Here's what I don't get about rent control: how is it actually benefitting the renter?
Here's what I don't get about rent control: how is it actually benefitting the renter? If a landlord has a few different units, some under rent control, some not, and some cash to spend on improvements, why would he spend it on improving the rent-controlled units? The Facebook post that was here yesterday even said so much: > The few of us who still remain in San Francisco have no choice but to live in sub-par conditions like mold, windows that don't shut, rodents and countless other issues because there is no other choice, because the rents are so high you can't move so you don't. This is what you get when you set the price artificially below market value: subpar product. Has anyone here seen Soviet-era apartments? They were exactly like this. So in the long run, the place will fall apart around the renter, and they will be pretty much powerless to do anything about it. And the bit about "can't move" because it's too expensive just means that the area is now too expensive for you and rent-control is the only thing allowing you to stay here. If the excuse is that your job is here, well maybe your job is not paying you enough to live in SF. Perhaps founders should stop starting companies in this incredibly expensive area, and explore greener pastures.
Posted by mcdoug on Mar 16, 2015, 5:09 PM
Tags
Related issues
- > 1) Land is effectively nationalized under 100% LVT.
- This low cost -> artist -> rich people movement of neighborhoods is something I observed happening in some cities I’ve lived in and it am...
- From an admittedly selfish point of view, I also don't mind this.
- > Oil is still underpriced wrt to its environmental cost.
- If component prices keep going up and the respective monopoly/duopoly/triopoly for each component colludes to keep prices high&...
- When I moved to the bay area out of college housing was too expensive for me to manage even working for a large tech company.
Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.7,500 issues0 comments
pricing (Housing)
> 1) Land is effectively nationalized under 100% LVT.
This low cost -> artist -> rich people movement of neighborhoods is something I observed happening in some cities I’ve lived in and it am...
From an admittedly selfish point of view, I also don't mind this.
> Oil is still underpriced wrt to its environmental cost.
If component prices keep going up and the respective monopoly/duopoly/triopoly for each component colludes to keep prices high&...
When I moved to the bay area out of college housing was too expensive for me to manage even working for a large tech company.
High housing costs is a key factor.
I know this isn't how our political system works, but if I were king of America I'd try to solve the problem of expensive housing like th...
Here's what I don't get about rent control: how is it actually benefitting the renter?
Here's what I don't get about rent control: how is it actually benefitting the renter? If a landlord has a few different units, some under rent control, some not, and some cash to spend on improvements, why would he spend it on improving the rent-controlled units? The Facebook post that was here yesterday even said so much: > The few of us who still remain in San Francisco have no choice but to live in sub-par conditions like mold, windows that don't shut, rodents and countless other issues because there is no other choice, because the rents are so high you can't move so you don't. This is what you get when you set the price artificially below market value: subpar product. Has anyone here seen Soviet-era apartments? They were exactly like this. So in the long run, the place will fall apart around the renter, and they will be pretty much powerless to do anything about it. And the bit about "can't move" because it's too expensive just means that the area is now too expensive for you and rent-control is the only thing allowing you to stay here. If the excuse is that your job is here, well maybe your job is not paying you enough to live in SF. Perhaps founders should stop starting companies in this incredibly expensive area, and explore greener pastures.
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Start the discussion.