5 ms·
> I don't have time to plow through the link you provided in your edit/update. But I think that for the specific issue you're trying to address, a pure subsidy
by Supermancho 4y ago
> I don't have time to plow through the link you provided in your edit/update. But I think that for the specific issue you're trying to address, a pure subsidy might work better than rent control.
I agree with this. It could work better if only legislation could keep up with inflation, which it doesn't. Hence fixed income is best subsidized by fixed rents.
- AnimalMuppet 4y agoSo rent control is better because the legislature won't keep paying attention? That's at least plausibly correct. If you don't trust the legislature, though, you might not trust them to write the rent control legislation in a way where the cure isn't worse than the disease. But you could argue that they only have to get that right once, whereas the subsidy they have to keep getting right. (Though they could plausibly write an inflation escalator clause into the subsidy legislation...) I still don't think that I agree with you. But you've made a case that made me think, which is about the highest praise I can give to an HN comment.
- Supermancho 4y ago> If you don't trust the legislature, though, you might not trust them to write the rent control legislation in a way where the cure isn't worse than the disease That was my initial assertion. > It's always the implementation that falls apart (because politicians). > But you've made a case that made me think I appreciate the earnest engagement.