I'm not sure if disenfranchise is the right word to describe it, but rent control leads to the following, in SF at least: - Not caring about getting new housin

I'm not sure if disenfranchise is the right word to describe it, but rent control leads to the following, in SF at least: - Not caring about getting new housing built, because the tenant is under rent control, and their housing hasn't really gotten more expensive, not their problem etc. - Not wanting new housing to be built because new housing is not subject to rent control — They'd rather keep the old units. - New renters subsidizing old renters because landlords can't charge market rates to old tenants, creating a divide between old tenants and new ones. - Creates a sort of class divide between the haves and have-nots, well off newcomers paying exorbitant prices vs. those less well off trying not to be gentrified away from "their" neighborhood. This is also a reason many oppose new housing in lower income neighborhoods (Mission, for example). Taken together it is easy to see that policies like rent control make it difficult to organize behind a common interest (More, and cheaper housing for everyone) the way homeowners do (Keeping property values high). I am not suggesting this is the only reason housing prices are extreme, but I do believe that if renters were more closely aligned in such a tenant city like SF, they could easily overpower NIMBYsm to achieve their interests. 60% of SF renters are under rent control [1] [1] http://commissions.sfplanning.org/cpcpackets/2017‐007933CWP.pdf http://commissions.sfplanning.org/cpcpackets/2017‐007933CWP....