Stanford paper says rent control is driving up cost of housing in San Francisco
1–10 of 326 posts
Re: Stanford paper says rent control is driving up cost of housing in San Francisco
#2[deleted]
Re: Stanford paper says rent control is driving up cost of housing in San Francisco
#3>The solution is to stop allowance of condo conversions or TIC (Tenancy In Common) conversions,” she said.
You can always trust them to keep digging.
Re: Stanford paper says rent control is driving up cost of housing in San Francisco
#4Now, I have not read the paper, but I would have thought the free market combined with sky-high wages and demand, combined with a lack of inventory, was the cause.
Rent Control surely just prevents local families from being muscled out by the tech employees?
Re: Stanford paper says rent control is driving up cost of housing in San Francisco
#5Rent control solves some problems. Creates other problems. Similar to almost any intervention in free markets. Sometimes the cost of intervention outweigh benefits, sometimes they don't.
Rent control allows people (wealthy or poor) to remain where they are without purchasing their residence. Unfortunately, to do accomplish this objective, it increases the price for new arrivals (be they wealthy or poor).
In California, Prop 13 does the same thing -- drives up the cost of housing for everyone other than the people who already own a home.
Re: Stanford paper says rent control is driving up cost of housing in San Francisco
#6Now, I have not read the paper, but I would have thought the free market combined with sky-high wages and demand, combined with a lack of inventory, was the cause. Rent Control surely just prevents local families from being muscled out by the tech employees?
Rent control removes the incentive to build new apartments. There are second order effects that make it counterproductive. Even the socialist economists agree rent control is terrible.
Re: Stanford paper says rent control is driving up cost of housing in San Francisco
#7Now, I have not read the paper, but I would have thought the free market combined with sky-high wages and demand, combined with a lack of inventory, was the cause. Rent Control surely just prevents local families from being muscled out by the tech employees?
But rent control manipulates the free market. With rent control, people who might otherwise move, don't. Further, people who might rent a vacant apartment while they're overseas don't. Or people who start a family and move to the suburbs keep their city place as a pied a tier. So supply is suppressed, but demand is not.
Re: Stanford paper says rent control is driving up cost of housing in San Francisco
#8Now, I have not read the paper, but I would have thought the free market combined with sky-high wages and demand, combined with a lack of inventory, was the cause. Rent Control surely just prevents local families from being muscled out by the tech employees?
Rent control removes the incentive to build new apartments. There are second order effects that make it counterproductive. Even the socialist economists agree rent control is terrible.
So as to not remove the incentive to build new apartments, in San Francisco, rent control only applies to units built before 1978.
The SF rent control law (like the CA Prop 13) does allow rents to increase, but very slowly. It would be possible to have both without as strong of adverse consequences by changing the ceiling at which both are permitted to increase.
Re: Stanford paper says rent control is driving up cost of housing in San Francisco
#9Now, I have not read the paper, but I would have thought the free market combined with sky-high wages and demand, combined with a lack of inventory, was the cause. Rent Control surely just prevents local families from being muscled out by the tech employees?
Rent control removes the incentive to build new apartments. There are second order effects that make it counterproductive. Even the socialist economists agree rent control is terrible.
Everyone who wasn’t gentrified out of their home agrees it’s great. An economist might foolishly brush off everyone being priced out of their neighborhoods as simply “externalities” but San Francisco’s politicians thankfully have a more nuanced view of the situation.
And, as ghouse indicates, new housing isn’t subject to rent control so developers make a killing if they get approval.
Re: Stanford paper says rent control is driving up cost of housing in San Francisco
#10Rent control solves some problems. Creates other problems. Similar to almost any intervention in free markets. Sometimes the cost of intervention outweigh benefits, sometimes they don't. Rent control allows people (wealthy or poor) to remain where they are without purchasing their residence. Unfortunately, to do accomplish this objective, it increases the price for new arrivals (be they wealthy or poor). In Californi…
> Sometimes the cost of intervention outweigh benefits, sometimes they don't.
+ Sometimes it works for a short period, as the policy reflected the economy at the time of creation, then becomes irrelevant via technology/market reaction to policy/general progress... but yet stays a policy for decades.
The important point is that we rarely ever measures whether it does work or not, and policy tends to have an extremely long shelf-life.
My ideal state would have:
1) a well-staffed multi-partisan agency entirely dedicated to reviewing policy, with a mandate of removing any policy having a net-detrimental effect on society. By launching scientific studies of the effects with subpoena power over other agencies, making policy recommendations, and potentially the power to temporarily suspend regulations until reviewed by congress.
2) require timeframes attached to most policies, forcing future reviews which must factor in measured results (likely from agency mentioned in 1) or face expiry