Talk:Rent control
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article covers subjects of relevance to WikiProject Urban studies and planning, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Urban studies and planning on Wikipedia. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale. | |
 |
This article covers subjects of relevance to Architecture. To participate, visit the WikiProject Architecture for more information. The current monthly improvement drive is Johannes Itten. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale. | |
Contents |
[edit] Economic viewpoint
I intend to add the economist's viewpoint, as I think it would add massively to the article. The economics of rent control are simple, yet as all parties would concede, massively important to the issue. To this end, I propose trifurcation of the article into history of rent control, political debate concerning rent control, and economics of rent control. Indeed? Thoughts? Zenosparadox 22:39, 16 February 2006 (UTC) (apologies, I was not logged in).
So far all the comments that mention economists have been more political than anything else and and I hope your comments would be more balanced. I don't, however, think that an econoomic analysis merits equal space with the political debate. After 26 years of involvement with this topic I've found that people are more interested in what kind of community they have than in the purely economic questions. People's decisions and opinions on rent control include economics, but there other questions that seem, in the end, to be more important: Are people being unfairly taken advantage of? Is the problem large enough to merit spending our time on a political solutions? Will we end up with a community we like or dislike? Communities with rent controls (or other price limits or subsidies, for that matter) may adopt them because they value other factors more than economics. I think the article best serves the reader by describing what rent controls are and by being a mirror to the actual debates. Larry B 22:35, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
With degrees in economics and law, I respectfully suggest the practical economics of rent control are less simple than they might seem in theory. For that reason, I have added a paragraph on how the housing market differs from theoretical "efficient markets" and how rent control laws compensate somewhat for that inefficiency. I think the political debate should consider the economic incentives carefully, because policies that ignore economics tend over time to produce increasingly undesirable results. Economic theory usually argues against price controls, with good reason, but appropriate regulation can balance otherwise inefficient markets. TVC_15, 25 April 2006.
Good comment on the practical economics not being simple. As for the political debate, I've been impressed with how the "mom & pop" landlords, homeowners and faith based groups operate more from a basis of some landlords behaving in a manner they consider bad. One author (whose name escapes me) claims price controls originated with early Christians reacting to price increases during famines and the like. Whether or not that is true, important constituencies in the political debate do seem to have the same reaction. Ultimately, politicians will count votes, decide to keep their jobs and act accordingly. Larry B 00:57, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
I also wanted to add my kudos to whoever authored the economic portions of this article, presenting fairly both points of view. Really nice job.--Mantanmoreland 15:01, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] History
I don't know the details, but it should be mentioned that there is also rent control in Canada, especially Toronto and Winnipeg. CPS 05:13, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
The only information that could be found on that country is a section on Ontario Canada Rent Controls
Rent control in Canada is in the provincial jurisdiction. Ontario has had rent control legislation since the seventies, other provinces may or may not have rent control. Ottawahitech 22:29, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
There should also be mention of rent control in France, specifically in Paris. It was instituted during World War I and repealed in the early 1980s - ironically, by the socialist government of François Mitterrand, as it was believed that rent control benefited the wealthy and failed to benefit the poor.
--- Two notes: (Which I welcome others to address)
1)I believe (but am not sure) that Rent Control in Boston and Cambridge, MA was ended by the passage of a state law, and not by each respective city, as stated by this article.
[You are correct, and I've taken the liberty of updating the article to reflect that. - TVC_15, April 25, 2006]
2)Economist Thomas Sowell discusses Rent Control in his books, Basic Economics and Applied Economics, in detail. These sources could add valuable insight to this article.
-- Seems to have some confusion between the motive for rent control laws, which vary with the advocate, and the purpose of the law itself. The latter, at least in California, are usually more restrained and balanced. LarryB
-- The Costa-Hawkins Act of 1998 limited the ability of California cities to institute rent control other than for existing tenants. It was intended to end the rent control programs of Santa Monica, Berkeley, and West Hollywood. It was not those cities who limited rent control to existing tenants but the state of California, through that law.
--That is incorrect. The Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act prohibited the application of rent control to new construction (among other things). it was not intended to end rent control anywhere and if that had been its purpse it has failed miserably. See California Civil Code Sections 1954.50 - 1954.535. Also see Landlord Law by Brown, Warner & Portman (Nolo Press) for an accurate depiction of rent control in California. If the previous poster is a landlord, I highly recommend that you buy and study this book. LarryB
--In fact, the comment about the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act is partially correct. One section of the Act mandates vacancy decontrol. When a new tenant moves in, initial rents are set by the landlord without restriction in most cases. Whatever its intended purpose, it did reduce the effectiveness of rent control in California. rnemcik —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.232.103.109 (talk)
--Have made a number of edits to change the tone of the article from something that was, or was about, the political debate to something that is more about rent control itself. Hope to add a paragraph on the history of rent control when I get the chance. As it stands the article is primarily American, but would need to research Canadian, New Zealand and, apparently, French laws to change that. LarryB
--Removed "trailer park" as a term that mobilehome owners consider insulting. My experience in California is that the term is no longer in common use. (If you have the political clout to get a rent control law, nobody will call you trailer trash, or at least won't do it twice). If there are rent control laws in regions where mobilehome parks are commonly called "trailer parks", please let me know.Larry B 22:53, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
--Strengthened and clarified addition on unethical landlords. Every group has some crooks and they, like the rest of us, adapt to new conditions.Larry B 21:24, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Modifier on Cato
There was no need to call the Cato Institute "libertarian/conservative" if the other proponents/critics do not also have such modifiers (e.g. Paul Krugman). I think it's enough to identify it as "anti-rent control". Besides, calling a libertarian institute like Cato "conservative" is really not completely accurate.
