I ain't a Whole Foods shopper bud. There ain't no Whole Foods in the Heights and if there was I wouldn't go there. You're now getting mad at imaginary characters on the internet, what a fun life.

> You understand that the sheer action of moving does not automatically equal pricing others out, right?

Do state your theory of how more people can move into a neighborhood without expanding supply and manage to not displace someone.

OK. They can move to a new other place. You understand that there will then be people in this other place who are priced out, right?

There is no solution other than New York City and its suburbs building enough supply.

Your idea of blaming the people being priced out solves absolutely nothing.

The Heights is a higher income area than Newark and Union City and has been that way for a long time. It has always been a middle class neighborhood. Many people priced out of the Heights go to those areas. Are they now the evil problem in those areas? Or maybe you should just tell New York City to build enough housing and stop the problem at its source.

I find it funny that it's Subway (Subway!!) regarded as the "gentrification option" in this thread. If it was the Subway that already existed and Andrea Salumeria was opening up, the sentiment would be the exact opposite. The same people would be accusing the more expensive place of "gentrifying". Like all the people in the thread the other day saying we don't want good food in the Heights, it'll raise rent.

If they get priced out and are tethered to the area by their job where else are they supposed to move? The real issue is NIMBYism in New York City blocking housing supply and causing them all to move here. Plus none of the Heights McMansion conversions would even be viable if new multi unit development was allowed by right.

With coupons you can get it down to 6 or 7 each for 2

Not that I would go there with Andrea Salumeria right next door

You've never read the economics behind how a land value tax can't be passed down?

The supply of land is fixed. You can't pass the burden of a tax onto consumers if the supply is fixed.

This has nothing to do with whether you can charge market rates for the housing. Of course you can charge market rates for the housing. The market rate ain't going to include the land portion of the property tax. As you yourself say they're gonna have to decrease the rent if they want to keep charging the profit maximizing rate with the land value tax. This is not true of the building portion of the tax. Supply is not fixed there.

My question was quite clearly rhetorical.

I hope you are absolutely broke to justify it cause as someone who knows what the immigration process is like I can't fathom risking it all over $2.75.

I'm ready to get down voted into oblivion - I ain't complaining. As a renter this is part of why McGinley Square area in an older building is cheaper than an equivalent older building in Boston. The land portion of a property tax is impossible to pass down to renters because the supply of land is fixed. Only the building portion gets passed down. I wonder what the median value of a property in this metro is? People who can afford to pay high taxes should be taxed to fund social services.

Go to Ohio, there's nothing there so you can live dirt cheap.

Just move to the literal next neighborhood to the north then. What you are seeking already exists...

k

Only flopper here is you, buddy

Do you believe white people should avoid moving to places with minorities? No? Then I'm not referring to you.

The ones that look annoying (subjective, I think they add vibrancy to the streetscape) would disappear if legal ones opened.

It's not true. You can only write off maintenance and repairs and maybe depreciation of the appliances. The key thing is you have to actively spend money on the property in order to write it off, which means it loses money on net. You can't claim a deduction for lost income.

If you're rich or white you should purposely avoid ever moving in next to a minority or patronizing any business in a minority area and only move to exclusive 95% white ethnosuburbs. That's how we achieve justice ✊️

A cannabis dispensary’s dreams of opening in the Village neighborhood of Downtown Jersey City went up in smoke this week when a not-in-my-back-yard campaign swayed the city’s Cannabis Control Board.

Complaints had been lobbed by parents, local business owners and a real estate developer against The Green Ashram because it’s proposed location, 17 Division St., is near schools and a private daycare. An online petition against the business’ location garnered nearly 1,000 signatures.

The NIMBY lobbying ultimately worked, even if the critics couldn’t specify anything illegal about the business: The city’s cannabis board rejected the Green Ashram application, 3-1, Monday, effectively shutting out any chances of it opening.

The denial is believed to be the first time a Jersey City cannabis applicant was rejected because of community outrage — as opposed to regulations — in a city where officials have embraced the cannabis industry and dozens of businesses have applied after statewide legalization.

“There’s not been a mobilization like this,” said board member Stacey Flanagan. “Yes, half of this is dreams, and half of this is reality. The reality is (that) you need to do more to get more, and I don’t feel like that was accomplished here.”

Through an attorney, the owners of The Green Ashram declined to comment on the rejected application.

Green Ashram’s three co-owners had planned to work with a domestic violence organization, host expungement clinics and hire minorities to fulfill the required social equity component. They also had a few endorsements, including from a local cannabis workers’ union. But the community was steadfast against the application at the meeting.

Parents whose children attend the Brunswick School, a private daycare, said the hundreds of kids that attend would be put at risk, and so would students at the public schools nearby.

“The family part of Newark Avenue, there’s so many children,” said Zoe Martinson, who has a child that attends the Brunswick School. “There are two parks that have kids events in the summer, there’s a daycare that has a lot of students, there’s child haircuts, there’s Little Gym, it’s just an area that isn’t conducive (and) doesn’t serve the community.”

Jersey City regulations say that a cannabis business must submit to the board a list of childcare centers within 200 feet of its location for consideration. No such places were flagged; Green Ashram is roughly 340 feet away from Brunswick School. Also, cannabis laws, like alcohol statutes, prohibit cannabis use in public.

So far, only two cannabis applicants in Jersey City have state approval to open: Blossom Dispensary on Tonnelle Ave., who plan to open in this fall after obtaining final local approvals, and WR Wellness in the Powerhouse Arts District, who’s opening date was unable to be determined.

Last year, another Downtown cannabis applicant, Local Modiv, sued to overturn a cannabis board rejection over a supposed lack of local support. A judge ruled in favor of the applicants and remanded it back to the board, and was eventually approved this January.

Jersey City residents voted by a 3-to-1 margin in the 2020 statewide referendum to legalize marijuana, with 61,449 people voting yes and 19,475 voting no.

Plenty of parts of Bergen-Lafayette and Greenville which won't be getting gentrified any time soon. Anything between MLK and Ocean in particular, once you get a few blocks away from the light rail.

Yes, hence Manhattan rent being higher

Visible terms = the competition when you tour an apartment

Economic terms = where people would want to live if money and supply wasn't an obstacle, but it is, and Manhattan rents are too high for many people to qualify, automatically eliminating a bunch of bidders. But be assured, if they could qualify, they'd be applying there before here.

They're more in demand in visible terms, but in economic terms demand is still higher in Manhattan. If Manhattan was as cheap as here, they'd be #1 on this metric by far.

As for the JC rents higher than NYC thing, no one ever brings up composition effects. Let's say you go from 2000 old units and 2000 new units to 2000 old units and 3000 new units with no changes in the rent of the actual units themselves. "Jersey City average rent" will still go up even though the exact same number of old units at the same price are still available.

The only places I see at that valuation have tremendous HOA fees pricing out the working class

There are plenty of solutions, fare free transit isn't one of them until service levels are high enough that risking a cut wouldn't devastate the system. Every single transit system in America has too low service and reducing revenue can't increase it.

Quite a few in the residential units with NYC views.

How much is your residence worth?