• BlameThePeacock
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Economists almost unanimously agree that rent control is a short term reprieve that causes long term problems.

    Don’t control rents, control land values with land value taxes (not the same as property taxes)

    If you take away the profit motive for owning a home, the whole current system collapses and housing returns to the price it should be based on it’s usefulness as a house not an investment.

    • SamuelRJankis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      The full context of this is economists don’t think it’s a long term solution but their other proposed solutions is even less accepted by politicians and the masses.

      As such like many of the larger problems we have we’re left with a temporary solution that’s implemented long term.

      When people criticize rent control at best what they’re saying is if we bottom out on a problem the only way we could go is up. Ala electing Trump.

      • BlameThePeacock
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Their other proposed solutions aren’t accepted by politicians and the masses, because there’s too many people benefitting from the system fucking the next generation to want to change it. We’re literally living in the largest pyramid scheme ever constructed.

    • acargitz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Montreal had rent control for a long time and renting only became a problem when the bubblification of real estate got imported to Quebec from the rest of Canada.

      • BlameThePeacock
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Renting only became a problem when it became a problem elsewhere… oh… well then it looks like it didn’t work well did it.

        • acargitz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          The Canadian rental market, famously a victim of rent control.

          • BlameThePeacock
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            Who said anything about the Canadian market having tried rent control?

            Plenty of other places have tried and failed at it though.

    • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      8 hours ago

      While I don’t support rent control, let’s be real econmists are cheap regime whores who say whatever their owners need them to say so that plebs accept the fuckening.

      • BlameThePeacock
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        If you’re trying to imply that rent controls are good by your statement, can you show me anywhere that’s implemented them that has affordable housing prices?

        It’s not like they haven’t been tried, they just continually fail.

        • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 hour ago

          No country needs rent controls. They need ownership controls. As in, nobody should be able to own more than 1x primary residence and 1x holiday house &/or investment property. Period. No company should ever be allowed to own residential land/property, except for the duration of a build (with hard limits for development/build/sale that prevent artificial price controls).

          Neoliberalism/conservatism have failed humanity for housing security, financial & economic security, national security, employment security, mental and physical health, education, civil liberties; the list is endless. Continuing this several-decade failure any longer is insanity.

          • BlameThePeacock
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            37 minutes ago

            No we don’t. Ownership controls are such a stupid way to deal with the issue.

            People should be able to own as much as they want, they should just have to pay everyone else for that privledge (through taxes), rather than profiting off it. Pay for what you use, the more or the more desirable, the more you pay.

  • Someone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 hours ago

    I think we need a rental tax credit. Whether it’s partial or fully tax exempt, doesn’t really matter. If every renter was reporting their rent payments on their taxes it would be impossible for landlords to dodge their own taxes, thereby shifting the tax burden where it belongs.

    • Pasta Dental@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 hours ago

      A rental tax credit would likely result in money laundering schemes. For example you’re a Mafia boss and you purchase a building with very expensive appartment rents and people that you pay to “pay” you the rent. Then that money is magically clean and tax free

      • Someone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        8 hours ago

        I don’t see how this would make money laundering for organized crime any easier than it is today, the tax would just be shifted to the landlord side (likely at a higher rate since they’re probably in a higher tax bracket) and off the tenant.

        Right now the tenant earns money, pays income tax on that money, pays rent, and the landlord pays taxes on that money (if they’re honest and report it all) but can claim their mortgage interest as a tax deduction.

        I think the tenant should be able to claim some portion of their rent as a tax deduction. It would require an official record of rent paid, which would keep the landlord honest. I’d say the mortgage interest on a rental property probably shouldn’t be tax deductible either, but even still this would have the biggest impact on those large private landlords that are often what you’d call slumlords.

        Edit: I’m obviously not an expert on taxation or housing policy so if I’m wildly out of touch I’ll accept that, I just think it’s kind of bullshit that the government subsidizes the mortgages we pay for our landlords with the money we paid the government when we worked for it.

  • Sunshine (she/her)
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 hours ago

    We need:

    -limit 1 house per family

    -serious rent control

    -4-storey apartments built owned by the public and cooperatives

    -Stronger renter protections

    • n2burns
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Can you explain what you mean by

      -limit 1 house per family

      Many of the times I’ve heard this sentiment, it’s been to either ban Mom&Pop landlords, or ban rental houses completely. These options seem to benefit potential homeowners by screwing over renters. I’m not sure if you mean something different?

      • n2burns
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        Vacant House Taxes have been tried throughout Canada and are generally ineffective. They are just a distraction.

        The main reason why they don’t work is fairly obvious: Why would someone own property to keep it vacant?

        Sure, there are some people with vacation homes, or second homes where they frequently visit (heck, I might have to get an apartment where my office is located now we’re being forced to return to the office). Oh the Urbanity has a great video where they point out the vast majority of “Vacant Homes” are either students who don’t permanently live there, in the process of a move, under renovation, etc.

      • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        Government can do this tomorrow but it will never happen.

        He’s regime whores who will do policy that hurts their owners.

    • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      11 hours ago

      I think we also need to discount and ease new construction - NIMBY bullshit shouldn’t be allowed to prevent densification and we either need direct subsidies or material subsidies of construction materials.

    • masterofn001
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      10 hours ago

      When new builds are all mcmansions from developers with deep, unethical, ties to politicians it doesn’t really help much either.

      Looking at you Doug Ford.

  • Avid Amoeba
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    10 hours ago

    I’m actually shocked that the Financial Post said something positive on rent control. This is some alternate universe stuff. It’s typically neolib drivel.

    • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      They know it will never happen, so they get to play around with the topic and seem like team pleb.