StarDestroyer.Net BBS

The Rent Is Too Damn High Party steals the NY gubernatorial debates

We told you that tonight's New York gubernatorial debate—with seven participants!—would be crazy, but we could have never anticipated this level of it: watch as Jimmy McMillan, of the "Rent Is Too Damn High" party, uh... introduces himself.

Crazy "Rent Is Too Damn High" Candidate Steals the Show at NY Gov. Debate

Somebody, please, give this guy a TV show. Or a gig as an auctioneer. Or something.

Video in the link. If this is more OT or something, whisk it away - but please put it somewhere where the rent ain't too damn high!

http://www.rentistoodamnhigh.org/

Best Political Party Website....ever.

EDIT: And this poster......




Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

This is the most honest and straight-forward politician I've ever seen.

fgalkin wrote:http://www.rentistoodamnhigh.org/

Best Political Party Website....ever.

Sweet jesus. It's like he made it as hard as possible to know what the fuck he was talking about.

What, did you miss all the references to "Rent is too damn high?"

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

He's got datapoints in there, but not a single number isn't shrinking or spinning or whatever.

Maybe it was originally made in Geocities?

Is it me or does he sound like Mr T?

PainRack wrote:Is it me or does he sound like Mr T?

I think that IS Mr. T. Seriously though, he's got a talking point that people can't ignore and he's getting a lot of visibility for it. It sounds like a lot of people agree with what he's saying, and even if it doesn't go anywhere it let's politicians know that more than school funding or trash service most New Yorkers are having problems because "The Rent is too Damn High".

How the heck is that a political platform? What does he intend to do to make the rent not too damn high?

Samuel wrote:How the heck is that a political platform? What does he intend to do to make the rent not too damn high?

One presumes things like city ordinances and laws to cap rent costs or some such.

That dude's facial hair is awesome. Is it too late to move to NY so I can vote for that guy?

Haha, I get to vote for him if I so choose.

However, since I am more interested in making sure Carl Paladino never, ever, ever, ever, ever even comes close to winning, I'm voting Cuomo.

Dalton wrote:Haha, I get to vote for him if I so choose.

However, since I am more interested in making sure Carl Paladino never, ever, ever, ever, ever even comes close to winning, I'm voting Cuomo.

I may fall into the same category, as much as I instinctively dislike Cuomo.
However, the "Rent is 2 Damn High" guy and the "Anti-Prohibition" party candidate both had some damned good points - if Cuomo looks like a runaway winner, I may vote for one or the other of them.

*boot*

Steve wrote:

Samuel wrote:How the heck is that a political platform? What does he intend to do to make the rent not too damn high?

One presumes things like city ordinances and laws to cap rent costs or some such.

Price controls are generally a bad idea. The exception is when supply is limited and the good is essential and the housing and apartments market where it is an even worse idea.

Interview with the press after the debate:

I'm torn on what to think, because as much of a sideshow as this is the guy has a good message and i'd rather support a fringe guy who genuinely wants to improve things than a popular guy who runs on a platform of reform and doesn't really act on it much.

One presumes things like city ordinances and laws to cap rent costs or some such.

That is a recipe for disaster.

I'm sure the first time such a cap is passed, it will allow most if not all rental property owners to rent their property at a small profit. However, if a small decrease is seen as good, a larger one will be seen as better, so eventually, they'll keep lowering the cap until property is rented at a loss to the owner. Also, I imagine there will be some new laws increasing the legal responsibility of the owner, and with it the cost of owning the property. Eventually, rental property owners will want out of that business, and will have nobody to sell to, because who'd pay to take over that headache? Since nobody wants to or can afford to rent out property, the state will just have to take over for the public good. Now, thousands of pieces of property effectively become public housing, and the economy loses a lot of productive properties.

I'm torn on what to think, because as much of a sideshow as this is the guy has a good message and i'd rather support a fringe guy who genuinely wants to improve things than a popular guy who runs on a platform of reform and doesn't really act on it much.

Assuming you live in New York State and can vote for this man, why don't you vote for him if you like what he's offering? I think if people voted for the people they wanted to be in public office, they'd be more likely to get the people they want. Voting for who you think or have been told will win simply rewards mediocre and/or dishonest people and proves that the public is as stupid as politicians likely think we are.

However, since I am more interested in making sure Carl Paladino never, ever, ever, ever, ever even comes close to winning, I'm voting Cuomo.

That's a really immature basis for voting for anyone. If you really want Cuomo to be governor, that's a real reason to vote for him. If not, find somebody you do want and vote for that person. I don't care if that person doesn't have a "viable chance of winning" or some horseshit some group says. The people you really want have a better chance of winning elections if you vote for them.

Well, he's picking up some inertia; the governor of Pennsylvania just endorsed him.

Samuel wrote:Price controls are generally a bad idea. The exception is when supply is limited and the good is essential and the housing and apartments market where it is an even worse idea.

I must be missing something.

"The exception is when supply is limited and the good is essential..." Does that mean that under such conditions price controls are less bad, or more bad?

Because surely the supply of rental properties in New York is limited, and the good is essential if you want to find a place to live in New York.

I think I see what you're getting at, but there's a bit of ambiguity in there, so I'm not sure.

Simon_Jester wrote:

Samuel wrote:Price controls are generally a bad idea. The exception is when supply is limited and the good is essential and the housing and apartments market where it is an even worse idea.

I must be missing something.

"The exception is when supply is limited and the good is essential..." Does that mean that under such conditions price controls are less bad, or more bad?

Because surely the supply of rental properties in New York is limited, and the good is essential if you want to find a place to live in New York.

I think I see what you're getting at, but there's a bit of ambiguity in there, so I'm not sure.

It's limited in Manhattan proper. There's plenty of space just outside the island though.

Simon_Jester wrote:

Samuel wrote:Price controls are generally a bad idea. The exception is when supply is limited and the good is essential and the housing and apartments market where it is an even worse idea.

I must be missing something.

"The exception is when supply is limited and the good is essential..." Does that mean that under such conditions price controls are less bad, or more bad?

Because surely the supply of rental properties in New York is limited, and the good is essential if you want to find a place to live in New York.

I think I see what you're getting at, but there's a bit of ambiguity in there, so I'm not sure.

I meant things like rationing food during a famine- where there is a good people want, but you don't want market forces to determine allocation because people will hoard and there will be shortages.

TithonusSyndrome wrote:Well, he's picking up some inertia; the governor of Pennsylvania just endorsed him.

This?

Shocking news! Jimmy McMillan may not pay rent himself!
The New York Times conducted an interview with him in which he said that he has lived rent-free for 31 years. But he also told the Wall Street Journal that he paid $800/month for an apartment!

The solution?

Jimmy McMillan wrote:Don’t look for anything I say about my living space to be true,

This may well be the best political party since the Mike Party. Certainly it has a better candidate.

Bakustra wrote:Shocking news! Jimmy McMillan may not pay rent himself!

snip

Does that change anything? Jimmy doesn't say that HIS rent is too high. He made it a point in his speech at the debate to talk about families with children who are having problem putting food on the table while paying for a roof over their heads. His personal rent situation changes nothing about the message.