3 ms·
It's not just people moving to the area. Also consider existing renters who need to move, or people who become renting-age. I will need to move out of the cit
by Solvitieg 8y ago
It's not just people moving to the area.
Also consider existing renters who need to move, or people who become renting-age.
I will need to move out of the city if I lose my place. I'm paying $1000 below market value.
- throwawaysea 8y ago[Apologies - copying a comment I made elsewhere, but it is relevant to the point you made] Here's a better alternative to rent control. Instead of rent control on a per-unit basis, cities could provide subsidies to long-term low-income residents that reduce their personal expenditure on rent. The subsidies would be paid for through taxes, thus amortizing the subsidy across the local tax base instead of impacting an individual landlord or unit. But let me note that this must be done only for long-term residents (that is, those who have been there for years). For example, if someone moved to SF within the last 5 years, they should have known what the price of living there is. This is one of the most desirable cities, and it makes sense that it would be expensive and that not everyone would get to live there. Those moving there in recent years therefore, simply made an irresponsible personal choice and must yield to the consequences, rather than being subsidized at others' expense.