3 ms·

I don't think that's really an anti-trust problem, and I don't think you can call a majority of voters in an area a "cartel". It's a matter of giving the majori

I don't think that's really an anti-trust problem, and I don't think you can call a majority of voters in an area a "cartel". It's a matter of giving the majority of residents/voters what they want, even if it's bad for them in the long run.

AnthonyMouse 7y ago
> I don't think that's really an anti-trust problem What kind of problem is it then? High prices being maintained by a purposeful conspiracy of existing owners to constrain supply sure sounds a lot like an antitrust problem. > It's a matter of giving the majority of residents/voters what they want, even if it's bad for them in the long run. But it's not necessarily bad for them. They make more money by monopolizing the local real estate market in the same way as any other cartel monopolizes anything. Even if their choices are bad for the city itself, they may be planning to sell and move to another area before the long-term negative consequences to the city are felt.
- klipt 7y ago
  > What kind of problem is it then? Regulatory capture?
  - nerfhammer 7y ago
    That's hardly mutually exclusive with cartel behavior
kortilla 7y ago
It’s still a cartel from a market perspective. They are colluding to control supply.