“Should the land LORD be guarenteed a cash cow forever?”

Yes. Land owners have spent a great deal of time and effort to earn and save money to purchase a piece of property. They have an indisputable right to earn revenue from this property forever.

“Must the tenent be trapped in a cycle of move,(to where?) when ever the rent becomes to high.”

No. Don’t be scared off by my view that rent control is wrong. I still think we need a solution to help low income residents pay rent, but rent control is not that solution.

As crasshopper and I discussed above, we both believe that the government should help renters whose income falls below a certain line. A ‘rental assistance’ tax credit or even real funds toward the actual cost of rent would be funded through a collective local tax.

A tax solution is better than rent control. Rent control effectively taxes ONLY the property owner that chooses to rent property. Rent control sharply reduces the amount of money that a developer can make from building rental units. If they can’t make as much money from building rental units, they won’t build as many (or any at all), which limits the supply of rental units, which increases the real price of rental housing.

Instead of effectively taxing only the property owner who operates it as a rental, we should spread this burden among, at the very least, all property owners. Or, perhaps, all taxpayers in a community.

“P.S. this is and example of the rich mans blog.”

I am not a rich man. My income is about half of the median household income for San Francisco and about 75% of the per capita income for the City (Source). I simply believe that rent control in its current form is not the best solution humanity can offer.

Should the land LORD be guarenteed a cash cow forever?

Must the tenent be trapped in a cycle of move,(to where?) when ever the rent becomes to high.

Good rent control. can work and will work even if people with your logic dance on the moon freeeee!!!!!

Thank you for allowing me to give you a bit of my fifty cents.

We are here and not leaving soon.

Michael
P.S. this is and example of the rich mans blog.

I really like your last idea best. I think it might also be the most politically feasable, especially if dressed up as an ‘economic development zone’ or something (like SF’s South of Market Area). If all of SF’s SOMA apartments were rent control free, I think it would achieve a better mix of income diversity than at present — almost all of the development in SOMA are expensive flats occupied by wealthy ‘dot com’ers. With rent control free market rate rentals I think a flood of (even more) development would produce enough supply to start developing that neighborhood at an even quicker rate.

If you want to make the game politically winnable, why not remove the rent control but tax landlords? That is easier than taxing tenants, and—guess what?—landlords will transfer some of the cost of that tax to their tenants. Plus, since most people don’t understand economics, the tax will be politically feasible: you are swapping one form of pressure on landlords with another kind of pressure. The difference is that a tax allows freer movement of people among properties, hence better sorting and more opportunities for both landlords and tenants.

Another idea, if the above doesn’t work: allow some uncontrolled zones in the city (say hip downtown apartments or commercial rents), and if that seems to revitalize those areas, then other zones might consider unlocking rent prices for themselves.