Rent control is the perfect example to demonstrate how defective leftist mentality is. Data overwhelmingly suggests it's a terrible idea, but they strongly feel as though it's the moral position therefore the only reason anyone could possibly disagree would be if they're evil.
It says a lot about opponents of rent control that they have to be consistently dishonest to make their point - Tokyo does have rent control, and NYC builds 70,000 units a year.
tokyo froze nobody’s rent and rents are flat because they build 100,000 units a year. nyc froze a million rents, built almost nothing, and the line for an apartment still runs out the door. one of these is a housing policy. one is a hostage negotiation
We can only do that once we end our governments reliance on public unions. Until then, the price of building the 1 million units needed in nyc at the going rate is literally 1 trillion.
Rent control and rent stabilization have more downsides, in that they actively impede the solution - building more housing.
They also create allocational issues, and issues with maintaining buildings.
@pretentiouswhat@TheStalwart These kinds of comparisons should be adjusted for the age structure (elderly people spend more, but middle-aged people should earn more) but I don’t think economists have a method for that.
@pretentiouswhat I wonder if this rule generates resentment in local kids who are being beaten by kids who got a Shanghai education but then took the test in their hometown …?
If Burnham wins, he’ll treat it as a mandate to do whatever terrible leftist policies he wants (nationwide rent controls, wealth tax, exit tax, ultra-high CGT). This could be quite bad.
If he loses, Rayner or Miliband will become PM instead as obvious second-best choices, wounded and weak from day one and with no claim to a mandate. They are also clearly less electorally appealling. Reform winning in Makerfield therefore seems very desireable, and a lot of economic growth may be at stake.