messed up.
“Your monthly rent .. shall increase from $2145 to $8900”
371–380 of 628 posts
Re: “Your monthly rent .. shall increase from $2145 to $8900”
#372This person should be grateful they were able to live in a place in such high demand so cheaply due to unfair rent control laws. If a 4x increase in rent is bearable by the market then it's not a sign of landlord greed, it's a sign of a broken system. I'm sure if this person was offered the opportunity to make an extra 5k a month with little to no change in effort on their part they would do so and be offended if peo…
> If a 4x increase in rent is bearable by the market then it's not a sign of landlord greed, it's a sign of a broken system. It's not bearable by the market. $2145 is low but market rate is nowhere near $8900 for a place like this; not even half that. This is clearly an attempt to force the tenant out with an inflated rate. I'm not going to comment on either sides rights here but this rate is not simply "what the mar…
Can we really even say what "market rate" is anymore?
Re: “Your monthly rent .. shall increase from $2145 to $8900”
#373Earlier quoted context omitted.
1) Maybe they don't have plans to do anything with it today, but they don't want to get locked into renting to a tenant for decades. That's not irrational. 2) No, that's not just pushing the problem back a bit. That is wrong. There will always be owners who want do do something with their property somewhere down the road. If you allow them to rent it out in the meantime (without getting locked into a forever contract…
Owners may evict a tenant in an owner move in. There are a variety of regulations that you can get caught up in, designed to protect from abuse by commercial landlords, but practically speaking, if you own a single building and wish to evict rent controlled tenants live in one of the units, you'll be able to. Your objections continue to demonstrate an unfamiliarity with rent control in sf. @harryh: your complaint is…
Not sure why you didn't reply to my comment, but to answer your edit:
In the current instance it seems pretty likely that the owner has no intention of moving in but instead wants to sell an unoccupied house.
Re: “Your monthly rent .. shall increase from $2145 to $8900”
#374Hey everyone, time to retake San Jose.
Re: “Your monthly rent .. shall increase from $2145 to $8900”
#375Earlier quoted context omitted.
Build where? You know there's water all around it right?
If only there were some way for humans to survive on water!
In all seriousness though, I'm fairly certain that a repurposed cruise ship turned luxury condo building anchored off the coast with a free, regular speed boat shuttle could be a profitable business given the bonkers prices in SF proper.
Re: “Your monthly rent .. shall increase from $2145 to $8900”
#376Earlier quoted context omitted.
One of the problems is that San Francisco in the 60s and 70s passed rather strict zoning ordinances to prevent "Manhattanization". So, this city that has a very limited amount of space cannot grow upwards to help meet demand.
This is the real problem. SF is loathe to build out skyscrapers even though it's been proven that dense urban areas are the most efficient way to live. The earthquake argument isn't really a sound one in this day and age so the only thing left is "we don't like change."
The most conservative liberals on earth.
Re: “Your monthly rent .. shall increase from $2145 to $8900”
#377Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ironically, rent control is exactly why there is so little housing available in SF. Iirc, only 30% of the voting population owns property. So how is it that the rest of us (70%) don't vote to build more? Well, because 3/4 renters are under rent control, and essentially don't care. So only 70%/4 Edit: source: http://www.quora.com/What-percentage-of-San-Francisco-apartm...
Funny thing is that rent control is one of these issues that is non controversial among economists, from the most Keynesians to the most libertarians, they all agree that it's a bad idea. In fact, socialist economist from Sweden Assar Lindbeck said: “In many cases rent control appears to be the most efficient technique presently known to destroy a city—except for bombing.”. Rent control is usually pushed by ruthless…
Yep, even Paul Krugman thinks rent control is a bad idea: http://www.nytimes.com/2000/06/07/opinion/reckonings-a-rent-...
Re: “Your monthly rent .. shall increase from $2145 to $8900”
#378Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is essentially a fundamentalist view of property rights. It seems like that for any X, you can find people to assert that X is obviously the most important thing in the world, so anything else doesn't matter. Fundamentalisms are mentally satisfying, because you always have clear answers. But they're practically dangerous, because the ignored concerns don't actually go away. Land, of course, does not work like yo…
Property rights aren't "useful and important." Property rights are the fundamental basis for any other right. What right to life does anyone have if not because they "own" their own life? What right to free speech do they have if they do not "own" their own speech? Thievery doesn't become acceptable because someone makes a compelling case or a pretty argument. Justice doesn't become "fundamentalism" because it won't…
> What right to life does anyone have if not because they "own" their own life?
Congratulations, you just justified slavery.
Re: “Your monthly rent .. shall increase from $2145 to $8900”
#379Earlier quoted context omitted.
UP, for crissakes.
Well, you've got to tear a bunch of stuff down first. And I've read before that the city doesn't want to build up too much because they want to retain some of their character or something.
> I've read before that the city doesn't want to build up too much because they want to retain some of their character or something.
That's kind of the point. The city has several conflicting goals: make it an affordable place to live, don't allow new growth to change the character of the place, attract high paying jobs, don't widen the roads, attract new residents without kicking out old ones, etc.
Rent control is one of the tools they use to try to balance between these conflicting goals. The fundamental problem is that every serious economist says that rent control is a losing battle, and it never truly works anywhere it's been tried. There really aren't any rent control success stories from anywhere in the world. At some point, the city has to realize it can't achieve its conflicting goals, and it will need to prioritize: is it more important to have affordable housing or more important to limit the number of places to live in the city?
Re: “Your monthly rent .. shall increase from $2145 to $8900”
#380So, there's no mention of the tenant's salary in this story. Does rent control in SF or the US in general not stipulate that rent control is also a function of the tenant's ability to pay? Here, in The Netherlands, this is an important criterion in determining what the maximum increase is in rent for a given property [1]. My general understanding of the law in The Netherlands based on having rented once during univer…
Ability to pay is not factored in. I know many, many Google/Facebook/Apple software engineers living in rent-controlled apartments in San Francisco.