It's Happening Again - Homes Lost - Some Rent Control Needed

[protectionist]

Moving to another state is not required

No ? Then what is YOUR solution to moving out of a massively increased rent, in a massively rent increase state, where the housing market is changed to exhorbitantly high rents, and vacancies at affordable rate are no longer existent ?

 

[protectionist]

So move to a HUD property.. That what it's for.

Sure, BUT there aren't any vacancies. If you know of any, post it here.

 

[surada]

No ? Then what is YOUR solution to moving out of a massively increased rent, in a massively rent increase state, where the housing market is changed to exhorbitantly high rents, and vacancies at affordable rate are no longer existent ?

You want to take away rights of landlords who have mortages, taxes and maintenance costs. If you can't afford an apartment, go to a HUD property.. Its for people like you.

 

[protectionist]

I can afford to pay my cost of housing.

If you can't afford yours then tough shit. Go be poor some place else.

The perfect example of the case I'm making. Your words make my case.

PS - you may not always be able to afford to pay the cost of housing (in Florida).

 

[protectionist]

You want to take away rights of landlords who have mortages, taxes and maintenance costs. If you can't afford an apartment, go to a HUD property.. Its for people like you.

Post 242 answered that.

And landlords should not have "rights" to gouge renters at ANY rental rates, any more than car manufacturers have rights to make cars without air bags and seat belts (which they don't). How unfair to those car manufacturers that they have to spend money on features to protect the public, but landlords exercise no concession at all.

And landlords were making big profits before Biden's migrant dumps, and the rents started skyrocketing, so talk about "mortages, taxes and maintenance costs" is a red herring laughingstock (if it werent such a serious issue)

 

[Blues Man]

No ? Then what is YOUR solution to moving out of a massively increased rent, in a massively rent increase state, where the housing market is changed to exhorbitantly high rents, and vacancies at affordable rate are no longer existent ?

Buy a multi family live in one unit rent the others.

It's how I bought my first home when I was 22

 

[surada]

Post 242 answered that.

Contact senior services or governor Desantis or both.

 

[protectionist]

Buy a multi family live in one unit rent the others.

It's how I bought my first home when I was 22

I'm lucky if I can buy just one old single family home, and I don't want anything in Florida. I want to get out of this state, and moving is expensive.

 

[protectionist]

Contact senior services or governor Desantis or both.

Been there done that. Services direct you to agencies with 3-4 year waiting lists.

Desantis (aide) answer was "Talk to your landlord" Translation: we're not going to do our job and protect you.

Can't wait to get out of this state.

 

[task0778]

When you apply rent controls, you dampen the incentive for developers to bring new rental properties to market. Every investment is subject to a risk vs reward evaluation, and rent controls obviously impact the reward side, to the extent that not as many new rental properties are developed. And landlords find converting existing properties to other uses more attractive and developers find new rentable accommodations less profitable to build, compounding this scarcity problem. A 1994 rent‐control expansion in San Francisco, for example, led to landlords converting rental properties to condos for higher‐income families, and market rents increased by over 5 percent. Rent control not only increased the cost of non‐controlled accommodation, but it also accelerated gentrification. On the flip side, positive effects have been seen when rent controls were abolished. In Cambridge, Massachusetts, for example, economists found that direct dollar investments in housing units more than doubled over a few years. Maintenance and improvements tend to decline.

Consider:


St. Paul Just Implemented the Nation’s Strictest Rent Control Law. It’s Already Backfiring Tremendously

It's one of the strictest rent control measures in the US—if not the world.

Tuesday, November 16, 2021

The city just approved a rent control measure that will limit landlords’ ability to increase rents on its 65,000+ rental properties. They will not be able to increase prices by more than 3 percent each year under the new law. Controversially, the initiative does not account for inflation and applies to new construction, not just existing properties. This makes the St. Paul rent control measure one of the strictest in the US—if not the world.

In St. Paul, these consequences are already starting to materialize.

“Less than 24 hours after St. Paul voters approved one of the country's most stringent rent control policies, Nicolle Goodman's phone started to ring,” the Star-Tribune reports. “Developers were calling to tell the city's director of planning and economic development they were placing projects on hold, putting hundreds of new housing units at risk.”

“We, like everybody else, are re-evaluating what — if any — future business activity we'll be doing in St. Paul," major developer Jim Stolpestad told the newspaper.

Another major developer, Ryan Cos, has already pulled plans for 3 new buildings, according to the Pioneer Press.

St. Paul Just Implemented the Nation’s Strictest Rent Control Law. It’s Already Backfiring Tremendously | Brad Polumbo

 

[Mr Natural]

Been there done that. Services direct you to agencies with 3-4 year waiting lists.

Desantis (aide) answer was "Talk to you landlord" Translation: we're not going to do our job and protect you.

Can't wait to get out of this state.

But isn't Florida like a conservative paradise?

 

[protectionist]

But isn't Florida like a conservative paradise?

Not any more. The last way to CONSERVE America is to let thousands of foreign migrants come into your state (just so they can vote for Biden), and chew up the housing availability.

 

[Flash]

The perfect example of the case I'm making. Your words make my case.

PS - you may not always be able to afford to pay the cost of housing (in Florida).

Then go live in Mississippi. They have the cheapest housing cost in the US.

I saw a video the other day of housing cost in Ukraine. Yoy can buy a three bedroom home on three acres with other buildings for $3,000. A 20 year mortgage would cost you how much, $20 a month?

 

[protectionist]

When you apply rent controls, you dampen the incentive for developers to bring new rental properties to market.

No you don't. They were making HUGE profited before the migrant dumps occured with their resulting skyrocketing rents.

