Recent comments in /f/rva

iwearlederhosen t1_jdm5r9t wrote

See my comment below. It's not all about appreciation in value but the cost of maintaining the property. A $100ish increase a month is netting a landlord no income increase. Would you expect they just eat that as a loss? If I owned properties and had a good tenant I'd do the same thing. Explain the cost going up, even lay out exactly the increases and say I'd like you to stay but this is what it costs this year more now.

If you don't like it I guess you could go live in a tent and pay nothing, I don't know what your ideal solution is here

−3

nilsrva t1_jdm4lj3 wrote

I am actually really curious as to how can ignore the outcome in deciding what is right. I would agree in principle for most things, but this is housing and should be treated like the necessary-to-life thing it is because there are no other alternatives. Unlike say, water, which as a society we generally agree should be as low a cost as possible and come into our HOMES despite there being additional private options. There just are so few public options for housing.

At this point we have a massive chunk of our society who can’t get a seat at the other side of the table in these private deals due to nothing but being born too late. That ain’t right. I am not saying a landlord cant set their rent, but surely you have to see why some kind of protection for the renter should exist in concert with that.

If we depend on the good-will of landlords you make renters the frog and landlords the scorpion. I dont even fault a landlord for raising the rent, its the nature of the game, thats why we need to change the rules.

8