California Approves Statewide Rent Control • Hacker News Board

Re: California Approves Statewide Rent Control

#241

Post by freehunter » Thu, Sep 12, 2019, 1:50 AM UTC

wanderer2323 wrote: post #227

claudeganon wrote: post #222

The real solution is to decommodify housing. >The landlords, like all other men, love to reap where they never sowed, and demand a rent even for the natural produce of the earth. -Adam Smith

>decommodify housing genuinely curious what would that entail, in practical steps

My guess is to implement a higher tax on properties where the owner does not live on the property, or put a limit on how many rental units a landlord can own. Something like that could dis-incentivize large tracts of rental properties.

Re: California Approves Statewide Rent Control

#242

Post by claudeganon » Thu, Sep 12, 2019, 1:50 AM UTC

wanderer2323 wrote: post #227

claudeganon wrote: post #222

The real solution is to decommodify housing. >The landlords, like all other men, love to reap where they never sowed, and demand a rent even for the natural produce of the earth. -Adam Smith

>decommodify housing genuinely curious what would that entail, in practical steps

Look into the history and development of Vienna’s social housing system as a start. 62% of people live in housing under this scheme:

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5b4e0b12e4b0b15aba88c7b0

Re: California Approves Statewide Rent Control

#243

Post by xvedejas » Thu, Sep 12, 2019, 1:50 AM UTC

claudeganon wrote: post #222

The real solution is to decommodify housing. >The landlords, like all other men, love to reap where they never sowed, and demand a rent even for the natural produce of the earth. -Adam Smith

Should it not be the other way around, turn housing into more of a commodity? We have no shortage of most commodities, for example foods, because typically the higher the demand for the commodities, the more is made. Those markets benefit from things like economy of scale. Housing seems to be the opposite right now, there's very high demand and yet development is not able to keep pace due to artificial restrictions like zoning and height limits.

Re: California Approves Statewide Rent Control

#244

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Sep 12, 2019, 1:51 AM UTC

kd0amg wrote: post #206

halflings wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't OP saying they are doing this because of rent control? (e.g not being able to change rent selectively, only able to constantly increase rent?)

Specifically, it's an attempt to hedge against the possibility of the market rate increasing by more than 7% in a year.

[deleted]

Re: California Approves Statewide Rent Control

#245

Post by mc32 » Thu, Sep 12, 2019, 1:51 AM UTC

Supermancho wrote: post #233

1123581321 wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using the law to destroy the value of someone’s asset until they abandon it is confiscation, just indirectly.

Confiscation, it is not, anymore than negative reports are confiscation of stock. You can liquidate and acquire a different asset. Personal preference has rarely been rewarded (re: eminent domain). There are windows of opportunity, timing and strategy inherent to capitalism. Sell before it passes (or the market adjusts) to maximize your realized asset value.

People are going to like that as much as they like devaluations or high inflation.

Re: California Approves Statewide Rent Control

#246

Post by baby » Thu, Sep 12, 2019, 1:51 AM UTC

xur17 wrote: post #205

baby wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s FUD. It works great in other countries and if strict can give equal chances to tenants no matter your background.

> if strict can give equal chances to tenants no matter your background. The GP's point is that it gives equal chances to tenants to stay . New tenants do not benefit from rent control, they instead are hurt by the higher prices due to lower supply.

The supply problem has nothing to do with rent control.

Re: California Approves Statewide Rent Control

#247

Post by ng12 » Thu, Sep 12, 2019, 1:51 AM UTC

holy_city wrote: post #161

ng12 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$120,000 comes out to around $6k/mo. A mediocre studio in SF is pretty close to $3k.

After taxes it's a bit under $6,900 so 40% of that is ~$2,700. Browsing Zillow/Apartments.com/Padmapper shows several thousand listings for studios under $2k and single bedrooms around $2.2-2.7k, depending on area. SF proper seems pretty tiny and the most expensive, is everyone just trying to cram in there? Do people try not to commute?

It's closer to $6,600, and that's without spending a dollar on retirement or benefits.

> Do people try not to commute?

Spoken like someone who's never tried to commute in SF. Public transportation options are extremely limited, owning a car is extremely expensive.

Re: California Approves Statewide Rent Control

#248

Post by pcwalton » Thu, Sep 12, 2019, 1:51 AM UTC

refurb wrote: post #237

pcwalton wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vacancy rates in San Francisco are very low compared to the rest of the state and the country. Rent control in SF is problematic not because it leads to vacancies but because the allowable increase is far too low, way below inflation.

Vacancy rates are empty units that are available as a percent of all units available for rent. It doesn’t typically include units that aren’t available for rent. The estimate is there are 100,000 empty homes in the SF area.[1] I’ve seen an estimate of 20,000 for SF proper. This [2] report to SF Planning states the number of empty units has doubled over time. [1] https://www.sfgate.com/realestate/article/An-estimated-…

It's low no matter what measure you look at.

Re: California Approves Statewide Rent Control

#249

Post by baby » Thu, Sep 12, 2019, 1:51 AM UTC

statusquoantefa wrote: post #199

baby wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s FUD. It works great in other countries and if strict can give equal chances to tenants no matter your background.

The US economy is the driver of the world economy, and has been for quite some time and it's why we see so much innovation of entire new sectors in the US. (Yes, you can see sustained higher growth for a time in some other places, like China, because starting from a lower level allows for piggybacking in the same way the US economy grew with regard to Europe in the 19th century.) The reason mature European economies…

You probably live in a bubble. Have you visited the bible belt in the US?

Re: California Approves Statewide Rent Control

#250

Post by 52-6F-62 » Thu, Sep 12, 2019, 1:51 AM UTC

pitaj wrote: post #207

52-6F-62 wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article continues beyond that line. They outline, with numbers, the practical effects of rent control in the sample size of metro Toronto. I’m not an economist but I didn’t think consensus was a valid benchmark against empirical data.

Consensus are built from empirical data of more than just one metro area.

A consensus of opinion is irrelevant. And among those articles is hardly a consensus. One wants regulations limited to an extent, another wants vouchers instead of rent controls.