Housing is not a right in the US. It's a for-profit endeavor. Unless that fundamental thing changes expect rents to go up as much as the market will bear and landlords to do everything to make as much profit as possible.
Side note: I doubt this is actually "AI". Probably some heuristics.
Price-fixing is not a right in the US. It's explicitly illegal.
We as citizens should be strongly opposed to anything that makes housing more expensive because it contributes to homelessness, which is much more expensive than just forcing landlords to actually compete with each other (you know, like the free market is supposed to).
The biggest threat to a competitive market isn't the government in the US. It's the accumulation of power by a small number of actors who control the majority of the supply side.
Well, no, not to defend it really, but the premise is that your use of the amenities of modern society, which people put a lot of effort into creating, is earned by providing profit to others, not merely an entitlement.
This conflicts with our moral sense (in part because there's nowhere you can go to opt out) so we backstop it with entitlement programs. But the premise is a least in principle fairly sound; not as evil as what you articulated.
Though, even if the supply side was immediately opened up, some redistribution is justified to make up for the historical lack of capacity and the inevitable decade it would take to catch up with demand.
smt88|3 years ago
Price-fixing is not a right in the US. It's explicitly illegal.
We as citizens should be strongly opposed to anything that makes housing more expensive because it contributes to homelessness, which is much more expensive than just forcing landlords to actually compete with each other (you know, like the free market is supposed to).
The biggest threat to a competitive market isn't the government in the US. It's the accumulation of power by a small number of actors who control the majority of the supply side.
MonkeyMalarky|3 years ago
sixo|3 years ago
This conflicts with our moral sense (in part because there's nowhere you can go to opt out) so we backstop it with entitlement programs. But the premise is a least in principle fairly sound; not as evil as what you articulated.
stewx|3 years ago
sixo|3 years ago