• Fredselfish@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      Yep even locally your not represented. Only corporate interests matters. Why you must vote locally not just nationally.

  • Copernican@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    As a rent stabilized new yorker, my POV is that if you can settle on a rent increase limit that both pisses off the renter and landlord in equal proportion, it’s the right decision. Rents need to increase from time to time. And if you want improvements to building and units, there needs to be cash from the landlord to do it. When I consider buying, or renting another spot, I think it’d just be cheaper to put 10k per year into my rent stabilized place than rent at market value or buy and take out a mortgage.

    That’s a long way of saying, rent control and stabilization increases aren’t always bad, but need to be reasonable. And for 3 years there were no rent increases. Inflation is real over the past 3 years.

  • girlfreddy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    Not like LA doesn’t already have a huge unhoused population, so City Hall decides to add to the problem.

    Bunch of dumbfucks.

    • SCB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Rent control leads to fewer places to rent, this driving up rent for places not rent controlled, and adding insane competition to places that are.

      Disposing of rent control entirely, in a phased transition, would be ideal.

      “Next to bombing, rent control seems in many cases to be the most efficient technique so far known for destroying cities."[4] So noted the socialist economist Assar Lindbeck in 1977. In a 2012 survey of leading economists, a mere 2% thought that price controls on rent improved the availability and quality of affordable housing.[5] Then why hasn’t rent control destroyed the cities where it has been implemented? Because of the easing of these price controls since their adoption in the mid-20th century.[6] That is, until now.

      Also, something that makes me sad: extremely rare L from Buttigieg

      “Rent control is one of many tools that local jurisdictions can use to promote access to affordable housing.”[2] — Pete Buttigieg

      Poor guy.

      https://manhattan.institute/article/issues-2020-rent-control-does-not-make-housing-more-affordable