Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Swedish economist Assar Lindbeck, a housing expert, said that "rent control appears to be the most efficient technique presently known to destroy a city – except for bombing".

And yet Sweden has rent control and 90 percent of urbanism is being envious of Sweden.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Swedish economist Assar Lindbeck, a housing expert, said that "rent control appears to be the most efficient technique presently known to destroy a city – except for bombing".

And yet Sweden has rent control and 90 percent of urbanism is being envious of Sweden.

Anonymous wrote:The Swedish economist Assar Lindbeck, a housing expert, said that "rent control appears to be the most efficient technique presently known to destroy a city – except for bombing".

Anonymous wrote:The Swedish economist Assar Lindbeck, a housing expert, said that "rent control appears to be the most efficient technique presently known to destroy a city – except for bombing".

Anonymous wrote:Why is everyone making this so complex? We have supply and demand. The goverment is trying to regulate one side (rental price) but not the other (rental costs). That doesn't make sense. Either regulate it fully or don't regulate it fully.

Anonymous wrote:Why is everyone making this so complex? We have supply and demand. The goverment is trying to regulate one side (rental price) but not the other (rental costs). That doesn't make sense. Either regulate it fully or don't regulate it fully.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More housing will not make housing cheaper. We don’t live in a closed system.

Weird how supply and demand affects the price of everything except housing.

More new cheaply built housing will make housing cheaper. Unfortunately, building new houses are expansive. Materials, labor, land, safety features, environmental standards cost a lot. Builder needs to pay for all of that and also make some profit. The only way to create cheaper housing is to have government build them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More housing will not make housing cheaper. We don’t live in a closed system.

Weird how supply and demand affects the price of everything except housing.

Anonymous wrote:More housing will not make housing cheaper. We don’t live in a closed system.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the "evil landlord" side...

I work in property management.

For the better part of two years there has been an eviction moratorium due to covid. That means even if a tenant (some of whom never lost employment) paid 0.00 dollars in rent, you could not evict them and replace them with a paying tenant.

At the same time, all maintenance on that unit and others still has to be done, with very diminished revenue coming in.

Now that the moratorium is over (and even now it is not in a landlord's best interest to evict people unless someone is truly not willing to work with them), you are seeing rent increases to make up for the 2+ years of getting 60-80 cents on the dollar of expected rent.

Putting in a 3% cap, will just make maintenance all the harder to keep up with. As the cost of goods has gone up dramatically, people's salary and benefits have gone up dramatically, etc.

Not saying some people have not put in some unreasonable increases as well- but it will be impossible to perform good maintenance with these hard caps- compared to the cost increases we have occurred on many fronts.

People's salaries and benefits have gone up dramatically? Have yours?

I think my annual raises have been 5 and 6 percent the last two years, as is most of our staff.

Not sure if thats dramiatically- but yes- wage growth in the entire country has been high the two years. Thanks.

How nice for you.

And thank YOU for ignoring my post that costs for MRO materials, salaries, wages, benefits- have all gone up.

We spent 12% more last year just on product alone for maintenance. And that is not for capital improvements, or upgrades, or rehab work. Just the usual maintenance, repair, operations stuff needed to keep units running.

But we should jsut eat that right? Or operate in the red?

If you can't pay for it without passing 100% of the costs on to the tenants, that seems like a problem with your business.

Let's play this out on a macro level.

A property owner (whether they manage 5 units, or 50,000), has a double digit increase in the cost of the products they need to maintain the units. Their employee costs have gone up. Inflation and supply chain are hitting them all over.

So in your mind they just operate at a loss in perpetuity for... reasons?

Are you expecting double digit cost increases in perpetuity?

No, I certainly hope not.

And if we allowed more density, the free market could run itself here. If a property pushed the rent too much, people would literally vote with their feet.

But we dont make the grocery store only charge 3% more than they did last yr if the cost of eggs goes up.

No, it couldn't. Yes, there needs to be more housing and more density. No, housing is not like eggs at a grocery store.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the "evil landlord" side...

I work in property management.

