|
LemonDrizzle posted:I don't think I've ever heard of a rent control scheme that, when applied to a market with a genuine housing shortage, produced a more equitable outcome than would have been achieved by just letting the market do its thing. If you have a shortage of housing in places where people want to live, it necessarily follows that at least some people will be unable to live there and will quite reasonably be pissed off about the situation and regard it as deeply unfair. You can't eliminate that unfairness without building more housing (or making it more attractive to live elsewhere in the city/country), all you can do is decide who gets the lovely end of the stick. Money talks bullshit walks. icantfindaname posted:So you have examples of rent control that produced successful outcomes? Or are you just saying that because the Cato Institute said something, that something must be wrong? Now this one I don't understand. Rent control exists. There are people who live in apartments and pay less than market value for them.
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2014 08:40
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 00:53 |
|
|
Rent control is not supposed to help anyone get an apartment. Rent control is not supposed to increase the housing supply. Rent control is not supposed to solve demand. It does the opposite of those things because it is intended to do the opposite of those things. Rent control is not economic policy, stop projecting your wants onto it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2014 21:18
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:It's a good idea just because it's easier and more efficient for the government just to own and run rent-subsidized housing for the poor than it is to give the subsidy money to private landlords or try to fix prices Look, I know a lot of people live in housing, but rich people* use it as an investment, and isn't that what's really important? *Invest in a house and become rich too! It can't fail!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2014 09:41
|
|