Literally every economist, slat water, freshwater, etc agrees that rent control is the second worst thing to do to a city after bombing. Yet it won't die
Literally every economist, slat water, freshwater, etc agrees that rent control is the second worst thing to do to a city after bombing. Yet it won't die
rent control is a great policy for people who intend to die in their current apartment
Do you know some reading on this?
Meta analysis from last year Rent control is *really* bad www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...
Thank you!!
I'm on a plane flight right now. There are lots of great YIMBYs to follow on Bluesky
Which is most people, most people just want a place to live and not have to constantly deal with their rent hiking by hundreds of fucking dollars
Not true! The majority of people in this country own their home. And I'd be shocked if it was a majority of renters, even. I know lots of renters. None of them expects to live there forever.
Homeowners don’t really have a fucking say in the rent stabilization debt because they don’t fucking pay rent, also I’ve been renting my entire life, so has everyone I know, we want to know we can afford to fucking live in the same place and not have to move because rent goes up dumbass
Sorry you said something wrong and then got salty when you got called out on it. Have you tried not doing that? Building more housing is the only way to achieve this. Anything else is fucking over future residents- including kids- for the sake of current ones. Inherently reactionary
"Hey this policy is actually bad for everyone, all the experts agree" *unhinged ranting* it happens everything you discuss rent control
Cheap rent is good and desirable. It's most easily achieved through abundant building
Yup. The best way to make landlords have less power is by reducing the scarcity of their assets. You'd think leftist inclined people would be all over this.
We are all for building more housing, but that's going to take years and no one is even talking seriously about getting started on the kind of housing that's needed. In the meantime, something has to be done to protect low-income renters from eviction and homelessness.
Austin simply changed its zoning laws in 2022 and rent has dropped 7.5 each year since.
The best way to destroy the power of landlords is to nationalize housing and abolish landlords, you just want to make more literal lords who make money by doing nothing and sucking the blood of people who can’t afford homes.
Cool let me know when you get the political power that would let you nationalize housing and "abolish landlords". Meanwhile in the real world cities like Austin have allowed more building of units and rent has fallen
Oh, sorry - I mistook you for a serious person interested in real solutions for real issues My b, won't do that again
Which doesn’t require landlords or raising rent every year, the government can just build housing instead of relying on the whims of predatory vampire landlords
“Erm askhaully people being able to live their lives without being bled dry by worthless landlords is reactionary, those poor marginalized landlords need to raise rent every year because what if an undeserving poor person lives there?!”
I think we should make it harder for landlords to raise rent by building sufficient housing so they are forced to compete for tenants Rent control is a net regressive policy. It's very much like the logic of MAGA re: immigrants- prioritize those already living here and fuck everyone else
Yes people living in a city should be prioritized, they’re the ones that fucking live there, I don’t care about your hypothetical yuppie loser friends that want to come in and kick out everyone
A) why? Why are they more important? Again, this is fundamentally reactionary logic B) the yuppies will be fine. Those who have money will outbid those who don't. It's the poorer who suffer. C) again, what happens, in your ideal world, with normal population growth through having kids?
Imagine Xavier and Yvonne are normal middle class people in Minneapolis. They have a small house they own. They have three kids, April Ben and Charles What happens when their kids grow up and start families of their own? Shall the small home plot be divided? Shall the kids have to move away?
Why should people who live in a place be squeezed to death so that “in theory” transplants would have an easier time moving to a city? Which I don’t think you care about immigrants at all, I think you care about the profits of landlords first and foremost
“Think of the children!” Is such a fucking hilarious scumbag line, as if old people don’t also need places to live, should the elderly be pushed out of their homes to die on the street or something? I don’t care about fucking rich shit heads who want to move to the Minneapolis, I care about the
Who actually fucking live here now.
This is functionally indistinguishable from MAGA rhetoric re: immigrants What if we built enough homes so that the elderly and their adult children+families could both live there?
And what about the non rich people who want to move to Minneapolis? Besides, rich people will be fine. They'll outbid someone poorer for limited supply. If there were sufficient housing available, they wouldn't have to You seem extremely uninformed about this
That’s moronic lmao, alright so citizens of a city should be kicked out for being poor to make way for rich transplants that can afford insane rent prices?
Rent control is unfortunately not an effective way to accomplish that. It's a supply-side problem that requires supply-side solutions: specifically land value taxation and zoning reform.