Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So is keeping the labor wage down and not putting a cap on business services and sundries.
We live in a debt based economics world. And your upset, because someone caught a break?
I'm not upset at all. People who want to live in a government controlled location can do as they please. But I can post my opinion of what I think is ridiculous. Same as you.
Welfare isn't a socialist concept its a way for the ruling elites the bourgeoisie to keep the proles in line and prevent a revolution. Socialism is where the means of production are democratically controlled.
The leaders of socialist countries and communist countries and their buddies have always lived very well .
My previous landlord in manhattan bought his townhouse in the 1970s for a pittance. I'd guess he paid around $100,000 for the upper east side townhouse. (he sold this townhouse for 15 million dollars within the last few years.) our landlord once told me he and his wife rented a 4 bedroom upper west side, rent controlled (not rent stabilized) apartment for decades. we paid market rate rent to our landlord for the use of his townhouse. his landlord, on the other hand, received pennies on the dollar from his multi-millionaire, elderly tenant because he had been renting this four bedroom apartment under rent control for decades.
a government controlled rental market favors the lucky not the poor, but the law won't ever be changed as the voters aren't electing officials that would do that.
The rich benefit more from EVERYTHING that the government does and doesn't do way way way more then the poor.
I know that's right. We pay their salaries and they vote in their pay raises. Yet no one complains about that. I find that odd.
All workers should be voting for their own (each other's) pay in full transparency at every job. I don't know why only well-connected Republican and Democratic representatives get this benefit (as well as government health insurance).
The law is flawed because it is an egregious government control on private property and livelihood of others regardless of the empathy one may feel for the persons involved. A government control that keeps rent of an apartment worth $1500 at $100 is egregious. It does not consider wage or retirement increases that occur over time. Keeping rent at a decades old rate is abuse of power.
I think kicking people out of their homes because "I can now charge more for this area" is extremely more egregious (in the sense of shockingly terrible, not shockingly good). Especially if the rentees are elderly, and especially since taxes can (and probably are) adjusted to be fair for the renter.
Trying to extract as much wealth as possible from that poor women.
^thats what you all your rob and redistribution schemes do
Rent controls lead to housing shortages and deferred maintenance, how does that help anyone?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
