5 ms·

BS. Nobody is forced to live in these apartments. If you are looking to rent and this is important to you then rent someplace else.

by vaadu 10y ago

slantedview 10y ago
In cities with not enough housing (like, say, SF), then someone generally is forced to live there since alternative options may be slim to none.
- eropple 10y ago
  "In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread."
zaque1213 10y ago
I agree with you. The apartment I recently moved into made it clear up front that hey had an exclusive cable and wireless provider. But the cost of the service is bundled into my rent. It's a great apartment in a great location and still cheaper than other apartments around so I decided I didn't care that much about choosing my own provider. It's not ideal and I thinks it's a shady practice, but I'm willing to live with it for a year or two.
- pavel_lishin 10y ago
  Exactly - when looking for an apartment, unfortunately the ISP is pretty far down the list. Location, amenities, safety, layout, all end up being more important.
  - zaque1213 10y ago
    Yes indeed. Chose my apartment because it's a five minute drive from work and in Houston that is damn near impossible to find. I'd let the apartment owner kick me in the face every time I walked in my room if that's what it took not to return to my old commute.
vkou 10y ago
Nobody's forced to live in apartments that aren't up to code either, but that doesn't mean that we allow slumlords to squat on what could otherwise be useful real estate. Due to the very limited amount of rental space, and the difficulty of constructing more of it, rentals are a heavily regulated market. If you don't want to deal with regulation, perhaps you should pick a line of business with a lower barrier for entry.
dublinben 10y ago
What if all landlords in your area have independently reached these exclusivity agreements with a single provider? What choice do you have then?
- sokoloff 10y ago
  Rent one of their units under such an agreement Rent in some other area Buy a place I can't tell if the original article is legitimate journalism, a submarine piece for Webpass, or a bit of both.
  - st3v3r 10y ago
    So no real choice, then.
adrenalinelol 10y ago
You're assuming said options exist, depending on where you live, they normally don't.
cm3 10y ago
While you have a point, you're assuming that everybody is at liberty to live where they want to while making a living the best way they can. I too wish it was the case, but not everybody can work remotely (or even has the desire to), or otherwise can take the most appropriate job while not compromising on their housing situation.
st3v3r 10y ago
"Nobody is forced to live in these apartments." Ahh, the old, "No one forced someone to live there, so everything that happens is A OK." That's not an argument, and that's not justification. That's just you admitting this is a shitty practice that needs to stop.

BS. Nobody is forced to live in these apartments. If you are looking to rent and this is important to you then rent someplace else.

by vaadu 10y ago

BS. Nobody is forced to live in these apartments. If you are looking to rent and this is important to you then rent someplace else.

slantedview 10y ago

In cities with not enough housing (like, say, SF), then someone generally is forced to live there since alternative options may be slim to none.

eropple 10y ago
"In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread."

zaque1213 10y ago

I agree with you. The apartment I recently moved into made it clear up front that hey had an exclusive cable and wireless provider. But the cost of the service is bundled into my rent. It's a great apartment in a great location and still cheaper than other apartments around so I decided I didn't care that much about choosing my own provider. It's not ideal and I thinks it's a shady practice, but I'm willing to live with it for a year or two.

pavel_lishin 10y ago
Exactly - when looking for an apartment, unfortunately the ISP is pretty far down the list. Location, amenities, safety, layout, all end up being more important.
- zaque1213 10y ago
  Yes indeed. Chose my apartment because it's a five minute drive from work and in Houston that is damn near impossible to find. I'd let the apartment owner kick me in the face every time I walked in my room if that's what it took not to return to my old commute.

vkou 10y ago

Nobody's forced to live in apartments that aren't up to code either, but that doesn't mean that we allow slumlords to squat on what could otherwise be useful real estate. Due to the very limited amount of rental space, and the difficulty of constructing more of it, rentals are a heavily regulated market. If you don't want to deal with regulation, perhaps you should pick a line of business with a lower barrier for entry.

dublinben 10y ago

What if all landlords in your area have independently reached these exclusivity agreements with a single provider? What choice do you have then?

sokoloff 10y ago
Rent one of their units under such an agreement Rent in some other area Buy a place I can't tell if the original article is legitimate journalism, a submarine piece for Webpass, or a bit of both.
- st3v3r 10y ago
  So no real choice, then.

adrenalinelol 10y ago

You're assuming said options exist, depending on where you live, they normally don't.

cm3 10y ago

While you have a point, you're assuming that everybody is at liberty to live where they want to while making a living the best way they can. I too wish it was the case, but not everybody can work remotely (or even has the desire to), or otherwise can take the most appropriate job while not compromising on their housing situation.

st3v3r 10y ago

"Nobody is forced to live in these apartments." Ahh, the old, "No one forced someone to live there, so everything that happens is A OK." That's not an argument, and that's not justification. That's just you admitting this is a shitty practice that needs to stop.