That's interesting. When all is said and done, I'm not opposed to discriminating against future renters. My reasoning: I grew up in Portland, and I love(d) th

That's interesting. When all is said and done, I'm not opposed to discriminating against future renters. My reasoning: I grew up in Portland, and I love(d) the art and music scene there. And, lots of the people who were at the forefront of building that culture (rightly or wrongly) did not (or could not) invest in their long term housing future by buying a crappy house in a terrible neighborhood that now is totally gentrified. I feel like they made an investment in the quality of life that I benefited from, and rent control seems like it helps them. It does discriminate against future renters. But, isn't that the point, that future renters didn't invest in the city in the same way? I would love to find a solution that makes it so that future artists can come in and make the same contributions without having to be trustafarians, and it seems like organizations like the Actors Fund in NYC (https://actorsfund.org/ https://actorsfund.org/) work to make this possible in a small way. I do see that rent control policies discriminate (prevents a pure free market) against property owners. But, it does not seem like we are really accounting for all the benefits they get when a property increases in value because of the investments made by renters in the area. If we could do that honestly, maybe we could come up with a more honest way to handle rent control.