[EricMausler]

Jumping in to say I think it's important to try to control the incentives around how many empty units are "too many" empty units.

Having a tenant comes with cost and risk. Why charge 1200 for 100 apartments when you can charge 3500 for 34 apartments? Maybe even 3000 is still just as profitable

Every extra 100 you charge an existing tenant is pure profit, while reducing price to take on more tenants means more maintenance costs, managing staff costs, etc.

In an economic vacuum this may work itself out, but IF there is a widening wage gap where the you have 30 tenants who can afford up to 4500 a month and you have to drop the price, and then the next 50 potential tenants can only afford up to 1800.. there is financial incentive to squeeze more and more out of the 30 year after year rather than try to accommodate all 80.

Hopefully I'm painting the picture properly