3 ms·
>The victim is the person not able to rent on a first-come-first-serve basis instead of someone willing to pay more than is allowed. That's indeed the only sen
by YPPH 5y ago
>The victim is the person not able to rent on a first-come-first-serve basis instead of someone willing to pay more than is allowed.
That's indeed the only sensible thing I can think of. But it's a very odd thing to me (that a mutual, consensual agreement between two people is governed by the interests of third parties).
- TheOtherHobbes 5y agoThat's because there's a thing called the social contract, which makes it clear to anyone who can parse situations like a mature adult that all policy has wider social consequences, and short term gimme gimme can have disastrous long term results. And also because "consensual agreements" rarely are. Typically one party has more power than the other and can force terms. By definition, you only get truly consensual agreements when the balance of power is equal - which it very much isn't in rental markets with deliberately restricted stock.