As for the dumb articles blabbered that new rent controls are "backfiring", New York City had rent controls since 1920, and millions of people were born and raised there because of that. Millions of people lived there because of that. The New York Yankees and New York Giants wouldnt have existed without it. Never would have been a Lou Gehrig or a Babe Ruth.

 

[protectionist]

Then go live in Mississippi. They have the cheapest housing cost in the US.

I saw a video the other day of housing cost in Ukraine. Yoy can buy a three bedroom home on three acres with other buildings for $3,000. A 20 year mortgage would cost you how much, $20 a month?

Why should millions of renters have to pack up and move (which they wont, because they cant afford it), when a relatively small group of landlords don't have to make any concessions ? (as other businesses commonly do)

No, the burden should be on the landlords to be reasonable in protecting the public, same as other businesses.

Ukraine ? What will life be like there, after Russia takes it over ?

 

[task0778]

No you don't. They were making HUGE profited before the migrant dumps occured with their resulting skyrocketing rents.

As for the dumb articles blabbered that new rent controls are "backfiring", New York City had rent controls since 1920, and millions of people were born and raised there because of that. Millions of people lived there because of that. The New York Yankees and New York Giants wouldnt have existed without it. Never would have been a Lou Gehrig or a Babe Ruth.

New York City had rent controls since 1920

Not true. In 1920, New York adopted Emergency Rent Laws, which effectively charged the courts of New York State with their administration. When challenged by tenants, rent increases were reviewed by a standard of "reasonableness." The definition of reasonableness was subject to judicial interpretation. Certain apartments were decontrolled beginning in 1926, and the Rent Laws of 1920 expired completely in June 1929, although limited protections against evictions considered unjust were continued.


In the post-war period rent controls were in operation in many American cities. By reducing the return to landlords it made sense for them to let their properties go to rack and ruin. This was a major source of ‘urban blight’. As the economist Assar Lindbeck put it, “In many cases rent control appears to be the most efficient technique presently known to destroy a city—except for bombing.”


So strong is the evidence for this that we have that rarest of things – a consensus among economists. In 2012, economists were polled with the following question;

Local ordinances that limit rent increases for some rental housing units, such as in New York and San Francisco, have had a positive impact over the past three decades on the amount and quality of broadly affordable rental housing in cities that have used them.

81% of them disagreed.

81% of economists agree that rent controls are bad policy


So, you are among the 19%.

 

[protectionist]

New York City had rent controls since 1920

Not true. In 1920, New York adopted Emergency Rent Laws, which effectively charged the courts of New York State with their administration. When challenged by tenants, rent increases were reviewed by a standard of "reasonableness." The definition of reasonableness was subject to judicial interpretation. Certain apartments were decontrolled beginning in 1926, and the Rent Laws of 1920 expired completely in June 1929, although limited protections against evictions considered unjust were continued.


In the post-war period rent controls were in operation in many American cities. By reducing the return to landlords it made sense for them to let their properties go to rack and ruin. This was a major source of ‘urban blight’. As the economist Assar Lindbeck put it, “In many cases rent control appears to be the most efficient technique presently known to destroy a city—except for bombing.”


So strong is the evidence for this that we have that rarest of things – a consensus among economists. In 2012, economists were polled with the following question;

Local ordinances that limit rent increases for some rental housing units, such as in New York and San Francisco, have had a positive impact over the past three decades on the amount and quality of broadly affordable rental housing in cities that have used them.

81% of them disagreed.

81% of economists agree that rent controls are bad policy


So, you are among the 19%.

I know what they had, and what they had in 1920, is some form of rent control. I know a lot more about it than what you posted here.

1. As for your alleged 81% of economists, how many if them grew up in a rent-controlled apartment, which if there had been no rent control there they might nit have ever been born ?

2. As I have stated before, this thread is about the effects the Florida housing crisi, on Florida renters, not landlords or economists or THEIR perceived economics.

 

[task0778]

I know what they had, and what they had in 1920, is some form of rent control. I know a lot more about it than what you posted here.

1. As for your alleged 81% of economists, how many if them grew up in a rent-controlled apartment, which if there had been no rent control there they might nit have ever been born ?

2. As I have stated before, this thread is about the effects the Florida housing crisi, on Florida renters, not landlords or economists or THEIR perceived economics.

No doubt you know more about rent control than I do, but that does not make you correct.

1. As for your alleged 81% of economists, how many if them grew up in a rent-controlled apartment, which if there had been no rent control there they might nit have ever been born ?

Totally irrelevant.


2. As I have stated before, this thread is about the effects the Florida housing crisi, on Florida renters, not landlords or economists or THEIR perceived economics.

I do not believe that human nature and the laws of economics change with respect to location, and you were talking about rent control, which actually is nothing more than putting a band-aid on a problem instead of fixing it. How do you not see that rent controls affects landlords and the construction of new rental properties? Is that not the real answer to the problem of high rents? I.E., more supply of rental properties?

Curious to know of any economists who support the idea of rent controls, I'd like to see their logic and evidence on that.

 

[Flash]

Why should millions of renters have to pack up and move (which they wont, because they cant afford it), when a relatively small group of landlords don't have to make any concessions ? (as other businesses commonly do)

No, the burden should be on the landlords to be reasonable in protecting the public, same as other businesses.

Ukraine ? What will life be like there, after Russia takes it over ?

No, you are confused. The burden is on you to live in housing that you can afford.

If you are so poor as to not be able to afford housing in the US then you may have to be homeless or move to a cheaper country.

 

[AZrailwhale]

I'm lucky if I can buy just one old single family home, and I don't want anything in Florida. I want to get out of this state, and moving is expensive.

Put your stuff in your car and go. The only cost is gas. You are a renter so you can’t have a lot of stuff anyway. You just want everyone else to fix your problem