| At a basic level I would not have any issues with these laws if they also limited expenses. In other words, if you are going to use force to limit income then landlords ought to have the right to limit expenses proportionately. For example, make tenants responsible for wear and tear on the property, just like you pay for mileage on a rental car and are responsible for damages. As it is, they are using force to limit income while expecting the landlord to offer the same product and services and foot the bill on unlimited expenses. How about legally limiting salary increases while requiring the same or more work? And, when you change jobs, you are only allowed to make 10% more. Oh, yes, but you have to spend thousands to renew your credentials. And how about truly severe penalties for tenants who destroy or damage property? Anyone who has been a landlord for with more than a handful of properties knows how much of a nightmare it can often be. Try running 10, 20 or 100 units and see how quickly you are going to bug out once even this mild form of rent control rears it’s ugly head. Because you know, with almost absolute certainty, that this is the proverbial slippery slope. And nobody wants to be the guy waiting for the last seat out of the Titanic. Oh, yeah, unintended consequences: If Airbnb is more profitable than conventional renting... |
When people finally realize that, there will be hell to pay.