Maximum Rent?

[phattonez]

Zero rent means I'd go bankrupt and close the building down, now nobody has a place to live. Again I ask, how does this help?

I'm not renting to a single person ever who is less than 400% of the rent in income. You've just made it harder for people around the borderline to find a place to live. Who is being helped?

Loans fail all the time. It's risk management. Banks do this all the time.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Doubtful that they would sit vacant. The latter is very likely to happen.

So how is this worse than the status quo?

It's not unless you realize that the landlord is then making even more money.

 

[Mycroft]

This isn't my first time dealing with economics. You tell me, specifically, what the effects would be.

Didn't you look at that link I gave you?

But tell me...were you alive in the early 70's? Did you experience the effects of price controls on gas?

This is what happened:

 

[Lursa]

In the scenario I provided the landlord can turn away whomever they want.

Then why wouldnt they just wait for a better renter who could afford it?

 

[Lursa]

And full market value would fall significantly in the scenario.

.Why?

 

[Lursa]

If the government passes rent cost control legislation, wouldn't you end up with a housing market like NYC?
Last I head they passed a lot rent cost control legislation.

From my view government passing legislation to distort the free market is generally a bad idea.

Seattle did, and from what I understand basically crippled their housing development market, by requiring excessive cost for fees, permits, environment impact studies, etc. etc. so no housing was developed. Now, they have a run-away housing market, the costs skyrocketing so much so that large parts of the labor force moved out, and now they have to promise them $15/hr to have them be able to commute in everyday from out of town.

Of course businesses pass those price increases right back to their customer base, which isn't the part of the labor force that moved out.

I'm struck by the unintended consequences, which, more often than not, appear to make things worse, rather than better (typical of government interference and distortion in markets).

Er, there's alot in there that's 'iffy' at best in terms of accuracy but the $15/hr wage is mandated by law and had nothing to do with housing.

Accurate however, is that the cost did/does get passed on to consumers.

 

[Lursa]

We had a legitimate disagreement. There's no need to be disingenuous about my arguments, except to score cheap points.

No, that was your absolute position:

He claims we're leaches on society and provide/perform no useful labor or services to society.

 

[Lursa]

Is your argument that people are simply choosing to spend half of their income on shelter? Do you think Americans are just stupid? That there is no fundamental problem?

Is it your argument that there is nowhere in the US where those people cannot find a job and shelter they can afford?

Let me ask, what type of employment is typical for the people you are referring to here?

 

[eohrnberger]

These are a lot of platitudes, not arguments. None of this has any argument to support it.

Pretty clear from this post of yours and others previously who've elaborated on simple principals of markets, yet you refuse to acknowledge them. :shrug:

 

[Lursa]

Tying rent directly to household income like that would just cause widespread discrimination on the basis of income. Why would I ever rent a unit out to someone that would force me to lower the payments?

And this isn't already done?

So selling cars based on household income (car loans, credit rating, etc) causes widespread discrimination on the basis of income too, right? And household appliances...same thing.

Are you saying all this is wrong? Unfair?

 

[phattonez]

It's not unless you realize that the landlord is then making even more money.

Please explain how you think the landlord would make even more money in the scenario I provided.

 

[phattonez]

Didn't you look at that link I gave you?

But tell me...were you alive in the early 70's? Did you experience the effects of price controls on gas?

This is what happened:

View attachment 67247922

I'm not talking about gas here. I don't think this would work with gas because there isn't a good alternative. With renting there is a good alternative: ownership.

 

[phattonez]

Then why wouldnt they just wait for a better renter who could afford it?

That's what they already do now!

 

[Lursa]

Doubtful that they would sit vacant. The latter is very likely to happen.

So how is this worse than the status quo?

Mine would. It would sit empty, it's not separate from my property. It's a separate structure but not independent of the property.

So yeah...it's no extra expense (no additional mortgage) to keep it empty for me.

For me, it provides additional disposable income.

 

[phattonez]

.Why?

Because it means landlords on average wouldn't be able to charge as much. It would drive down their yields. What happens to the price of an asset when its yield falls? What happens to a stock when it cuts its dividend?

 

[phattonez]

No, that was your absolute position:

That's your quote!

 

[phattonez]

Is it your argument that there is nowhere in the US where those people cannot find a job and shelter they can afford?

Let me ask, what type of employment is typical for the people you are referring to here?

These questions are irrelevant. No one who does honest work should be forced to pay 50% of their income toward housing because there is no alternative.

 

[Lursa]

That's what they already do now!

In your OP, please explain how and when in the rental process this was determined:

What if we passed a law stating that landlords could charge no more than 25% of a household's income as rent.

 

[phattonez]

Pretty clear from this post of yours and others previously who've elaborated on simple principals of markets, yet you refuse to acknowledge them. :shrug:

You elaborate. Explain to me the process by which things would get worse than they currently are. You underestimate how bad things are right now.

 

[Mycroft]

I'm not talking about gas here. I don't think this would work with gas because there isn't a good alternative. With renting there is a good alternative: ownership.

All government enacted price controls have the same effect. Rental housing would be no different.

Ownership isn't an option for a lot of people.

 

[phattonez]

So selling cars based on household income (car loans, credit rating, etc) causes widespread discrimination on the basis of income too, right? And household appliances...same thing.

Are you saying all this is wrong? Unfair?

What's the point of your question? No low income families qualify for a loan for a Porsche.

 

[Lursa]

Because it means landlords on average wouldn't be able to charge as much. It would drive down their yields. What happens to the price of an asset when its yield falls? What happens to a stock when it cuts its dividend?

They would charge as much as the market bears...it's still a profit. And if it reaches the point where it isnt, sell it.

 

[Lursa]

That's your quote!

Yes it is, of your exact words in at least 2 other related threads.

 

[phattonez]

Mine would. It would sit empty, it's not separate from my property. It's a separate structure but not independent of the property.

So yeah...it's no extra expense (no additional mortgage) to keep it empty for me.

For me, it provides additional disposable income.

You can always sell it, as many landlords would do in my scenario.

 

[Deuce]

So selling cars based on household income (car loans, credit rating, etc) causes widespread discrimination on the basis of income too, right? And household appliances...same thing.

Are you saying all this is wrong? Unfair?

I'm saying that it would be virtually impossible for a person under the arbitrary income threshold to buy a car or house because nobody would bother selling them something at a loss. Unless you plan to force a dealership to sell the Lamborghini to someone making $15,000/year. In that scenario only cheap cars would even exist.