[warp_factor]

multiple economic papers have shown that Rent Control is a huge disaster for a city. As said in another comment, it rewards those that moved in early (and those might be super rich techies like most of my friends that like to brag about having a rent controlled 2000$ 2bedroom). Rent control forces new units to be priced super high because the landlords know they will not be able to increase afterward. Probably one of the most failed policy in SF (and there are a lot of failed policies there)

[wahern]

According to the most recent paper, "renters who came later paid about 5% more than they would have in the absence of rent control." https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/rent-controls-winners-... That doesn't sound disastrous. After the 2016 election I would think free market proponents would be more appreciative of the value of economic security and the costs of structural dislocation, but I guess not.... Anyhow, rent control in SF only applies to pre-1979 buildings, so if anything rent control provides an incentive to build new housing.

We need more new housing, period. We can at least agree on that. I don't see how rent control prevents the creation of new housing. The city and its voters do that all by themselves.

[SamReidHughes]

The study period ends in 2010 and it doesn’t account for the different political situation as a result of rent control.