[jack_quack]

Without reading the article, isn't the answer always supply and demand?

[keeganjw]

Ha, you should've read the article.

[thegayngler]

Reading is your friend. 56% of the income generated from renting in an old building goes to taxes. That's scary high.

[krschultz]

In this case not reading was the correct call, since this article just made a bunch of people on HN less informed. I look forward to the echoes of this showing up in every future HN thread on housing prices. I should save the debunkers for future reference.

[toomuchtodo]

Or, conversely, its better that the city is extracting those taxes for services instead of it being straight profit for landlords. Lowering taxes would not lower rent charged, it'd just be more money in the pocket of landlords.

[lintiness]

if taxes were lower, it's possible landlords would rent for less to make the same marginal dollar.

[_rpd]

Article blames high city taxes. I always thought it was that rent is price controlled, resulting in undersupply.

[tsaoutourpants]

This is certainly another issue. There are many reasons why NYC rent is so high. But >50% of your rent going to property taxes may be the #1 most significant.

[hx87]

In this case, it's supply, demand, and tax (abatements).