Algorithmic rent-pricing litigation expands under new state and local laws • Hacker News Board

Re: Algorithmic rent-pricing litigation expands under new state and local laws

#71

Post by Aurornis » Sun, Aug 30, 2026, 4:10 PM UTC

BoiledCabbage wrote: post #64

Aurornis wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Under rent control the highest possible rent is set by laws. If you fall behind on the allowed rent increase you’re usually not allowed to catch up to market rate later, such as when your tenant leaves and you put the unit back on the market. So to avoid getting stuck at below market rate with no legal way to catch up, you have to take the maximum allowable rent increase every year. In some situations it’s better to…

> Landlords switch to raising rents in unison by the maximum allowable amount every year Blaming this on rent control? This entire take is absurd. Because of the simple fact that landlords, especially using this software, do this in cities without rent control. Unless now type arguing that Berkley rent control forces landlords in cities without rent control to seek maximum rents... Rent control is flawed, limiting ho…

> Blaming this on rent control? This entire take is absurd

Rent control is one of the few topics where the vast majority of economists agree on something. It makes people who don't understand second-order effects really angry when the conclusion doesn't match what they want to see, but it's been proven out across the world so many times that anyone who refuses to acknowledge the real problems with rent control is either uninformed or denying reality at this point.

Re: Algorithmic rent-pricing litigation expands under new state and local laws

#72

Post by juiceland » Sun, Aug 30, 2026, 4:43 PM UTC

Aurornis wrote: post #19

Chinjut wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would landlords not seek the highest possible rent without rent control?

Under rent control the highest possible rent is set by laws. If you fall behind on the allowed rent increase you’re usually not allowed to catch up to market rate later, such as when your tenant leaves and you put the unit back on the market. So to avoid getting stuck at below market rate with no legal way to catch up, you have to take the maximum allowable rent increase every year. In some situations it’s better to…

If the maximum allowable rent under rent control is bearable by the market, why would a landlord not do that in the absence of rent control? Are there landlords that are stupid and hate money?

Re: Algorithmic rent-pricing litigation expands under new state and local laws

#73

Post by FireBeyond » Sun, Aug 30, 2026, 5:53 PM UTC

arrosenberg wrote: post #15

demibabs wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you elaborate on what is meant by “rent-fixing”?

A bunch of landlords all use the same software to tell them how to price rents. The software continually pushes prices higher and higher. The software requires landlords to use their pricing as a condition of use. Now you have a price-fixing cartel for rent.

And those corporations can decide that they'd rather the apartment sit vacant than be rented at below exactly what they'd like to get for it, bolstered in part by the fact they can claim the non-occupancy as a loss on their taxes.

Re: Algorithmic rent-pricing litigation expands under new state and local laws

#74

Post by FireBeyond » Sun, Aug 30, 2026, 6:35 PM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #42

Governments are always unsuccessfully trying to repeal the Law of Supply and Demand. They've been trying to do it for the last 4,000 years. https://www.amazon.com/dp/1610161408/

Well, governments have successfully enabled wealth disparity to the point where corporations are buying up several tens of thousands of homes. Maybe free range capitalism isn't the amazing utopia it's cracked up to be?

Re: Algorithmic rent-pricing litigation expands under new state and local laws

#75

Post by labcomputer » Sun, Aug 30, 2026, 6:51 PM UTC

Nursie wrote: post #41

Aurornis wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think rent controlled units that sit empty should be subject to a tax based on an escalating percentage of the market rent They would just be taken off the market and then relisted later. Forcing people to rent their properties and also forcing the price isn’t something I can get behind. People need to be able to choose what they do with their property.

In a city or country with housing shortages or a very tight market, that’s asking a lot. People need homes, and there is a balance to be struck for the public good.

So let them build enough housing!

Why is this so difficult? We will try absolutely anything except to allow enough housing to be built, and then ask why there isn't enough housing. It's madness.

If there isn't enough housing, no amount of shenanigans can overcome that inconvenient fact, except to build more housing. That's it. That is the only thing which can alleviate a housing shortage.

Re: Algorithmic rent-pricing litigation expands under new state and local laws

#76

Post by WalterBright » Sun, Aug 30, 2026, 8:36 PM UTC

FireBeyond wrote: post #74

WalterBright wrote: post #42

Governments are always unsuccessfully trying to repeal the Law of Supply and Demand. They've been trying to do it for the last 4,000 years. https://www.amazon.com/dp/1610161408/

Well, governments have successfully enabled wealth disparity to the point where corporations are buying up several tens of thousands of homes. Maybe free range capitalism isn't the amazing utopia it's cracked up to be?

1. There are 90 million single family homes in the US

2. If you want to live in a house, but for less than 5 years, it is better to rent

3. If corporations really want to buy all the houses, there's a business opportunity for you. Build houses and sell them to the corporations at exorbitant prices.

4. Nobody is making anybody sell their home to a corporation.

5. Renting out homes does not reduce the supply of housing.

6. Homes are crummy investments.

Capitalist countries are indeed quite amazing compared to socialist countries. That's why people flee socialist countries and try to get in the US.

Re: Algorithmic rent-pricing litigation expands under new state and local laws

#77

Post by WalterBright » Sun, Aug 30, 2026, 8:37 PM UTC

socialest wrote: post #51

WalterBright wrote: post #42

Governments are always unsuccessfully trying to repeal the Law of Supply and Demand. They've been trying to do it for the last 4,000 years. https://www.amazon.com/dp/1610161408/

Except by creating supply, like socialist run countries do by building social housing.

They generally become expensive slums. Including the slums in America built by the government.

Re: Algorithmic rent-pricing litigation expands under new state and local laws

#78

Post by seanmcdirmid » Sun, Aug 30, 2026, 8:51 PM UTC

stymaar wrote: post #56

smitty1e wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TL;DR => Sowell, "Basic Economics".

A.K.A creationism for economics.

supply and demand is about as basic as things get, and its never been proven wrong.

Re: Algorithmic rent-pricing litigation expands under new state and local laws

#79

Post by FireBeyond » Sun, Aug 30, 2026, 9:41 PM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #76

FireBeyond wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, governments have successfully enabled wealth disparity to the point where corporations are buying up several tens of thousands of homes. Maybe free range capitalism isn't the amazing utopia it's cracked up to be?

1. There are 90 million single family homes in the US 2. If you want to live in a house, but for less than 5 years, it is better to rent 3. If corporations really want to buy all the houses, there's a business opportunity for you. Build houses and sell them to the corporations at exorbitant prices. 4. Nobody is making anybody sell their home to a corporation. 5. Renting out homes does not reduce the supply of housing…

1. And? Most are occupied. How many unoccupied SFHs are there?

2. I am a home owner. There is a certain subset of the populace that likes to act as though renters have it so easy, because owning a home is a never ending stream of credit card swipes for the next four (or five) digit maintenance expense - when they're not posting memes talking about not having to pay property tax or insurance or even utilities, as if landlords absorb those out of the goodness of their heart.

These corporations, if you read the article in the first place are colluding across other corporate landlords because if they don't get the rent they want, they would rather keep the occupancy vacant, because then they also get to claim it as a tax loss.

> Capitalist countries are indeed quite amazing compared to socialist countries. That's why people flee socialist countries and try to get in the US.

People don't generally flee socialism, but corruption. But hey, here we are in the US where we're doing a spectacular job of showing what a corrupt capitalist society looks like. And hey, look, the number of people trying "to get in here" is dropping like a rock.