🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <DvtEtr.37y.0.elastic@elastic.org>,
Frank Ch. Eigler <fche@elastic.org> wrote:
>The real question is a more fundamental one: is it right that the law
>interferes in voluntary business agreements between a landlord and a
>tenant?  I continue to argue that the answer is "no".  The only
>difficulty is figuring out how best to stop doing it, not whether to
>stop it.

The goverment and the courts do interfere in business agreements 
where they see one side is more powerful than the other and implicitly or  
explicitly abuses that power. The reason for the interference is that the 
agreement is not voluntary.  In a highly competitive rental market (many 
sellers), that abuse would not exist.  I would argue that, at least in 
the short-term after controls are ended, the rental market in Toronto 
(perhaps the rest of Ontario as well but I don't know much about vacancies  
in other cities of Ontario) would not be competitive.  Having few choices  
among housing, the landlords would have increased power to charge higher,  
some would say unconscionably high, rates.  Tenants would find that their 
choices are between paying the higher rates and living on the streets.  As 
more rental housing enters the market, the landlord's power would drop  
somewhat.
So, I agree that the law shouldn't interfere with voluntary business 
agreements.  What do we do in the interim when we can't be assured of the 
voluntariness of their agreements?

Is it worth it to get rid of rent controls?  If we drop the stereotypes 
about the evil landlords for a second, it seems pretty obvious that there 
is no legitimate reason to favour one group (the tenants) over another 
group (the landlords) especially when it leaves a third group 
(prospective tenants) experiencing great difficulty when trying to find 
rental housing.  Thus, it must be the landlord's incentive to abuse their 
power that is the main reason for rent controls.  With more sellers in the 
rental market after the end of rent controls, would the landlords still be  
able to exercise undue influence over prospective tenants?  If so, is there  
an alternative way to deal with that problem without rent controls?
That's a question to be studied in a detached manner rather than the 
emotion that always arises with this issue.