Blame The Democrats Again!

democrats too soft on landlords
maybe in 5 years they will do this.

Keep voting for your own demise…

Didn’t read through the article, that’s how my grandfather died and all land confiscated. When DXP started open China, some land (those not built-up & occupied by others) was returned.

1 Like

The California Democratic Party has officially became people’s enemy by endorsing a commie’s proposition. The California Democratic Party has become a commie party.

The people of California will defeat this California Democratic Party in November.

This proposition would freeze the rent on all property types to today’s rent, even when tenant moves out and a new tenant moves in.

Who in their right mind would lease their property to a new tenant when the old tenant moves out? They would sell the property to an owner occupied buyer.

If this proposition passes, new workers won’t be able to move to California’s SF, Oakland, Mountian View and SJ anymore. Because landlord will sell their houses and there will be no new rental property. Existing rental property inventory will continue to decrease.

1 Like

Any landlord or homeowner that is a Democrat is a fool.
The Democrats have declared war on citizens, drivers, tax payers, and generally anyone who believes in the rule of law


No No No, you have the wrong mentality
My thinking is that if you can’t beat them. JOIN THEM.
sell all your asset in SF and invest in other captializm country
so in the united states, you’ll become the part of the good side as 無產階級. Once you got nothing, you can live off from government, rent the house in SF and eventually take the property away from the owner. =)

Strict rent control is the end of the landlording in rent controlled cities. With no rent increase allowed for new tenant, it means a forever low rent increase. It makes zero sense.

Also with a forever rent control, it makes very little sense to build apartments. Builders will build only condos, never new rental apartment

Also the argument for renting instead of buying can actually make sense. @tamato can rent a mansion in Mountian View for a good price and can keep the mansion forever. Over his lifetime, he would save millions. More important, his descendants will save many tens of millions when he pass the low rent to his children.

Actually it’s good idea to rent a house in a rent controlled city if this passes. The lease with a permanent rent control would be worth a lot. Does Mountian View has just cause eviction?

SF, Oakland and SJ are perfect place to rent a house. You can sell all your properties in rent controlled cities.

For properties in non-rent controlled cities, you should monitor the policy change carefully and sell immediately when the rent control is a possibility.

Which capitalistic country? Singapore :slight_smile:

i believe singapore ppl majority of them buy gov housing. so private house might be in lesser demand , that might make it slower to appreciate and harder to rent out.新聞/新加坡是如何解決住屋問題的-66412

It’s time to donate one month rent to defeat Prop 10

So to beat rent control one should learn from Singapore to nationalize housing? :smile:

Don’t take me wrong. I like SG’s approach. I just don’t like this primal scream against “socialism”. Whatever policy works is good policy. Rent control is evil because it doesn’t work.

US overall don’t have a housing rent issue. we have a lot of land , house. just everyone want to live in the best part of the US.

if every singapore ppl want to live in the best part of the city, they will have the same problem right?

Naturalization of all properties including houses, apartment, stocks, aapl, amzn would work perfectly to end inequality. No doubt about that. Of course, government officials may become szars and government official may demand monetary and sexual bribes when you badly need something for leaky roof, broken sewage line or urgent disease.

With the strict rent control, landlord can also become szars when the old tenant moves out or dies. When there are 100k well qualified applicants for the vacant rental property at dirt cheap price, which renter should the landlord choose? Probably family members first. @jil may rent to his grandson, @sfdragonboy could rent to a nephew’s kids or simply to a would be mistress.

The strict rent control can gentrify rent controlled cities though. Low end tenants won’t be able to find housing when you have thousands of Google new hires to choose from. Will the landlord rent a $100 apartment to a google engineer or an illegal immigrant?

Huh? Wrong use of the word nationalize. Singapore didn’t nationalize the housing. It built from scratch government subsidized housing.

Huh? Every Singaporeans yearn for private housing. Is a status symbol that mean you’ve made it to middle class for those who owned private condos and to upper class for those who owned landed properties (terrace, semi-detached, bungalows). Owning a GCB would be :slight_smile: top few, a SFH with 15,000 sqft.

Having said that, every Singaporeans want to apply for HDBs to exploit the subsidy.

Every part of Singapore is GOOD :slight_smile:

Singapore is like San Jose, no extremely bad areas. Maybe even more uniform than SJ.

I guess population is distributed and segregated by age, not income. Old people live in close-in neigiborsbood and Younger people live in remote and newer places

Good guess.

I am correct? Thanks for confirmation.

So nationalized housing create generational inequality, age inequality. Still no equality

nationalized? naturalized? typo or what? no nationalization or naturalization.

Nationalization (or nationalisation) is the process of transforming private assets into public assets by bringing them under the public ownership of a national government or state.

Naturalization (or naturalisation) is the legal act or process by which a non-citizen in a country may acquire citizenship or nationality of that country.