Anonymous #1 1w

Yeah, I guess I hope that this doesn’t cause them to jack up the rent so they can ensure they recoup their investment within 7 years. That would probably be an unintended consequence

5

Anonymous OP 1w

from this im thinking that it maybe leads to them getting less renters somehow? more backlash? enough to get them to invest in multi-family buildings to keep things calmer or something? idk, i dont know much about the whole bill so im hoping theres something to counterbalance that

4

Anonymous #2 1w

So how badly would this backfire, in your opinion?

1

Anonymous OP 1w

Catastrophically

1

Anonymous OP 1w

The only way to lower housing costs is to increase supply. These measures will do the exact opposite

1

Anonymous #2 1w

Welp 💀

1

Anonymous #2 1w

That is not the only way. We need measures like this to be taken, there is a huge problem with super rich people buying up all the homes in the area and jacking up the prices due to lack of competition in the area

0

Anonymous #3 1w

Lack of competition is lack of supply

3

Anonymous #2 1w

So you’re saying that you think that people buying up all the houses in an area and artificially raising prices is not an issue?

1

Anonymous #3 1w

If there were more supply they wouldn’t be able to do that. I’m sure that may be a problem in some particularly small and constrained markets, but on a national basis institutional investors own like 1% of single family homes.

1

Anonymous #2 1w

okay so then why would there be such a strong consensus on passing this bill

1

Anonymous #2 1w

Saying lack of competition is lack of supply just doesn’t make sense. do you not think monopolies are an issue??

1

Anonymous #2 1w

like are you arguing that monopolies can’t exist, i am so lost

1