[trysomething]

Nature has endowed mankind with diverse faculties, fallible reason and variable fortune, and so in a free society there will by necessity be "winners" and "losers".

Those of you who reflexively oppose gentrification ought to consider what type of society you want to live in. Do you believe that individuals have the right to make decisions that could affect their own lives beneficially or adversely? One such decision is to rent or buy property.

There are clearly potential benefits and drawbacks to either choice. I may value stability of residence and the chance my chosen property will appreciate, and therefore choose to buy, and so put capital down and strain my credit. Alternatively, I may want to bootstrap a small business or startup using the same capital and credit, and therefore choose to rent.

When, in the name of stopping the "evil" of gentrification, you propose to severely restrict what a property owner can do, such as through rent control, you are also proposing to restrict the original choice to rent or buy. You are thus limiting the opportunity of the less fortunate to buy when and where the price is low and sell if and when the price gets high.

In the name of protecting the vulnerable, you prevent them from advancing to a better station in life. It's very easy to consider the benefits of laws and regulation while ignoring the costs.