Funny Rent Control

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Mixed bag. My experience as a property owner says nay. My experience as a renter says yay. The verbage of the law makes it so you can still make decent increases to keep up with market value though. It's not a terrible law. I like the no cause eviction payout for help to relocate better.
 
Nay

While rent stays cheaper for the tenant, rent control can be a real problem. It doesn't motivate the owner to make proper repairs or upgrades. It makes other properties in the area not rent controlled sky rocket
 
Yay. I have rent control and have so much disposable income as a result.
 
The political goal, and unavoidable result, of rent control is to control the populace by forcing them to remain/become permanent renters rather than homeowners and landlords. The big banks become the state's/nation's landlords as individuals are financially forced out of owning properties.
 
The political goal, and unavoidable result, of rent control is to control the populace by forcing them to remain/become permanent renters rather than homeowners and landlords. The big banks become the state's/nation's landlords as individuals are financially forced out of owning properties.

Real Estate agents just want to sell properties...
 
The political goal, and unavoidable result, of rent control is to control the populace by forcing them to remain/become permanent renters rather than homeowners and landlords. The big banks become the state's/nation's landlords as individuals are financially forced out of owning properties.

We live in a disposable world now. Soon we won't have cars. We won't own houses.
 
The political goal, and unavoidable result, of rent control is to control the populace by forcing them to remain/become permanent renters rather than homeowners and landlords. The big banks become the state's/nation's landlords as individuals are financially forced out of owning properties.

The housing crash, housing boom and stagnant wages have done more for this than rent control. The average person is getting priced out of the market. Also corporations soaked up inventory after the crash. Rent control is a reaction to the problem not a cause.
 
looks like your liberal utopia
you have no clue how the riverman rolls.....! wages need to meet the cost of living for those who have yet to figure out where they live though...I got mine long ago...
 
Thats cuz u old homie

I enjoy being driven around.
I'm only 33 and I hate being driven around... Like Taxi's, Ubers, the Max, about the only thing I'm cool with is airplanes. I'd literally rather walk if it's an option say like less then 10 miles or so.
 
The housing crash, housing boom and stagnant wages have done more for this than rent control. The average person is getting priced out of the market. Also corporations soaked up inventory after the crash. Rent control is a reaction to the problem not a cause.

Rent control is just another tool/step of the Deep State , 1%, socialist coup that engineered the crash.
 
View attachment 24989 I vote yay....because well.....this

Those are not renters, those are homeless people with no money or homes.

No amount of rent control will ever provide anything at all for them or their problems.

Their problems were created by the people who are now imposing rent control on Oregon.

Take a good look at them, maybe call dibs on a spot there for the future just in case.
 
Rent control is just another tool/step of the Deep State , 1%, socialist coup that engineered the crash.


In your scenario were socialists unregulating the lending and financial markets and creating derivatives?

Seems more like a capitalist ponzi scheme to me.
 
The political goal, and unavoidable result, of rent control is to control the populace by forcing them to remain/become permanent renters rather than homeowners and landlords. The big banks become the state's/nation's landlords as individuals are financially forced out of owning properties.
That would be true if they were only allowed a smaller yearly increase than 7% which is substantial.
 
I have mixed feelings. So, I'm going to pass on that question.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top