Are rent-controlled appartments the evilest thing ever?

[giblets]

I don't believe that people who charge poor people too much rent so that they have to move care about equality, but If guess you do?

No, they don't. But as KH pointed out, rent control only protects the people who are already not in a slum from having to live in slums. Moving out of the slums will be harder with rent control because rent control discourages investment in the construction of new homes to rent to people.

[Kidlicious]

No, they don't. But as KH pointed out, rent control only protects the people who are already not in a slum from having to live in slums. Moving out of the slums will be harder with rent control because rent control discourages investment in the construction of new homes to rent to people.

Well perhaps people who claim to believe in equality can build them houses. What I think is tragic is people being forced from their homes because of the market and some rich guy calling that equality.

[Flubber]

Wfile I agree with KH as to their problems, as to the OP, I have to answer NO. In my personal hierarchy I do rank a thing or two as more evil.

[Uncle Sparky]

We have rent control in Winnipeg. I think its a good idea. We have several actual landlords running for the conservatives in the current provincial election that want to destroy rent controls. I'm on a committee fighting them tooth & nail.

[Hauldren Collider]

Congratulations, you are one of the chief wealth destroyers in Manitoba. Do you want a prize?

Also, who the **** needs rent control in Winnipeg? It's not even the size of a third- or fourth-tier city in the United States.

[Uncle Sparky]

:rolf:

[KrazyHorse]

We have rent control in Winnipeg. I think its a good idea. We have several actual landlords running for the conservatives in the current provincial election that want to destroy rent controls. I'm on a committee fighting them tooth & nail.

Are you a moron or a self-interested inhabitant of a rent-controlled apartment?

[Felch]

Well perhaps people who claim to believe in equality can build them houses. What I think is tragic is people being forced from their homes because of the market and some rich guy calling that equality.

It's not their home, it's the landlord's. They're just renting it.

I'm pro-Georgist. A land value tax, supplemented by a consumption tax would be my ideal government revenue stream. Land value is relatively simple to assess, and land can not be exported or easily concealed.

[Hauldren Collider]

Is land value really that simple to assess? I thought the housing bubble arose in part because it isn't so easy to assess.

[Uncle Sparky]

The government recommends annual % increases. These are tied to the rate of inflation. Landlords may accept the rate or apply for a higher rate. If they apply for a higher rate, the tenant has the right to appeal. THE LANDLORD CAN (and always does) CHARGE THE HIGHER RATE UNTIL THE MATTER IS RESOLVED. This means a landlord can apply for a very large increase that they know they will never get and that will force people out of their homes.

I'm also a big fan of eminent domain. Ideally, there should be no private property. Over the last 20 years 'property' has driven the false economy that still has a long, long way to fall.

[Kuciwalker]

[Uncle Sparky]

See - socialism makes people very happy!!!

[Felch]

Is land value really that simple to assess? I thought the housing bubble arose in part because it isn't so easy to assess.

It's based on market value. But since you're taxing the value of the land, you're not going to see bubbles. Land value taxation discourages speculation.

Compared to the difficulty in taxing income, land is a piece of cake.

[MRT144]

Is land value really that simple to assess? I thought the housing bubble arose in part because it isn't so easy to assess.

OR rather because assessors have a conflict of interest.

[Felch]

Assessors themselves are a weak link. However land value is computed all the time. Insurance companies do it when they separate the value of improvements from the indestructible value of the property. So if you pay $500k for a house on a nice plot of land, and the house is completely destroyed by a fire, you don't get compensation for the full half million, just the value of the house itself.