Zane Shelby

100%. Of course, it’s never about building a coalition or acquiring political power for that kind of person. They don’t want to win or govern. They want to acquire social clout with their peers by dunking on their closest ideological allies.

I could go on, but the point is that anyone who believes that large corporate investors are the cause of the housing crisis (they’re not) should be a YIMBY. Real estate investors who make their money by gouging tenants hate new supply!

Unfavorable Apartment Market and Economic Conditions Could Adversely Affect Occupancy Levels, Rental Revenues and the Value of Our Real Estate Assets. Unfavorable market conditions in the areas in which we operate and unfavorable economic conditions generally may significantly affect our occupancy levels, our rental rates and collections, the value of the properties and our ability to strategically acquire or dispose of apartment communities on economically favorable terms. Our ability to lease our properties at favorable rates is adversely affected by the increase in supply in the multifamily and other rental markets and is dependent upon the overall level in the economy, which is adversely affected by, among other things, job losses and unemployment levels, recession, personal debt levels, a downturn in the housing market, stock market volatility and uncertainty about the future. Some of our major expenses, including mortgage payments, generally do not decline when related rents decline. We would expect that declines in our occupancy levels, rental revenues and/or the values of our apartment communities would cause us to have less cash available to pay our indebtedness and to distribute to UDR’s stockholders, which could adversely affect our financial condition and the market value of our securities. Factors that may affect our occupancy levels, our rental revenues, and/or the value of our properties include the following, among others:

UDR Inc. (NYSE: UDR) is a publicly traded real estate investment trust (REIT) specializing in high barrier-to-entry markets. Why? Because their “ability to lease [their] properties at favorable rates is adversely affected by the increase in [multifamily] supply”. www.sec.gov/Archives/edg...

The increase in same store rental income is primarily driven by good demand and modest supply across most of our markets.

Equity Residential (NYSE: EQR) is a leading real estate investment trust (REIT) specializing in residential properties. They openly state that their profits are driven by “modest supply”, citing “supply-demand imbalances” as a risk. www.sec.gov/Archives/edg...

Essex Property Trust operates primarily in the residential real estate sector, focusing on owning, operating, and developing apartment communities. The company's geographical concentration is mainly on the West Coast, specifically in Southern California, Northern California, and Seattle Metro. These regions are characterized by high demand for rental housing, driven by strong economic fundamentals and significant barriers to new supply, such as strict zoning regulations and limited land availability.

Essex Property Trust, Inc. (NYSE: ESS) is a prominent real estate investment trust (REIT) that focuses primarily on West Coast markets because of “significant barriers to new supply, such as strict zoning”. pitchgrade.com/companies/es...

Even if you take it as a given that corporate investors are bad, defending restrictive zoning only enables them. They say repeatedly in their SEC filings that restrictive zoning is a boon to their business, and increased supply is a threat. There are criminal penalties for lying in such filings.

Investors owing between one and five properties account for 85% of investor-owned homes, and those owning between six and 10 properties account for another 5%, bringing the total share of small investor-owned homes to about 90%.

Kevin, I would advise against relying on Sirota for this kind of information. He clearly didn’t read the article because it undercuts his own argument. The “investors” in the headline aren’t REITs, they’re overwhelmingly small-scale *landlords*.

This @zohrankmamdani.bsky.social video is absolutely INCREDIBLE. The numbers he cites, the strategy and results they produced — it’s the future. When have you heard *any* campaign talk about this, ever? (Video split in 2 to fit in Bluesky’s limits)

You've probably been hearing a lot about budget bills, environmental reviews, and labor fights out here on the West Coast. It's all adding up to probably the biggest policy change in modern California history. Here's a breakdown for the perplexed.

The brilliance of this is that it allows progressives to keep the pressure on while simultaneously creating a permission structure for moderates to change their behavior.

NYC Comptroller Brad Lander: "I don't think the line for the [Democratic] party right now is between progressives and moderates; I think it's between fighters and folders."

the reason I am so supportive of primaries is that I recognize the reality that the Democratic Party is the only viable alternative we have to the Republicans under our current system of elections and I also recognize how deeply inadequate many of our current Dems are at fighting this administration

97% of New York City's three million free parking spots are free. Adding meters to just 25% of free parking spots could generate billions of dollars for the city. Using demand-based pricing, cities can price parking by block — setting the right price to ensure a few curb spaces are open on every block. It's simple: prices increase when demand is high and decrease when demand is low. San Francisco successfully piloted demand-based parking and saw: • 1 67% drop in parking search times • 1 30% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions • Y 22% reduction in double parking

just saying, if an pro-transit mayor wants to fund some ambitious policies, there is a massive goldmine of 3 million free parking spaces in New York City just sitting there waiting to be metered

Correct me if I’m misunderstanding, but it sounds like the relative change in wage floor varies a lot by the type of construction work and by the details of the project. It’ll be a net increase for some, and a net decrease for others.

Yes.

I’m not sure if I would say “central,” but I’ve often heard that there are some very real trade-offs between lowering housing costs and paying construction workers union wages.

Lotta leftists going “stupid liberals, let’s see if you vote blue no matter who now that Zohran is the nominee, hur hur”

They…all will? “Blue no matter who” is our actual sincere position.

We’re not the ones who keep threatening to let republicans win if our demands aren’t met. That’s you.

the NYC mayoral election might be an opportunity to reset some terms.

the Cuomo faction are not “liberals” but “centrists”.

the Lander faction are “liberals”

the Mamdani faction are “leftists”

if you’re mad at centrists but complaining about liberals you are mostly pissing on the wrong people

I’ve clearly pissed you off, which wasn’t my intention. I’m sorry. What I was trying and failing to convince you of is that it’s not worth focusing on the behavior of over-the-hill elected Democrats in the twilight of their careers.

I am telling you that, as someone who has worked with and for the Democratic Party for years, for me it was and is a sincerely held belief. It is was and is for nearly all of my colleagues.

Framing people like Clinton and Gillibrand as “elites” gives them too much credit. The New York mayoral election is proof that they don’t have the influence they perhaps once had.

I think you are underestimating the degree to which “vote blue, no matter who” was a plea from rank-and-file Democratic Party voters.

The tactical response to Gillibrand, Clinton, and whoever else being asshats isn’t “Democrats suck”, it’s “Gillibrand and Clinton no longer represent rank-and-file Democrats, as evidenced by the recent election in New York City.

the thing about mamdani is that i think stuff like free fares, city run grocery stores, and rent freezes are, at best, useless policies

it's just i also think given the state of nyc they're basically harmless, and if he can get upzoning over the finish line the rest doesn't matter

For fuck’s sake, there’s an opportunity here for leftists to seize the mantle and help define what it means to BE a Democrat, pulling the entire party, normies and all, to the left. But if you’d rather keep the circular firing squad in place then go off, I guess.

A whole lot of people seem really committed to ignoring the lesson of Mamdani’s nomination: When leftists and liberals stand in solidarity with each other, we win.

Believe it or not, for most rank-and-file Democrats, myself included, “vote blue no matter who” is a sincerely held belief.

Literally begging you to not assume that fucking Gillibrand speaks for all Democrats, especially immediately after Democrats, not DSA members, Democrats, showed up in numbers to nominate Mamdani.

You mean this abundance goon? bsky.app/profile/jaco...

A lot of takeaways from Zohran’s DSA-powered win but one of them is that liberals are not the problem. The liberals voted Zohran (or Brad and also ranked Zohran). It’s reactionary centrists that ran the disgraceful race-bating campaign.

That’s a direct quote from Mamdani. Watch the video.