4 ms·
No, just leaving them vacant while the value increases.
by icebraining 7y ago
No, just leaving them vacant while the value increases.
- bakuninsbart 7y agoSF Metro vacancy rate is below the national average for large metro areas.[0] [0] https://www.sfchronicle.com/realestate/article/An-estimated-100-000-homes-are-sitting-empty-in-13692007.php https://www.sfchronicle.com/realestate/article/An-estimated-...
- icebraining 7y agoAnd if those markets were the same except for the rent control rules, we could conclude that rent control doesn't increase the vacancy rate. But they aren't.
- tibbon 7y agoCool- next up, a tax on vacant properties. Maybe they will have to sell. Perhaps the people can again seize the means of production (part of that being stable housing). I’d far rather know another 100,000 units are owned by the people that live in them than 100 landlords owning and profiteering from those units. If this “disrupts” the entire rental industry, that’s fine with me. Didn’t bring much value anyway
- rayiner 7y agoThat’s worked great everywhere it’s been tried!
- icebraining 7y ago> I’d far rather know another 100,000 units are owned by the people that live in them than 100 landlords owning and profiteering from those units. I'd rather have that too! But it's not the result of these patchwork rules. Fix it properly instead.