[ido]

Well I don't know what your point of comparison is, but my wife and I have been looking at buying or renting a bigger place (new baby) and all the stats I see when looking at places indicate purchase pricing going up at about double the rate of rental prices (often 5-7% YoY rent increase vs 10-15% YoY purchase price increases).

This has been the case for the last couple years at least. What do you attribute the discrepancy in rent increases vs purchase price increases if not for rent controls?

Do you know nobody living cheaply with an old contract that they would never get today, and that their landlord can't increase to market rate? Cause I know loads such people and this would not happen in a place without rent controls.

[Zahlmeister]

Real estate prices all over the world have gone up as a consequence of zero-interest monetary policy. Berlin is still on the cheap end, so it's still attractive to buy there even now.

Rents don't go up proportionally, simply because the demand isn't there. During the US housing bubble, rents didn't go up either, while property prices went through the roof.

> Do you know nobody living cheaply with an old contract that they would never get today, and that their landlord can't increase to market rate? Cause I know loads such people and this would not happen in a place without rent controls.

That's because most contracts specify that increasing the rent follows the standard procedure: Over three years, rent can rise by up to 20% (15% in Berlin), if the comparable rents in the area have risen as well (which is influenced by market rate). Ultimately, this limits the pace at which rents rise, but not the extent. In Berlin, only very few areas could sustain such growth, whereas in places like Munich where people earn way more, rents have risen much higher.

This is also not the rent control specific to Berlin (which is what you originally referred to), these are federal regulations.

[ido]

I refereed to rent controls in the sense that the american OP said are causing price increases in SF (afaik this is simply limiting rent increases for existing contracts, which is the default in Germany).

All of Germany is under rent control in that context, and IMO it works compared to exploding rents in the US and other countries (UK, Israel, most places really aside from some of continental Europe).

    That's because most contracts specify that 
    increasing the rent follows the standard 
    procedure: Over three years, rent can rise 
    by up to 20% (15% in Berlin), if the comparable 
    rents in the area have risen as well (which is
    influenced by market rate). Ultimately, this 
    limits the pace at which rents rise, but not 
    the extent.

This is a form of rent control almost nobody in the rest of the world outside of continental europe enjoys - prices generally rise as quick for current tenants as they do for everyone there: your landlord can tell you tomorrow than the next time your contract is up to renewal (usually yearly), the price will be 2x the current one and if you don't like that you have to leave.

[Zahlmeister]

> your landlord can tell you tomorrow than the next time your contract is up to renewal (usually yearly), the price will be 2x the current one and if you don't like that you have to leave.

It all depends on your contract. Some contracts may put limits on rent increases in. Yes, in Germany there effectively is rent control that prevents a doubling of the rent within a year, but generally rents don't double within a year.

If those rent controls were good enough to satisfy the affected people, why are there protests and demands for additional laws for even more rent control in places like Berlin? Why is living in Munich so hard to afford? At what point does rent control start to "work"?

[ido]

It works, it's just not enough. It's still better than the situation in the US, UK, etc where there's even less (I remind you that the OP's argument was that rent control was a bad thing).