The Great Manhattan Rip-off

The great Manhattan rip-off

Rent controls, New York's particular bane, are poised to receive yet another unwelcome extension 

It was one of many price controls brought in during the grim, panicky period between the attack on Pearl Harbour in 1941 and America's move to a full wartime economy in 1943. The housing market was seen as another thing that needed to be rationed or, at least, regulated—alongside rubber, petrol, coffee and shoes. By 1947 all these controls were phased out, except property-price regulations. Most cities have since scrapped these market distortions; the capital of capitalism has not.

Only one-third of New York City's 2m rental apartments are free of some kind of price restraint. A city board sets annual increases and administers an ever more complicated system. In some buildings, people live in similar apartments but pay wildly different levels of rent. In others, lone grandmothers sit in huge apartments, aware that moving would mean paying more for a smaller place elsewhere.

Read the rest of this article in the PDF format:

Download this file (The Great Manhattan Rip-Off.pdf)The Great Manhattan Rip-off[ ]52 Kb

Rent Control or Bomb?

Rent Control or Bomb?

We couldn't resist showing you these images comparing the damage done to buildings by wartime shelling and peacetime neglect under rent-regulation regimes.

See if you can spot the difference!

See the pictures in PDF:

Download this file (Rent Control or Bomb.pdf)Rent Control or Bomb?[ ]1172 Kb

Rent Regulation -- Beyond the Rhetoric

Rent Regulation -- Beyond the Rhetoric

In New York City more than one million housing units, representing more than half the private rental market and one‐third the total housing stock, are subject to rent regulation. This scale of regulation is unique among American cities and is highly controversial.

Proponents claim rent regulation protects affected tenants from otherwise likely excessive rent increases in New York’s tight housing market and helps make housing affordable for low‐ and middle‐income households who otherwise could not live in their own home in New York City. Critics claim the regulations give substantial benefits to upper‐income households who could afford unregulated rents, cause rents to be higher among unregulated units than would otherwise be the case, encourage some families to stay in apartments longer than they otherwise would, curb construction of new housing, discourage landlords from properly maintaining regulated units, and lower property values of buildings with regulated units, thereby depriving the City of New York of property tax revenue.

Current rent regulations trace their origins to federal price controls imposed on the city’s rental housing market in 1943 during World War II. The federal rules applied to housing built before February 1947. In 1951 New York State opted to assume the controls on the pre‐1947 housing stock on grounds that the local housing market continued to experience a low vacancy rate. In 1969 rent regulation in a modified form (rent stabilization) was applied to housing built after 1946. The rules that applied to both older and newer housing have been altered several times since, with periods of full or partial vacancy decontrol and other modifications. Nevertheless, the justification for all rent regulation remains the tight local housing market. The legal basis for current rent regulations is the continuation of a vacancy rate of 5 percent or below as an indication of a housing “emergency.”

Read the rest of this article in PDF format:


Rent Control a '100-year failure'

Rent control a '100-year failure'

By Steve Lafleur, The Leader-Post October 22, 2011 

The New Democrats defeated the scourge of rent control in Saskatchewan during the 1990s. Unfortunately, the same party is now promising to implement "second-gen

While not as disastrous as the former rent-control regime, the newly proposed plan would merely replace one type of rent volatility with another. Second-generation rent control is a failure.

Rent control has been one of the biggest public policy failures of the last hundred years. Swedish economist Assar Lindbeck wrote the famous line that "next to bombing, rent control seems in many cases to be the most efficient technique so far known for destroying cities."

Preventing landlords from charging market-rate rents leads them to skimp on repairs and maintenance. It also removes the incentive for construction of new units. It leads to an under-supply of rental units, which can only be corrected in the long run by rationing or with higher prices.

Read the rest of this article in the PDF format:

Download this file (Rent control A 100 Year Failure.pdf)Rent Control 'A 100-year Failure'[ ]43 Kb

Sample Taxpayer Article 1

This is some sample content for testing.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut aliquam urna vitae nibh ullamcorper, et congue purus elementum. Suspendisse malesuada condimentum nibh. Etiam sodales egestas elit, vitae dapibus magna laoreet eget. Phasellus et bibendum tortor. Donec non lacus convallis, volutpat felis et, eleifend est. Nunc a nisi massa. Morbi ut fermentum lorem, ut porta enim. Vivamus gravida est sodales, convallis dui a, scelerisque felis. Phasellus quis sollicitudin sapien, sed vehicula lorem. Maecenas vitae urna eu arcu lobortis sollicitudin. Nunc pulvinar, ante bibendum condimentum pellentesque, justo justo iaculis diam, vitae tempor nisl nibh sed nisl.


Etiam et dui at lectus consectetur gravida auctor id mi. Integer et elementum mauris. Morbi fringilla pulvinar nulla, eget laoreet libero aliquam non. Donec neque nibh, scelerisque at facilisis a, fringilla vitae est. Integer vulputate tincidunt luctus. Interdum et malesuada fames ac ante ipsum primis in faucibus. In eu sem leo. In ut lectus ut est consequat ultrices non ut ligula. Aliquam aliquet a ligula in vulputate. Ut quis massa dictum, gravida metus vel, accumsan metus. Vivamus vehicula sodales tortor, non facilisis libero. Donec faucibus aliquet leo a elementum. Pellentesque nibh nibh, porttitor nec dolor ut, elementum sagittis ipsum. Pellentesque nisi sapien, euismod a placerat placerat, semper in quam. Phasellus tincidunt eros libero, sed pretium diam luctus sed. Proin arcu leo, mattis in egestas quis, rhoncus sed enim.


Donec nec ligula consectetur, rutrum purus vitae, porta magna. Vivamus ac nunc porttitor libero porta scelerisque. Etiam quis ante ut odio rutrum interdum ut sit amet risus. Nulla arcu est, molestie in vestibulum ac, venenatis eget sem. Aliquam dignissim lorem eu lectus aliquam tincidunt. Ut laoreet ultricies augue posuere sagittis. Curabitur egestas nisi elit, non aliquam diam varius ac. Donec lacinia pulvinar condimentum. Aenean sed neque tristique, fringilla ante at, aliquet nisl. Maecenas sodales lacinia nibh, non posuere dolor eleifend id. Praesent mollis luctus felis, nec tincidunt nulla condimentum non. Morbi convallis felis eget orci euismod, non egestas libero fringilla.


Aenean vitae cursus justo. Phasellus eros lacus, laoreet eu elementum eu, fermentum vitae leo. Donec porta magna vel odio molestie eleifend vitae eu nunc. Sed accumsan erat at tellus vestibulum fermentum. Proin consectetur sapien id eros adipiscing, et aliquam velit viverra. Morbi turpis velit, suscipit id ipsum ut, venenatis rhoncus tellus. Vestibulum rutrum, neque eu bibendum condimentum, nulla ipsum consequat eros, non cursus enim ligula nec leo. Fusce neque metus, elementum tempor turpis vel, malesuada fermentum sem. In ipsum mauris, fermentum vitae felis id, auctor fermentum mi. Aenean sed tincidunt libero.