|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Nov 3, 2013 12:26:10 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Nov 3, 2013 16:44:58 GMT -8
The merits or lack of merit in "rent control" have been argued since I was in High School. You would think that by now people in New York would have seen what has been the outcome after 70 years. The little bit about San Francisco is shocking!
|
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Nov 3, 2013 18:02:43 GMT -8
The merits or lack of merit in "rent control" have been argued since I was in High School. You would think that by now people in New York would have seen what has been the outcome after 70 years. The little bit about San Francisco is shocking! But isn't this typical when the government decides that it knows best how people should live their lives? Unintended consequences abound. Such laws as rent control create powerful interest groups who will do whatever they can to ensure that the government continues to favor them. "The greater good" was no doubt the stated motive for rent control. What happens is that "The greater good" morphs into the greater good for a select subset of citizens who benefit from the law in question. My suspicion is that quite a number of New Yorkers would, if you pressed them, admit that their continued support for rent control is based on their desire to continue receiving the subsidy that the law provides them, rather than any rational argument. AzWm |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Nov 3, 2013 20:11:30 GMT -8
As a general rule rent control is not a good idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Nov 6, 2013 13:44:11 GMT -8
San Diego's only rent control law is limiting the amount that rents can be raised in a single year to 10%. That is not going over the line in government control in the market.
|
|
