rental agreements and real estate listings.
But the rising rents “suggests that landlords may be attempting to incorporate broker fees into the rent, which would transfer the cost to renters in a less direct, but very real way,” added Walkup.
The law change has created what insiders tell The Post is a “shadow market” — apartments that aren’t listed so landlords can still get tenants to cover the fee.
“We’re going to be looking for apartments again like it’s 1999 … where you have to know who to call and when to call,” said Jason Haber, co-founder of the American Real Estate Association and a broker at Compass.
“It’s going to be an odyssey.”
And listings dried up overnight with an estimated 2,000 vanishing from website StreetEasy on June 11 — the day the FARE Act took effect — while UrbanDigs found available apartments dropped by an eye popping 30%
-------
I disagree with the use of the word "shocking" in the 2nd sentence. Rather predictable. It's laughable how badly the government has screwed up the NYC housing market with one "good intentioned" policy after another. Too many to list. Fortunately, the city is going to elect a socialist mayor later this year so everyone will finally have access to affordable housing.
Edit - ha, sturg beat me to it
sturg33
I
do you think the commie is gonna win it?
acesfull86
Well-known member
My guess is in the end it'll be Cuomo, but it should be an interesting race. The Working Families Party has said they will not put Cuomo on their ballot line even if he wins the (D) primary, so that will open a spot for the commie in the general. Then you'll have Adams running as an independent, there's some other "centrist" who'll be on the ballot as an independent, then Sliwa or some other (R) with no chance. If the idiot non-commie clowns cannibalize each other's votes, there could be a path for the idiot actual commie clown to win.
sturg33
I
He's an embarrassment.
Any day now im gonna get that crow. Our chief magadonian said he will be here to show us all how stupid we are
Guess TACO applies to others
acesfull86
Well-known member
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/lutnicks-sadness/
Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick joined the administration pile-on against Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell, whose sin is not cutting interest rates. There are good arguments on both sides of the interest-rate question. Then there’s Lutnick’s argument.
Justifying a go-slow approach to reducing rates, Powell said that tariffs have already caused prices to increase for some products, such as personal computers. Lutnick calls that “really sad”: “You would think Powell would know there are no tariffs on personal computers. They currently don’t exist.”
This is . . . not true. Some of the data showing it’s not true come from the Department of Commerce. In fairness, tariffs have been hard to keep track of lately — but that’s not a defense that Lutnick can make.
—————
Nice
Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick joined the administration pile-on against Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell, whose sin is not cutting interest rates. There are good arguments on both sides of the interest-rate question. Then there’s Lutnick’s argument.
Justifying a go-slow approach to reducing rates, Powell said that tariffs have already caused prices to increase for some products, such as personal computers. Lutnick calls that “really sad”: “You would think Powell would know there are no tariffs on personal computers. They currently don’t exist.”
This is . . . not true. Some of the data showing it’s not true come from the Department of Commerce. In fairness, tariffs have been hard to keep track of lately — but that’s not a defense that Lutnick can make.
—————
Nice
I genuinely don’t know what Lutnick brings to the table besides a faithful adherence to Trump’s dogma on trade. He’s largely unable to speak to any economic issue with enough competence to even spin the insanity effectively. At least Bessent can capably pretend the tariffs aren’t an issue.