Subterms
Aside from their political views, Joshua Fisher and Ryan Troyer have a lot in common. In 2020, they lived across the street from each other in Sioux Falls, S.D. They are both white men of a similar age. Mr. Fisher, 42, is an auto technician; Mr. Troyer, 39, is a sanitation worker. They are both […] More
Even the most skeptical real estate agents say they think twice about the existence of ghosts, especially after unusual encounters.A real estate agent, Mike Fabbri, still remembers the chill of opening the door of an apartment near Washington Square Park in Manhattan.His client, a media planner in her mid-20s, was on the hunt for a quiet, one-bedroom in Greenwich Village. She walked in and immediately walked out. “She said, ‘I’m fine with a nice ghost, but I felt really evil energy in that apartment,’” Mr. Fabbri recalled.He sympathized. “I said, ‘You know, there are things you can change in an apartment, like the wallpaper. But you can’t change an evil spirit or a demon without priests. Let’s move on.’”Mr. Fabbri helped her find what he called a “charming” unit in a prewar co-op. No ghosts.Haunted houses, if one believes, can be problematic for real estate agents. The New York Times talked to agents who have embraced the macabre or have at least learned how to navigate it, as believers themselves or as sympathizers.They are the kind of agents who confess to would-be buyers that something might be amiss — an acknowledgment that many agents are not necessarily bound to. According to a 2023 Zillow analysis of state laws, only Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey and New York require agents to disclose suspected haunting or paranormal activity.Some houses considered “stigmatized” are the sites of grisly murders or criminal operations. Others have been rumored to harbor ghosts. The rumors aren’t always just rumors, in the experience of Cindi Hagley, a real estate agent in the San Francisco Bay Area.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More
The residents are the first in the state of Maine to successfully utilize a new law making it easier for them to compete with investors and gain ownership of the land their homes sit on.Manufactured houses, widely known as mobile homes, are one of the most affordable options for homeownership in the United States, but they typically come with a big risk: You own the house; you don’t own the lot it sits on.That has made mobile home parks ripe targets for investors, who buy communities and then increase the lot rents to boost profits. It’s a massive industry: manufactured homes account for approximately one in 10 new single-family homes in the United States, according to a 2023 report by the Manufactured Housing Institute trade organization.To curb investor involvement, the state of Maine ushered in a new law last year that requires mobile home park owners to give advance notice to residents if they intend to sell, giving the community members a chance to buy it themselves.Linnhaven Mobile Home Center is a community of nearly 300 occupied homes in Brunswick.Tristan Spinski for The New York TimesNow, it’s the largest resident-owned community in Maine.Tristan Spinski for The New York TimesOn Oct. 10, the residents of Linnhaven Mobile Home Center, a community of nearly 300 occupied homes in Brunswick, became the first to succeed in utilizing the new law. They paid $26.3 million to buy the property from their landlord by cobbling together loans and grants from several sources, including the state and the town of Brunswick.Now, it’s the largest resident-owned community in Maine, giving hope to other owners of manufactured homes. Several other states also have similar laws in place, including Connecticut and New York.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More
Changes in how real estate commissions are advertised and paid went into effect this weekend. Buyers and even some agents aren’t sure what they mean.An hour before the open house on Saturday afternoon, a real estate agent paced across the dark bamboo floors, straightening the throw blanket, fluffing the pillows and lighting a scented candle.The last-minute sprucing at the $1.2 million condo in Jersey City, N.J., was exactly what agents have done at open houses for decades before this weekend.The difference now is the information they are required to disclose and where they can disclose it when it comes to real estate commissions — a charge that had hovered between 5 to 6 percent of the sales price, and until now was typically paid by the seller and split between the seller’s agent and the buyer’s agent.The changes that went into effect this weekend decouple the two commissions: Sellers are no longer expected to pay buyers’ commissions, though they can still choose to do so, and the proposed commission split can no longer be advertised on the online database commonly used to sell homes, the M.L.S.The new rules went into effect across the United States as part of a $418 million settlement agreement with the National Association of Realtors, a powerful real estate trade group that was successfully sued by a group of homeowners in Missouri who argued that the longtime practice requiring them to pay agents’ commissions led to inflated fees. Brokerages have spent months trying to educate agents and consumers on the looming changes.But when they were implemented nationwide this Saturday, buyers remained befuddled.Sarthak Jain, left, and his wife, Aditi Maheshwari, touring a duplex in Jersey City alongside their Realtor.Andres Kudacki for The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More
