contrary-contrarian t1_iuj042b wrote on October 31, 2022 at 6:14 PM

Reply to comment by the_ocean in Accurate by seanner_vt2

This is a classic economists myth that simply is not true.

Allowing landlords to raise rent unchecked creates an unstable market that fucks over young people who can't afford to live anywhere near where they work.

the_ocean t1_iuj0lrm wrote on October 31, 2022 at 6:17 PM

I’d love to see studies showing it isn’t true - if you have links I’m happy to be wrong. My anecdotal lived experience from rent controlled markets was that units rarely hit the market, and instead were often traded secretly so landlords wouldn’t know there was a new tenant. When they did hit the market they were priced outrageously because the owners were losing money on existing tenants and trying to make it up on newcomers. But again, that’s anecdote not data. I welcome new information that would improve my understanding.

Shadowheals t1_iuj59b4 wrote on October 31, 2022 at 6:48 PM

I don’t know anything about rent control or about housing economics in general. I’ve always rented and have never had too much of an issue finding something.

But, as I’ve grown older I’m becoming less and less in favor of how insanely capitalist America and Americans have become. Would controlling rent based on housing value or some other means work?

If you’re renting out an apartment building worth 500,000 and you have 5 units, so roughly 100,000 a unit, rent can only be so and so much. Enough for the landlord to make some money and to do maintenance but not screw renters as well. I’m sure this isn’t a great idea for the “American dream” type of people who feel they can charge or do whatever they want since this is America, but the American dream certainly feels like it turned into a myth years ago.

Again I’m ignorant on this subject, and maybe that’s the way rent controlled suppose to work, but I am curious.

the_ocean t1_iujadbk wrote on October 31, 2022 at 7:23 PM

That sounds like a plan that’d work well in a country less fanatically devoted to unchecked capitalism, but would be a hard sell in the US.

There are some types of housing where the state caps profitability to the owner, but it’s almost universally in cases where the owner can’t make more than some fixed profit on sale, not on rent. This is how a lot of grants to assist low-income house purchasers work.

It’s also reasonable to think that doing so would reduce many potential builders’ interest in making more housing. Which is maybe a sign that we should have more “social housing” built by the state or nonprofit groups. But, again, lots of Americans think that’s communism and, well, they may not know what communism is but they sure don’t like it.

contrary-contrarian t1_iuj73ip wrote on October 31, 2022 at 7:00 PM

Your experience has been with rent control on specific properties. This creates scarcity of those properties and thus the issues you've laid out. I'm proposing milder rent control for all rental properties vs. much more strict rent control for only a select few.

The idea is to curb the massive money grabs like we're seeing right now with landlords raising rent at unprecedented levels just because they can, not because they need to.

the_ocean t1_iuj9guo wrote on October 31, 2022 at 7:17 PM

That’s fair - i actually think your idea of a cap on rental increases whether renewal or new is an interesting idea that might avoid the pitfalls of classic rent control. I agree with you that the cost of acquiring new tenants probably means that landlords would have minimal incentive to churn.