A community for discussing and documenting the second great housing bubble.
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/14231269
Let them fight (second image in body)
Have Life-or-Death duels for any CEO or landlord wishing to raise their total pay or rent. If they win, tax them at 90% income. If they lose they will die.
The real solution is that new housing permits cannot be granted until a certain threshold of low income housing is met. For instance, if 3% of the rental market is low income housing, and the city ordinance requires 15%, no new multi-unit housing construction permits are granted until the minimum threshold of 15% is met. Don't let them build their "luxury" condos until the needs of the city are met. Unfortunately, money talks, and right now the people building the condos have a lot of it.
In a market with expensive housing, that would have effects similar to simply making renting illegal: a dramatic drop in property values, conversion of multi-unit rental properties into condos, and no apartments available for rent anywhere that isn't a slum. I suppose it would be good for home-buyers, since people owning (former) rental properties would be desperate to sell, but it wouldn't be good for renters.
If housing were cheap why wouldn't renters just by or go into co ops.
Owning a house takes a lot of money that renters don't necessarily have
And take a wild guess about why they don't have that money
It wouldn't take lots of money of there were no landlords. The average home takes only 300 labor hours to build. Homes are expensive because of the rent can pull in, not because they're expensive to build.
That is a pretty bad idea unless those average rent prices were HEAVILY localized. Like it can't be a whole major city...or even 1/4 of one.
