• WetBeardHairs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    It helps remove the incentive to buy up all of the single family homes. The calculus is pretty simple -

    1. buy a house
    2. rent it
    3. pay the mortgage, insurance, and maintenance with the overinflated rental costs because everyone colluded to jack up rental prices across the board
    4. eventually own the house entirely off of the back of renters
    5. repeat

    Renting a home shouldn’t cost enough for that cycle to be self sustaining.

    • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I work in municipal development.

      100% of the single-family home projects that have been proposed in my area for the last year have been rental-only communities.

      Like - they don’t even want to give the houses individual water meters. They want to hook them all together, which means they can’t even be converted down the line to something else without digging up all the damn infrastructure.

      • WetBeardHairs@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’ve visited some friends in those rental only neighborhoods. The lawns are all trashed. The neighborhood was less than three years old but it was already sliding toward a slum because of the clear lack of ownership by the occupants.

        Honestly I can’t believe that part of the rent didn’t go toward neighborhood wide lawn care.

    • jackalope@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t think it actually fixes that. Rent control numbers are in the hands of politicians who may just act as toadies for landlords. Maybe they’ll control rent on the higher side some but ultimately they have an incentive to keep that cash flowing.