Ambos candidatos abogan por ampliar el poder del gobierno para dirigir los resultados económicos, pero en ámbitos muy diferentes.[Estamos en WhatsApp. Empieza a seguirnos ahora]La vicepresidenta Kamala Harris y el expresidente Donald Trump volaron a Carolina del Norte esta semana para pronunciar lo que se anunciaron como importantes discursos sobre la economía. Ninguno de los dos expuso un plan detallado de políticas: ni Harris, que se centró durante media hora en la vivienda, los comestibles y los medicamentos con receta, ni Trump, que durante 80 minutos desperdigó varias propuestas entre reflexiones en voz alta sobre inmigrantes peligrosos.Pero ambos candidatos, cada uno a su manera, enviaron a los votantes mensajes claros e importantes sobre sus visiones económicas. Cada uno de ellos defendió la visión de un gobierno federal poderoso, uno que utilice su poder para intervenir en los mercados en busca de una economía más fuerte y próspera.Solo discreparon, casi por completo, sobre cuándo y cómo debe utilizarse ese poder.El viernes en Raleigh, Harris empezó a imprimir su propio sello a la economía progresista que ha dominado la política demócrata en la última década. Este pensamiento económico abraza la idea de que el gobierno federal debe actuar con agresividad para fomentar la competencia y corregir las distorsiones en los mercados privados.El planteamiento busca grandes subidas de impuestos a las empresas y a quienes obtienen ingresos altos, para financiar la ayuda a los trabajadores de ingresos bajos y de clase media que luchan por crear riqueza para sí mismos y para sus hijos. Al mismo tiempo, ofrece grandes exenciones fiscales a las empresas que se dedican a lo que Harris y otros progresistas consideran un gran beneficio económico, como la fabricación de tecnologías necesarias para luchar contra el calentamiento global o la construcción de viviendas asequibles.Esta filosofía anima la agenda política que Harris presentó el viernes. Se comprometió a entregar hasta 25.000 dólares en ayudas al pago inicial a cada comprador de primera vivienda durante cuatro años, al tiempo que destinaría 40.000 millones de dólares a empresas constructoras de primeras viviendas. Harris afirmó que reinstauraría de forma permanente el crédito tributario por hijos ampliado que el presidente Biden estableció temporalmente con su ley de estímulo de 2021, al tiempo que ofrecería aún más ayuda a los padres de recién nacidos.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More
Both candidates embrace expansions of government power to steer economic outcomes — but in vastly different areas.Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald J. Trump flew to North Carolina this week to deliver what were billed as major speeches on the economy. Neither laid out a comprehensive policy plan — not Ms. Harris in her half-hour focus on housing, groceries and prescription drugs, nor Mr. Trump in 80 minutes of sprinkling various proposals among musings about dangerous immigrants.But in their own ways, both candidates sent voters clear and important messages about their economic visions. Each embraced a vision of a powerful federal government, using its muscle to intervene in markets in pursuit of a stronger and more prosperous economy.They just disagreed, almost entirely, on when and how that power should be used.In Raleigh on Friday, Ms. Harris began to put her own stamp on the brand of progressive economics that has come to dominate Democratic politics over the last decade. That economic thinking embraces the idea that the federal government must act aggressively to foster competition and correct distortions in private markets.The approach seeks large tax increases on corporations and high earners, to fund assistance for low-income and middle-class workers who are struggling to build wealth for themselves and their children. At the same time, it provides big tax breaks to companies engaged in what Ms. Harris and other progressives see as delivering great economic benefit — like manufacturing technologies needed to fight global warming, or building affordable housing.That philosophy animated the policy agenda that Ms. Harris unveiled on Friday. She pledged to send up to $25,000 in down-payment assistance to every first-time home buyer over four years, while directing $40 billion to construction companies that build starter homes. She said she would permanently reinstate an expanded child tax credit that President Biden temporarily established with his 2021 stimulus law, while offering even more assistance to parents of newborns.She called for a federal ban on corporate price gouging on groceries and for new federal enforcement tools to punish companies that unfairly push up food prices. “My plan will include new penalties for opportunistic companies that exploit crises and break the rules,” she said, adding: “We will help the food industry become more competitive, because I believe competition is the lifeblood of our economy.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More
