Posted on 10/25/2009 1:56:46 PM PDT by OldDeckHand
The New York Times: The United Nations has assigned an official, “a special rapporteur on the right to adequate housing,” to check the city’s affordable housing. The rapporteur, Raquel Rolnik, is to tour the city for the next three days with housing advocates and city officials to “hear the voices of those who are suffering on the ground,” she said.
VIDEO AT LINK
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.tv ...
“Obama is turning us into a 3rd world country right before our very own eyes, and in just his first term.”
Hell, he orchestrated that in only nine months.
Bring it ON UN Bring it ON . . . . . .
I agree: housing in New York City is unaffordable. The UN should find a cheaper place to squat....
hh
Why don’t they investigate Obama’s, We Are Our Brother’s Keeper, brother in Kenya who lives in a hut?
Before this UN chick gets too gung ho on inspecting us, perhaps she needs to tend to her own back yard in Brazil?
http://www.ruralpovertyportal.org/web/guest/country/home/tags/brazil
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_issues_in_Brazil
Nicely done and pertinent
Think how many apartments could be built on the UN Site in NYC
Time to start housing homeless people in the UN building.
We are fight the WOT while we are destroying ourselves from within.
scanning the constitution. Still scanning, still scanning, eyes aching, still scanning. NOPE. Can’t find a THING in there that guarantees the right to adequate housing. Sorry UN, go bark up some other countries tree. Even the poor here, even the HOMELESS have more housing opportunities than most other countries. Get bent.
so Zeroes cousin or step step step brother or whatever living in Kenya in a cardboard shack won’t have a UN inspector because they’re too busy here?
The next President should tell the UN to get out of New York and go f%^& itself. And forget about those dues.
The rapporteur, Raquel Rolnik isn’t vey objective is she? She has already given her position. ‘If we take housing as human right’. Her investigation will have but one conclusion...the US and capitalism are evil.
This would be funny if it weren’t so stupid.
But this Should also embarrass odmubo. well if he can be embarrass.
They didn’t have the nerve to do it when Bush was in office
Force the UNocrats out of their building and turn it into low income housing.
That or dump the building into the East River and chase the UN leeches out of the country.
The worst ten percent of housing in the United States is better than ninety percent of the housing in the rest of the world.
The latest UN escapade is political fraud at its worst and at the highest.
New York has among the nation’s most restrictive rent control and “fair housing” laws, and tax-subsidized housing mandates in the country; and it probably has one of the highest local % of the most expensive housing as well as the largest gap in supplying new “affordable” housing - all the older (affordable) housing has been grandfathered OFF the open market. (Congressman Rangel has three such grandfathered apartments in his name.)
But, just go to any state with the fewest of such government attempts to “create” affordable housing and you likely have some of the lowest median home prices, occupied and/or new, in the nation. A low median home price - half the houses cost more, half cost less - is indicative of more “affordable” housing in sheer economic terms and in the markets that achieve it most often, it is achieved by the markets and not government mandate.
New York City has little affordable housing because there is no real free market in housing in New York City - everything about it is tightly controlled and tightly wound around political mandates. Millions of apartments are by law withheld from the market, on the pretense that they are protecting “affordable” housing. In fact, they are only protecting current occupants and artificially lowering the organic availability (by price) of units available to rent; which automatically causes what units can be built to obtain a premium; the total of which would be less if millions of apartments were not withheld from the market in the first place.
For instance:
Example A: I know a man who is protected in his very low rent from full market rent increases, for an entire floor unit that comprises about 2,000 square feet in a walk-up building in an up-and-coming neighborhood. The “legal” rent the landlord cannot exceed for his unit is $400.00 a month.
Example B: My niece has a very nice two-bedroom unit of about 800 square feet in a very fine older, but well maintained and highly sought-after complex, (with elevators but no doorman) and because she is somewhat “grandfathered” her rent cannot (for this year) exceed $1,100 a month. The rent for everyone else with units exactly like hers (1000s in that complex) depends on when exactly they signed their first lease. The longer they have lived there on renewals of the original lease, the longer they have been protected, every year, from a real market impact on their rent.
Example C: In my nieces building, the death of a previously “grandfathered” tenant made it possible for the landlord to obtain a market rent for a unit exactly like the one my niece has, for $4,300 a month.
“Affordable housing” advocates can only point to example C, as “the problem” and are completely unable to acknowledge the roles of examples A and B, repeated millions of times across the city, in the creation of that problem.
GET US OUT OF THE UN AND THE UN OUT OF THE U.S.— NOW!!!
ANOTHER thing about which those whacky old Birchers have been right for over 50 years!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.