• Cagi@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Where I live we’ve had a 4% cap for a long time. It just means tenants get evicted to increase the price. It’s illegal, but the procedure to after landlords cheating the system is so grueling and adversarial, it puts justice beyond the reach of many victims. I can only imagine this being even worse in the US.

    • phdepressed@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      4 months ago

      If this caps rent even if the tenant changes it’d be something. I don’t see how this passes an R house or gets through the “moderate” Dems in the senate.

      • Cagi@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        It’s certainly an essential piece of the puzzle, but without the other puzzle pieces it is only going to have a minimal effect and is easy to abuse. Better than nothing nothing though, it won’t be a wasted effort if it passes, it just won’t fix anything or curb rent prices on the whole. But it will help people out here and there.

        • phdepressed@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          4 months ago

          It’s not a cap on rent it’s a cap on raising it. Not much different than setting interest rates imo. I don’t know enough law about it but at least it’s an attempt? There’s a lot of talk here about how it doesn’t solve the underlying problem but I don’t see people providing another solution.

          I’d like to see property taxes increased with more single family homes owned. Let businesses keep the apartments let homes become a place to live and not an investment though.

          • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 months ago

            The problem is rent isn’t interstate commerce. There isn’t a way to justify that there is a national mandate for this, it’s a matter left to states.

            As for property taxes, many states already do this with exemptions for a primary residence that reduces taxes.

            • phdepressed@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              4 months ago

              I’m talking about increased taxes for each additional home so that owning more than 2 or 3 homes becomes financially unviable. This causes an incentive to sell if you own a lot and prevents someone wanting to own a lot in the first place.

    • chilicheeselies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      We have rent stabilization in nyc (for some buildings). It caps the increases, and landlords are obligated to renew your lease if you want to unless you violated it in some serious way. In returnfor haveing a building stabalized, the landlord gets tax incentives.