• Asifall@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    This is just a soft rent control which isn’t going to increase the supply of housing.

    We don’t need this, we need to tax the fuck out of secondary residences and short term rentals.

  • NatakuNox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Lol so he just set a bar that property managers will meet every year. 5% is crazy because that’s far outside what the average person sees in wage increases. Cap it at 2% or less if you want to help. And pass a federal renters bill of rights. And create a Poland esq public housing program so government can actually act as a counter balance to the private market.

  • Kairos@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    Ah yes a half assed solution

    If you really want a one-liner like this just tax empty units with some function (exponential, linear, logarithmic, whatever you want) with the listing price.

    And of course you’d need stuff regulating what is an empty unit and punishing misreporting, only allowing leases at that price, etc. But it’s simple as an idea.

    • Empricorn@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Housing is so fucked it literally cannot be fixed just by the president, any president. We need laws, we need zoning, we need judicial protections for renters, we need private companies increasing supply… But yes: we also need this cap on rent increases. It’s a start!

      • Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Let me tell you why this will never, ever happen. Ever.

        Private companies increasing supply is supposed to be the goal. But the side effect is basic supply and demand; as the supply increases, demand decreases. When demand decreases, prices fall. When the value of people’s homes fall, they go underwater. This leads to a lot of homeowners who were on solid financial footing when they purchased the property suddenly facing financial ruin.

        You will never, ever get homeowners to vote in favor of something that will put them in serious financial risk. You will never, ever get landlords, corporate or private, to vote away their primary source of income. And in the medium to long term, you would be putting the financial stability of millions of homeowners at risk if this were to become a thing, along with risking collapsing the housing market entirely via oversupply.

        I’m not saying what side is right or wrong, morally, ethically, etc. I’m just pointing out the realities of the situation and what is the most likely result. I don’t claim to know what the solution to the problem is, but I do know that this isn’t it, and is likely to cause more problems than it solves over the long term.

    • MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      That’s going to apply to pretty much any good legislation for the foreseeable future. The GOP isnt interested in governing whatsoever. People need to understand that if they want shit to even have a chance of getting done they’re gonna have to vote (at a minimum).

      • PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Yup. The “O” in GOP stands for “Obstruct”. The GOP has been focused on breaking the government from the inside, so they can then point at it and say nothing works and it should all be privatized instead.

  • MehBlah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    How about set that cap at 1/4 average monthly wages for a state or county or even a city.

    • pewter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      That wouldn’t work because some housing is much more expensive than others. It might have more rooms. It might be better built. It might be newer. At least a 5% increase cap would scale with all of those things more appropriately.

  • solsangraal@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    R’s will kill this and continue to blame D’s for high rent prices. same as they did with gas. same as they did with the border. republican voters are just that fucking dumb

  • TechNerdWizard42@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    If you say you shall only raise by 5%, you will ALWAYS raise by 5%. Today it’s 0% usually until a new tenant. Anytime there are forced amounts, you have to raise it because you can’t when you need to

    • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Today it’s 0% usually until a new tenant

      Oh, you’re serious. Let me laugh even harder.

      • TechNerdWizard42@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        I know no private landlords, not mega corps, that raise rent annually. A good tenant is worth lower rent.

        With a forced limit, there will be guaranteed raises.

        • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Lol. You must live in the middle of nowhere or know some pretty lazy landlords. Raising the rent yearly is like number one on the list of being a landlord.

          If other people are doing it too, where is the tenant going to go? You just match the same market price for a comparable unit. Same with decreases (if that happens).

    • kandoh@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I live in a rent controlled building and from 2017 - 2021 my rent stayed the same, no increases.

  • Verdant Banana@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    what about the minimum wage being stuck at $7.25? some wait staff make half that still

    Biden is just throwing crumbs around like some elder on a park bench feeding pigeons

    • Not_mikey@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      There’s an argument to be made that you need rent control before mandating any wage increases otherwise landlords will just raise rent since they know you have the money. Same argument can be said for UBI, it’ll just be a $1000 a month gift to landlords. If you maintain capitals control over setting prices any increase in income will be gobbled up by them as they raise prices and increase profits.

      You need to squeeze capital from both sides, price controls and wage increases, for redistribution to be effective. Otherwise they’ll compensate for losses on one side by increasing/decreasing the other.

    • Sc00ter@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Ah yes. Let’s the this other thing that’s not related restrict our ability to move forward.

      Don’t let perfection stand in the way of progress.

      • anticolonialist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        There has been no progress, wages have been too low for decades, housing is out of control, and all we get are table scraps

      • Verdant Banana@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        $15 an hour would be considered progress not perfection

        when has the US moved forward more than a baby step if that in the last half century? and we just lost most of that progress we did make in the last fifteen years

        • Sc00ter@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          That wasn’t my point. The point is to not let lack of progress in one area detract from progress in another. I agree that the minimum wage is way too low, but that shouldn’t influence an attempt to cap rent increases.

          Obviously, both is better, but 1 is still progress and better than 0. If we don’t celebrate progress, we’ll never get better.