[edit] Not Neutral
This article seems to be loaded with charged words that keeps it slanted somewhat, such as "unethical landlords." I'm not sure how best to remedy this situation, so if anyone knows more about the situation it would help.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Whistlesgowhoo (talk • contribs) .
- To say that a law is unjust would be POV. To say that disobeying a law is unethical is also POV. I propose to do neither in this article. - Nat Krause(Talk!) 22:39, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
A difficult task indeed. Having chased "unethical" landlords for a couple decades (including one who engaged in the serial rape of recent Cambodian immigrant tenants) with the other landlords assisting or quietly cheering us on, "unethical" was as value nuetral as I could manage. At one point the article had more of a alternation of POV's (where "unethical" might fit) but transitioning beyond that seems to work better. Larry B 16:59, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
Why is the against section flagged as not neutral but not the for section? Presumably neither section can be neutral. Albertod4 (talk) 14:36, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
Good point about the flag, although at least one of the arguments "against" seems too broad (the one about property rights) so I'll narrow it slightly; maybe then someone will remove the flag? Regarding the allegedly "slanted" phrase "unethical landlords," however, using that phrase does not imply a slant against all landlords; to the contrary, it implies some landlords are ethical, because otherwise the phrase would be redundant.TVC 15 04:59, 2 December 2007 (UTC) 03:13, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
I've tried to balance a bit, so hopefully the flag can be removed. I narrowed the "against" argument slightly, and removed the statement about vacant buildings in NYC because it was unlinkable and outdated. (NYC had many vacant buildings in the 1970s and 1980s, but has had rent control since the 1940s, through housing booms and busts.) I also added a "for" argument regarding taxes. Finally, I added a hopefully NPOV statement in the introductory section, comparing rent control to zoning and urban planning. At the risk of sounding presumptuous and antagonizing every constituency, I hope people will consider the article more balanced now, and the arguments more focused.TVC 15 04:59, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
The argument against rent control still seems strident, but it often is. I've added a paragraph to the "for" section describing the factors that seem to be in play and discussed when cities debate rent control. Hopefully this will help balance things overall. As a general comment, those arguing against rent control often ignore the fact that a serious problem has to already exist before people will spend their time debating rent control. It would be wonderful if market forces magically solved those problems but in the communities that have adopted rent control the market doesn't seemed to have worked the way some wish it would. Of course, communities that consider and reject rent controls seem to feel that their problems aren't severe enough for that solution, which is also a good result. Larry B (talk) 20:10, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Good point about the factors that lead to enactment of rent control. I've added a small paragraph to the "for" section linking rent controls to property tax controls such as Proposition 13, with a link to a magazine article that includes Prop 13 among the factors that led to enactment of San Francisco's rent control law. I was thinking of adding that link and another to support your paragraph, but the sources I found are ironic: SF Apartment Magazine (published by a landlord group) ran a mostly objective article titled "The Birth of Rent Control in San Francisco,"[1] and the usually more liberal SF Weekly elaborated on the same history in an article titled "The Case for Ending Rent Control" [2]. The stridency of some arguments against rent control seems related to an absolutist view of property rights, ignoring the fact that the property rights of landlords depend on a larger legal structure that adjusts to societal developments.TVC 15 (talk) 00:08, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
I've added two links to the External Links section, both to government sites listing communities that have rent control. I wonder if we should organize the links section similarly to the rest of the article, i.e. subsections for introductory and scope-related links (e.g. official lists of communities that have rent control), articles in favor, articles against, and an article on history and enforcement. That would help neutrality by making apparent how many links are for and against, and it would provide some context to differentiate objective reference links from argument links.TVC 15 (talk) 00:54, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Introduction
The article fails to properly explain what the idea behind rent control is before going into arguments for or against it. 66.87.91.36 22:07, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Clarification on what rent control means
It is important to describe the different policies that rent control entails. It could mean limiting rent increases, limiting the change in rent with new tenants, or automatically renewing leases.
For instance, Ontario has implemented the first and last policies, with increases linked to the CPI; Quebec all three policies, with increases based only on fuel prices; and in New York City again all three, with increases either frozen (rent control) or linked to the CPI (rent stabilization). Moreover, each jurisdiction does not apply the controls to apartment buildings built in the recent past: for NYC rent control/stabilization applies to buildings built decades ago, for Ontario before the early 1990s, and for Quebec all except those built in the last several years. It is important to note that each set of policies affects the market differently.
G. Csikos, 21 October 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.239.84.91 (talk) 23:23, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Globalising
If this article were extended to include the United Kingdom, I would suggest a discussion of the Rent Act 1977 and the concept of a "fair rent" be included (even though these concepts are now considered outmoded in the UK). DWaterson (talk) 22:44, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Format
Would this be a better layout?
Issues
- Economic
- For
- Against
- Social
- For
- Against
- Moral
- For
- Against
