The landlord had told them he wanted to raise the rent to $3,500 and when they complained he decided to raise it to $9,500.

“We know that our building is not rent controlled and this was something we were always worried about happening and there is no way we can afford $9,500 per month," Yumna Farooq said.

  • I think your second point is valid, but the first is upside-down. Landlords compete with tenants for plots and bank loans. If they started leaving the market, more plots will free up and banks will be forced to start giving out loans to tenants. This will allow people who are currently tenants to build their own houses, rather than needing to rent. And your third point only applies if you exclude some properties from rent control, which is what Ontario seems to be doing.

    • Pxtl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      21 year ago

      Uh, part of the point of the greenbelt is to stop building detached houses because they’re actually environmentally quite bad. I mean maybe individuals could work together to put together a co-op but Housing Now TO says that municipal governments generally block any of those that would pencil out.

      • @MrMonkey@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        81 year ago

        I wanted to build a duplex but “zoning laws” say that wasn’t allowed, only single family detached houses with at least X amount of land.

        Most zoning laws are serious bullshit and work as defacto segregation to keep the dirty brown poor people away from the nice good rich folk. It’s why suburban school is a totally different things from poor urban school.

        Zoning laws are why developers in LA can’t afford to build anything other than luxury condos. Land is literally too expensive to build. As an example: a requirement to have at least X parking spots per X units, even when it’s built right next to a metro and a bus depot and you’re building low income housing for people who are less likely to own cars in the first place.

        Too many NIBYs whining about things.

      • @Rocket@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        -1
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        part of the point of the greenbelt is to stop building detached houses because they’re actually environmentally quite bad.

        If we’re being honest, all housing is environmentally bad. And not just environmentally bad, but bad for society in general. A necessary evil for the individual, perhaps, but it stands to reason that they should carry a high cost to account for the negative externalities they place on everyone else.

    • @Rocket@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      -6
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Landlords compete with tenants for plots and bank loans.

      Not really. Landlords need tenants. If tenants would rather own, then there would be nobody for the landlord to rent to. Landlords serve those who prefer to rent. Of note, one reason people prefer to rent is a belief that the housing market is about to crash. With a lot of signs suggesting that is a real possibility on the near horizon, this is why rents have skyrocketed recently. Nobody wants to be the bag holder, so many more are, right now, opting to rent over buying in order to wait and see what happens.

      banks will be forced to start giving out loans to tenants.

      There is nothing that forces them to give loans to tenants. If landlords start leaving the housing market it is likely that credit offers will grind to a halt. The bank wants absolutely nothing to do with a security that people are running away from. Furthermore, the money leaving housing is apt to flow into productive businesses, which means that any credit that the banks are still willing to extend will go in that direction.

      • @Imotali@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        111 year ago

        landlords serve those who would prefer to rent

        If you honestly believe this then you are delusional. I’m sorry there’s pretty much no kind way to put it. This statement is that egregiously erroneous that it is so incongruous with reality so as to be delusional.

        • @Rocket@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          -6
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Oh, right. People only pay for things they don’t want. How could I have forgotten?!

          • @UndoLips@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            41 year ago

            For what it’s worth, surveys in my country repeatedly show that renters would prefer to own. But the market here is rough and banks are denying people loans even with a lower monthly payments than their existing rent.

            I would think it is the same in the US, but most people here rent because they can’t buy.

            • @Rocket@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              -2
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              surveys in my country repeatedly show that renters would prefer to own.

              That does not mean they prefer to own right now. If you plan on moving to a new place in a few months, for example, it would kind of silly to buy only to have to buy again a few months later. You may prefer to buy, but the rational person would rent for a few months to bridge the gap, and then buy once they get to where they plan to stay.

              And, given the current state of housing, with a high risk of it soon imploding, a lot of people would rather wait a few months, even a few years, before they buy to see what happens to the market. Again, preferring to own doesn’t imply right now.

              The data shows a clear downward trend in price, especially in the traditionally desirable areas. If you have somewhere to rent, why would you choose to buy at this exact moment, knowing – with reasonable confidence – that a house will be cheaper in six months?