For the better part of two years there has been an eviction moratorium due to covid. That means even if a tenant (some of whom never lost employment) paid 0.00 dollars in rent, you could not evict them and replace them with a paying tenant.

At the same time, all maintenance on that unit and others still has to be done, with very diminished revenue coming in.

Now that the moratorium is over (and even now it is not in a landlord's best interest to evict people unless someone is truly not willing to work with them), you are seeing rent increases to make up for the 2+ years of getting 60-80 cents on the dollar of expected rent.

Putting in a 3% cap, will just make maintenance all the harder to keep up with. As the cost of goods has gone up dramatically, people's salary and benefits have gone up dramatically, etc.

Not saying some people have not put in some unreasonable increases as well- but it will be impossible to perform good maintenance with these hard caps- compared to the cost increases we have occurred on many fronts.

People's salaries and benefits have gone up dramatically? Have yours?

I think my annual raises have been 5 and 6 percent the last two years, as is most of our staff.

Not sure if thats dramiatically- but yes- wage growth in the entire country has been high the two years. Thanks.

How nice for you.

And thank YOU for ignoring my post that costs for MRO materials, salaries, wages, benefits- have all gone up.

We spent 12% more last year just on product alone for maintenance. And that is not for capital improvements, or upgrades, or rehab work. Just the usual maintenance, repair, operations stuff needed to keep units running.

But we should jsut eat that right? Or operate in the red?

If you can't pay for it without passing 100% of the costs on to the tenants, that seems like a problem with your business.

Let's play this out on a macro level.

A property owner (whether they manage 5 units, or 50,000), has a double digit increase in the cost of the products they need to maintain the units. Their employee costs have gone up. Inflation and supply chain are hitting them all over.

So in your mind they just operate at a loss in perpetuity for... reasons?

Are you expecting double digit cost increases in perpetuity?

No, I certainly hope not.

And if we allowed more density, the free market could run itself here. If a property pushed the rent too much, people would literally vote with their feet.

But we dont make the grocery store only charge 3% more than they did last yr if the cost of eggs goes up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the "evil landlord" side...

I work in property management.

For the better part of two years there has been an eviction moratorium due to covid. That means even if a tenant (some of whom never lost employment) paid 0.00 dollars in rent, you could not evict them and replace them with a paying tenant.

At the same time, all maintenance on that unit and others still has to be done, with very diminished revenue coming in.

Now that the moratorium is over (and even now it is not in a landlord's best interest to evict people unless someone is truly not willing to work with them), you are seeing rent increases to make up for the 2+ years of getting 60-80 cents on the dollar of expected rent.

Putting in a 3% cap, will just make maintenance all the harder to keep up with. As the cost of goods has gone up dramatically, people's salary and benefits have gone up dramatically, etc.

Not saying some people have not put in some unreasonable increases as well- but it will be impossible to perform good maintenance with these hard caps- compared to the cost increases we have occurred on many fronts.

People's salaries and benefits have gone up dramatically? Have yours?

I think my annual raises have been 5 and 6 percent the last two years, as is most of our staff.

Not sure if thats dramiatically- but yes- wage growth in the entire country has been high the two years. Thanks.

How nice for you.

And thank YOU for ignoring my post that costs for MRO materials, salaries, wages, benefits- have all gone up.

We spent 12% more last year just on product alone for maintenance. And that is not for capital improvements, or upgrades, or rehab work. Just the usual maintenance, repair, operations stuff needed to keep units running.

But we should jsut eat that right? Or operate in the red?

If you can't pay for it without passing 100% of the costs on to the tenants, that seems like a problem with your business.

Let's play this out on a macro level.

A property owner (whether they manage 5 units, or 50,000), has a double digit increase in the cost of the products they need to maintain the units. Their employee costs have gone up. Inflation and supply chain are hitting them all over.

So in your mind they just operate at a loss in perpetuity for... reasons?

Are you expecting double digit cost increases in perpetuity?

No, I certainly hope not.

And if we allowed more density, the free market could run itself here. If a property pushed the rent too much, people would literally vote with their feet.

But we dont make the grocery store only charge 3% more than they did last yr if the cost of eggs goes up.