Anonymous #1 18w

Corporations should also be barred from purchasing homes off the streets to jack up prices and should be forced to sell any houses they’re hoarding away from hard-working Americans.

11

Anonymous #1 18w

Rent control is counterproductive. It just disincentives building housing and creates a shortage.

1

Anonymous #2 18w

Doing nothing to cap rent is much more unproductive, worsening the quality of life for millions of Americans and unreasonably ballooning the cost of living. Greed shouldn’t be normalized or excused, because what’s the point of building housing that barely anyone can afford in the first place?

2

Anonymous OP 18w

Large corporations own roughly 0.5% of homes.

0

Anonymous #2 18w

That statistic doesn’t match the reality being felt by thousands of people. It’s like “pee on my leg and tell me it’s raining”, because telling us corporations don’t actually own that many homes overall doesn’t mean much considering that’s still 593,600 homes according to that chart.

5

Anonymous OP 18w

Its a drop in the bucket of 118,720,000 American homes. Theres no reason to believe that corporations are monopolizing homes. We shouldn’t make policy decisions based on feelings.

0

Anonymous OP 18w

Capping rent has created shortages everywhere it’s been tried. Austin is significantly lowering rent prices right now despite a growing population because they’ve allowed for the construction of lots of new housing.

0

Anonymous #2 18w

It’s a temporary solution to a problem that needs a bandaid before we can do surgery.

5

Anonymous OP 18w

Then we should work to implement free universal health care and control inflation instead of promoting band-aid solutions that may actually do more harm than good to the average worker

4

Anonymous #5 18w

Gee that’s exactly what the lefts been saying for how long now? It’s the regressive and traditionally capitalist conservatives that turn white and start stuttering the moment anything just slightly socialist is mentioned

5

Anonymous #2 18w

In most cities and towns physical housing isn’t the concern so much as affording the already existing abandoned buildings everywhere. It isn’t a problem solving solution but a symptom relieving treatment to be combined with other treatments

2

Anonymous #2 18w

Huh then why does every single estimate say between 25-50% of all Americans are literally living paycheck to paycheck? Doesn’t seem like much disposable income available there

13

Anonymous #6 18w

Physical housing IS our main concern. The only reason those useless empty lots can get so expensive is because there is too much demand for housing and too little supply, which is artificially restricted by zoning laws, landlords, and NIMBY associations. That's why you have people commuting two hours to the city everyday from some shitty suburb.

3

Anonymous #5 18w

Not with where I’ve moved and lived at least, there’s always been an abundance of abandoned and rotting houses that should have been upkept and livable had property prices been more affordable. Instead we have 15 people living in tiny rooms splitting the rent because that’s the only available living space that isn’t $300k because of Blackrock. I’m sure it can be different throughout the country but at least my experience

3

Anonymous #2 18w

That seems easy to claim, got any studies or info on it other than a claim by a rich elite?

2

Anonymous #6 18w

Academics are rich elites now? This is from the study you just cited. It explicitly states that 20% of households making $150K+ are living paycheck to paycheck by their definition and this can likely be attributed to factors such as buying larger, more expensive homes.

0

Anonymous #2 18w

I fail to see how this is proving your claim that households are lying about their economic state

4

Anonymous #6 18w

No one has said they are lying. I’m just pointing out that “paycheck to paycheck” is a misleading stat because it includes financially irresponsible people who make more than adequate incomes.

1