4 ms·
> you're the one who needs to square that cognitive dissonance - not me. No, you are. You have imaginary rules about who should be protected in a city (based o
by TurdF3rguson 7mo ago
> you're the one who needs to square that cognitive dissonance - not me.
No, you are. You have imaginary rules about who should be protected in a city (based on seniority??) that nobody else is aware of and are certainly not following. It goes by things like age and net worth, and basically nobody gives a shit how long you've lived somewhere.
- vkou 7mo ago> You have imaginary rules about who should be protected in a city (based on seniority??) Rent control is not imaginary (Any more than any other rules are), and yes, that is exactly how it functions, for the purpose that I have described. It advantages senior occupants (Who are grandfathered into controlled rates), at the expense of junior ones, or ones who don't live there yet (Who are presented with inflated rates, for obvious economic reasons).
- TurdF3rguson 7mo agoThere is no duty of cities to protect residents from "domestic migration". This exists entirely in your head.
- vkou 7mo agoThere's no duty of cities to do anything, yet they choose to do quite a bit. Some of them choose to have rent control.
- lostmsu 7mo agoThere's no "No" for you. You might be right and vkou's rent control is a bad solution, but he is certainly right and the laws as is are hypocritical.