Tell me how we *significantly* reduce rents in a way that DOES NOT rely on good faith from rich people, and I'm all ears.
-
-
Replying to @ScubaForDogs
I think it's helpful to view rich people, or capitalists, or however you define these groups as cold machines that chase their own interest. If you set up a system where chasing that interest is beneficial to you, you don't have to trust them to do anything but be selfish.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @eigenrobot @ScubaForDogs
In this case, you make it easier for them to build tons of dense housing in high-demand by removing laws that make this impossible. People are willing to pay for that housing; knowing they can make money by building and renting, capitalists build and rent. Now,
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @eigenrobot @ScubaForDogs
my *guess* is that your objection is something like: how does this reduce rents? Allow that landlords want to charge as much as they possibly can--I agree that they do, pretty generally! They'd take every penny from tenants if they could. All that's stopping them is competition
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @eigenrobot @ScubaForDogs
My gut is it's easy to miss this about markets: your main opponent is not your counterparty, often, but people who are competing with you for business I work at a big company. We think about two main things: how to make better stuff for consumers, and how to beat our competitors
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @eigenrobot @ScubaForDogs
This is less true in less-competitive markets, and there are definitely companies that spend a lot of time shivving consumers. My old boss at the Federal Reserve called (eg) credit card companies "obfuscopolies," for instance. It's dark stuff. And . . .
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @eigenrobot @ScubaForDogs
by and large companies can only get away with that shit if they're not at risk of losing their customers to competitors. This happens with monopolies, and it happens when there are only a few companies that can collude. This definitely happens too, and in real estate to an extent
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @eigenrobot @ScubaForDogs
Certain cities that I will not mention have a really bad reputation for chummy collusion by asshole developers. FWIW neoclassical economists hate this and related shit, and if you here one accuse someone of being a "rent seeker" it's akin to saying "die in a fire"
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @eigenrobot @ScubaForDogs
I'm going on and on. The main point I'm trying to make is that if you have more than a handful of landlords (which is usually the case), increasing the number of units available relative to the number of people who wants units makes them compete *with each other* on price
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @eigenrobot @ScubaForDogs
The best way to lower prices and make things better for people who need housing is (i) let developers build lots of dense units near cities where they're wanted--and strict zoning laws prevent this; and (ii) make it easier for new developers to enter and compete
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
This has become an absurdly long thread and I will pause now, thank you for reading through. I hope at least that you get the impression we want the same outcome, and that at least people like me are thinking seriously about how to get there.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.