5 ms·
Why would it be "wasteful" to prioritize quality of life for residents over investors' profits? Some cities (like Copenhagen) structure their housing mainly as
by mjn 10y ago
Why would it be "wasteful" to prioritize quality of life for residents over investors' profits? Some cities (like Copenhagen) structure their housing mainly as owner-occupied cooperatives for a reason. A functioning city that works for its residents is valuable, and it'd be wasteful to throw one away in hopes of speculating on some kind of Disneyland attraction.
- jstanley 10y ago> Why would it be "wasteful" to prioritize quality of life for residents over investors' profits? Because investors' profits don't come from nowhere. You're prioritising the residents' wishes over the tourists' wishes, despite the fact that the tourists are willing to pay more to use the property. That's not fair.
- gotchange 10y ago> Why would it be "wasteful" to prioritize quality of life for residents over investors' profits? Fair enough but are you willing to compensate the investors/landlords for the lost income from foregoing these opportunities or asking the govt to have the tax payers foot the bill to help tenants stay in their properties at artificially lower than market rates? I say let supply and demand sort this out and just focus our efforts on exposing anti-competitive violations like price collusion among landlords etc etc. Usually landlords/investors who are attracted to this "trade" are lured by the prospects of short-term profits and if that doesn't materialize for any reason, they'd seek more stable income by entering into long-term arrangements at more economic rates with permanent tenants.