The NewsThe mayor of Tulsa, Okla., announced on Thursday the creation of a commission tasked with developing a plan for reparations for the Tulsa Race Massacre, one of the worst racial attacks in U.S. history. The commission will study how reparations can be made to survivors of the massacre and their descendants, as well as residents of North Tulsa.Community members, activists, city leaders, clergy and children prayed in 2019 beside two grave markers for victims of the Tulsa Race Massacre.Joseph Rushmore for The New York TimesWhy It MattersDuring the 1921 massacre, white mobs burned Greenwood, a prosperous neighborhood known as Black Wall Street, to the ground. As many as 300 Black people were killed, hundreds more were injured, and thousands were left homeless. City officials, historians and the courts acknowledge that the massacre has led to generations of racial inequity in Tulsa.Calls for reparations in Tulsa are longstanding and have resulted in apologies, a scholarship program and other actions, but not direct financial redress.The last two known survivors of the massacre, now centenarians, have pursued reparations through the courts, but the Oklahoma Supreme Court dismissed their case in June.Two reports — one from a commission created by the State Legislature in 2001 and one by a group of Tulsa residents in 2023 — recommended reparations, including financial compensation. The commission announced Thursday, named the Beyond Apology Commission, follows the 2023 report’s calls for the city to create a group to examine and carry out a reparations program.Mayor G.T. Bynum, a Republican, has signaled that he wants this body to make recommendations that would result in tangible action. He wrote a social media post this week that the commission is not intended to be merely a “study group.”He also noted that part of the group’s mission is to produce a plan for a housing equity program by the end of November. (The mayor, who created the commission by executive order, is not seeking re-election, and his term will end in December.)Funds that could be used for that program have already been approved by voters, the mayor said.The debate over reparations has at times divided the city. In 2021, a dispute over who should compensate the survivors and their descendants preceded the sudden cancellation of an event commemorating the 100th anniversary of the massacre.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More
A fourth woman filed a lawsuit against Oren Alexander, once a star agent of luxury real estate.An actress and comedian says she was drugged and sexually assaulted by Oren Alexander, a top luxury real estate agent who is facing a string of accusations that he and his two of his brothers sexually assaulted women — allegations that had been whispered throughout the high-end real estate industry for years.Renee Willett, 31, filed a federal lawsuit on Friday accusing Mr. Alexander, 37, of attacking her in his apartment nearly nine years ago. She is the fourth woman to file a lawsuit this summer against Mr. Alexander. Two earlier lawsuits filed this year name Mr. Alexander and his twin brother, Alon, who does not work in real estate but often socializes with him. A third suit filed in June names Oren, Alon and their older brother Tal Alexander, 38, who is Oren’s longtime partner in real estate sales.Isabelle Kirshner, a lawyer for Oren Alexander, said she had no comment on the new allegation at this time. Oren, Tal and Alon have denied all previous allegations.Like other women who have said they were assaulted, Ms. Willett said she was prompted to file a lawsuit after reading articles about similar claims involving the Alexanders. Her lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in the Southern District of New York, came two days after The New York Times published an article with accounts from several women about the brothers.“I felt a responsibility to come forward,” she said. “I have to do this not just for myself, but for everyone else.”Ms. Willett is an actress and comedian who is now working on a screenplay. She came forward, she said, after learning about other allegations of assault against the Alexanders.Vivien Killilea/Getty Images For Idol RocWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More
After a strong start to the year, spending has slumped as a real estate downturn weighs on consumers. Communist Party leaders are meeting this week to discuss what to do about it.Economic growth slumped in China through the spring after a strong start this year, according to data released on Monday, as a real estate crash caused consumers to spend more cautiously.The latest growth statistics for the world’s second-largest economy, covering April through June, put further pressure on the Communist Party as its leaders gathered on Monday in Beijing for a four-day conclave to set a course for the country’s economic future.In a country known for strict controls on the flow of information, the Chinese government is maintaining a particularly tight grip ahead of the party gathering, known as the Third Plenum, which typically takes place every five years. China’s statistical bureau canceled its usual news conference that accompanies the release of economic data and Chinese companies are mostly avoiding the release of earnings reports this week.China’s National Bureau of Statistics said that the economy grew 0.7 percent in the second quarter over the previous three months, a little below the expectations of most economists in the West. When projected out for the entire year, the data indicates that China’s economy grew during the spring at an annual rate of about 2.8 percent — a little less than half its growth rate in the first three months of this year.The statistical bureau also revised down its estimate of growth in the first quarter. That growth rate, projected out for the full year, was about 6.1 percent, not the 6.6 percent rate that was disclosed in April.Xi Jinping, China’s top leader, is trying to win confidence in his policies at home and abroad as growth falters and the property market suffers.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More
