California Approves Statewide Rent Control

Post by dgzl » Thu, Sep 12, 2019, 7:09 AM UTC

anigbrowl wrote: post #605

dgzl wrote: post #259

I'm a renter in Oregon and I've been outspoken about this long before the laws were passed. From my experience, people who support heavy laws, regulations and taxes don't spend enough time considering potential side effects. They feel like with enough support, they can just force anything they want to happen, while completely disregarding the market. I feel like an amount of the general public just wants Big Daddy go…

I'm a renter in Oregon and I've been outspoken about this long before the laws were passed. From my experience, people who support heavy laws, regulations and taxes don't spend enough time considering potential side effects. They feel like with enough support, they can just force anything they want to happen, while completely disregarding the market. You know I was neutral on this stuff, studied economics and some bu…

Post by heyoni » Thu, Sep 12, 2019, 7:11 AM UTC

optimusclimb wrote: post #631

m463 wrote: post #448

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This happened to a family I know, except it was 50%. The building was purchased, "refurbished" and the rent was reset to a very high number.

> The building was purchased, "refurbished" and the rent was reset to a very high number. And if someone was willing to pay that number, then that's what the place was worth.

Post by heyoni » Thu, Sep 12, 2019, 7:13 AM UTC

busterarm wrote: post #419

phil248 wrote: post #138

I'm shocked at the ideological fervor here and the fact that virtually no one seems to have looked at the details of the actual bill. This is nothing like the rent control ordinance in SF that has caused $3000 units to get stuck at $500 rents. That will never happen under this law. The allowable increases are so much higher than "normal" rent control laws that any given unit will catch up to market rates in a matter…

The rent control laws in NYC aren't even nearly as bad as SF, despite how much they get demonized here on HN. In NYC units that might be _actually cheap_, as in rent controlled and not stabilized, number roughly 17k units _in total_. And only about 1/3 of those are significantly below market or in desirable neighborhoods. It's almost insignificant and the number of rent controlled units has gone down by roughly HALF…

Post by icebraining » Thu, Sep 12, 2019, 7:17 AM UTC

toastal wrote: post #648

refurb wrote: post #517

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rent control in SF really is that bad. Rent increase limits are 60% of CPI, so it can’t even match inflation. If your costs go up (utilities) or you want to do capital improvements, good luck getting the rent board to approve a pass through. Want to prevent other people than the tenant from moving into a 1 bedroom? Tough, can’t say no to that, it just has to be under 3 people. Want to move into your own house? Sure,…

Why should I care about the woes of landlords as opposed to renters?

Post by slavik81 » Thu, Sep 12, 2019, 7:24 AM UTC

pitaj wrote: post #62

tmh79 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

do you have any clue about this specific measure? Its limited to buildings that are 15 years old or older, and it limits rent increases to 8% annually, which in practice is about 1 - 3% of all lease agreements in CA, a very small amount. Commercial construction loans are based on the 15 year revenue generating potential of the proposed building, this law was created specifically with that in mind so as not to interfe…

> do you have any clue about this specific measure? Any price control inevitably has negative consequences in the market. This is practically a law of economics. > Its limited to buildings that are 15 years old or older, and it limits rent increases to 8% annually, which in practice is about 1 - 3% of all lease agreements in CA, a very small amount. If it with have such minimal effect why even have it? > Commercial c…