There's nothing wrong with that. They can tax the hell out of it and use it to fund services in the rest of the city where real people live.
Seeing as how there are 1.6 million of those now that would be quite a turn of events.
https://www.citylab.com/equity/2015/05/why-billionaires-dont...
Also, the population in Manhattan has been going up since 1980, so it can simultaneously be true that there are more people living here and more vacant investment properties and hotel rooms.
I doubt we're in any danger of Manhattan emptying out in the next few hundred years from anything other than a nuclear attack or climate change.
Why not? Because you like living there?
I'm also amazed by the average night price at Manhattan hotels. Even during normal weeks, the cheapest is well above 300$/night.
As someone who stays in hotels regularly for work (mainly capital cities in Western Europe), I don't find Manhattan prices to be any worse than London, Paris or similar.
We try to keep overnight-accom. expenses to under $100/person/night at my startup and SF is the only place we couldn't find a comfortable, clean and well-located hotel room at that price point.
Nothing fancy, but a surprisingly big room at a prime location.
It’s very possible.
Was kind to my landlord, and tried to fix whatever I could rather than calling her when I needed something. The goal was to have her forget I existed. Rent was raised $50 every other year which was completely manageable.
Of course that is not where people usually associate with Manhanttan..
It turned into a talk about housing, and housing prices (we had a california developer on the walk and some english people adding perspective).
Did you pay the rent yourself on that ~75k? Of course not. You paid half and your roomate the other half. Your answer is not really valid as you proved your income at the time was not enough to afford the apartment.
Wait a second....