I'm curious, and maybe this is not the right forum for this kind of discussion, but it seems to me at some level there's going to be a tradeoff between the ability of current tenants to afford their current housing and newcomers to afford housing. In markets like NYC, where demand is ever-increasing and for various reasons supply cannot keep up with demand, maintaining rent-controlled apartments necessarily drives prices higher overall. This prices a large group of people (especially the working-class young) out of the market. At the same time, were landlords allowed to adjust to market at-will, people who potentially have lived in a community for decades could be displaced without notice. Both situations are undesirable, since it would seem that someone gets screwed either way.
I've been wondering this for a while, but haven't come up with a satisfying answer: to what extent do people have the right to live in a given community? Does this depend on if people have lived in a community for some time? Does it only depend on whether they can afford to live there? I feel like these questions aren't black and white, but there's also no clear middle part I feel comfortable committing to.
I've been wondering this for a while, but haven't come up with a satisfying answer: to what extent do people have the right to live in a given community? Does this depend on if people have lived in a community for some time? Does it only depend on whether they can afford to live there? I feel like these questions aren't black and white, but there's also no clear middle part I feel comfortable committing to.