[cman1444]

Yep, this is exactly what would happen. Anyone who has worked in industries adjacent to these types of people knows how it is.

At this price point, you're essentially only going to be renting to people who are currently homeless, which is great from a societal standpoint. However, you can't ignore the fact that substantial portions of the homeless community, and therefore your potential tenants, are either drug addicts and mentally ill people.

1 out of every 10 of those people will cause more property destruction than could ever be recouped in rent from the other 9. It just doesn't work for private landlords.

[generalizations]

I bet those landlords could build housing that was sufficiently resistant to property destruction, which those renters would be happy to pay for at a sufficient rate - everyone would be happy. But it's the myth of consensual housing: isn't there someone you forgot to ask? The housing regulations would (and do) absolutely forbid anything that fit this niche.

[adammarples]

I don't think it would be hard to carefully interview and vet each potential tenant. However, I don't even know if that would be legal nowadays.

[TimorousBestie]

Of course it’s legal to interview tenants in the States, a landlord should simply avoid violating the Fair Housing Act in a particularly flagrant manner while doing so. (E.g., they should avoid documenting in writing that they’re refusing to rent on the basis of familial status! This parenthesis possibly based on a true story.)

Give it another couple years and I’m sure the courts will dismantle the FHA. Then landlords will have to find something else to complain about.