[yrdmb]

> But this just does not feel right. It feels like tyranny of the majority.

It's not tyranny. It's just democracy. Asset owners get lots of tax deductions, capital gains benefits and other goodies because they are the majority who voted it for themselves.

> Ordering them to decrease the rents is not that different from confiscating part of their property.

There have been rent stabilized apartments in new york for decades now. It's nothing new and it's nothing like confiscating property.

[credit_guy]

> There have been rent stabilized apartments in new york for decades now.

I know, I live in one such apartment. I have a very good relationship with my landlord. I'd be among the first to profit if NYC decided to force landlords to lower rent. It still does not feel right.

> It's not tyranny. It's just democracy.

Not in this country. Democracy is not just who has the most votes. There are checks and balances, and one of them is the justice branch of the Government, up to and including the Supreme Court. If something is not just, hopefully the Supreme Court will step in and say no. There were cases in history when this did not happen, for example the Dred Scott decision 166 years ago [1] that Black people do not enjoy the protection of the Constitution. But more often than not, the Supreme Court was there to undo the injustice resulting from the will of the majority alone.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dred_Scott_v._Sandford

[yrdmb]

> I know, I live in one such apartment. I have a very good relationship with my landlord. I'd be among the first to profit if NYC decided to force landlords to lower rent. It still does not feel right.

Then leave your rent stabilized apartment. What do you think rent stabilized apartments are? They are apartments with legally and artificially lowered rents. Would you feel better if they called it stabilizing rent rather than lowering rent?

[credit_guy]

> Then leave your rent stabilized apartment.

I think you have it backwards. If someone offers an opinion that is manifestly against their own economic interest, you are dismissive? Why?

[x-complexity]

> > But this just does not feel right. It feels like tyranny of the majority.

> It's not tyranny. It's just democracy. Asset owners get lots of tax deductions, capital gains benefits and other goodies because they are the majority who voted it for themselves.

Democracy, by its ideal principles, relies on tyranny of the majority: Democratic voting relies on a majority of people voting for A, regardless of the voting mechanism used, with those voting for (B, C, D, etc.) getting the raw end of the shaft.