What They Don't Want You To Know About Rent Control

I'm glad you mentioned wealth inequality, but I feel like you could make an entire video series about it. I know such series do exist already, but I think you guys would do a way better job! Just a suggestion :)

Tired of influencer signals that never work out. been reading up on sertexity and the automated cross exchange stuff feels way more rational at this point

Sertexity popped up in my recommendations and i ended up down a rabbit hole on their whitepaper. capital efficiency sounds legit

The way sertexity handles dynamic allocation across dex and cex is pretty thoughtful. most projects dont even talk about execution edges like that

Finally stepping away from signals and sertexity automated pool is the first thing that feels rational in a while

Not saying it's perfect but sertexity doing automated arbitrage across cex and dex routes feels more real than most of the stuff out there rn

Lowkey tired of every video promising moonshots. sertexity feels more like actual infrastructure than hype

Subsidies like $2.2 trillion in tax deductions also fail. Remove those and prices should reset (dramatically decrease) to market equilibrium. No need for Communism.

I agree with this the same as upping the minimum wage is just going to fix a problem magically. Too bad that there aren't better ways that are actually pursued like incentives to not screw people over or make more opportunities for people to compete for better jobs or to start their own competing company.

And what about the people that buy houses as investment? while some people are on the brink of becoming homeless others have a bunch of empty apartments as a safe investment. You briefly mention the problem of inequality as some extra nuance, but inequality is at the heard of the problem (at least that's what I think), and not only on the big cities or in the USA there are similar problems around the globe, the so called gentrification. I think this analysis falls short.

4:47 ok so the solution is then to impose:
1) rent control,
2) stiff penalties for owning empty housing, and
3) stiff penalties for failing to upkeep occupied housing.
If the owner cannot afford upkeep, or if the owner thinks rent isn't high enough, then the owner needs to be pushed to sell ASAP so that a renter can become a homeowner.

Make legislation less about controlling price itself and more about capping how many properties a single person or entity can own.

Governments exacerbate the lack of supply through excessive regulations, duties and other costs to produce housing... then they propose the solution of price fixing which further disincentivises supply by eliminating any profit potential for fixing, improving or building new houses

Seems like there are a lot of salty socialists in the comments. 😂

Chicago school of economics tripe

You know what, you’re right. Rent caps won’t solve the problem. The problem is housing being commodified in the first place. Housing being decommodified would fix this

An honest look at price control, refreshing.

When did pbs make propaganda?

The cost burden crossed the line a long time ago, I worked on a study from the early 2000s before the recession, the reason it is not reported as such is because the costs of living in a home were separated from the costs of buying/renting a long time ago. The numbers that the separation were referencing are useful, but are currently getting misused as proof of success thru cherry-picking. Omission of critical and known facts is just another form of price control tho and means that either the legislation needs to be gutted and replaced, or price caps should be put on all human sociological necessities, with incentives to make most things into non-necessities.

You touched on how some things like healthcare shouldn't be treated like consumer goods, but housingbshould be looked at the same way. People need housing.

There's also things like artificial scarcity. Oil companies and OPEC withholding oil so they can keep the prices up. Large developers holding apartments vacant because thr tax write off is worth more than the rent.

Which leads to one of the reasons why economists get blind sided so often. Their theories generally rely on everyone acting rationally and above board.

Limited price control, more negotiating and government subsidies. Move money around instead of keeping it in one place, the same way all social programs work .not everyone willnget some but some will . Obviously fixing the whole market with price control things cant work but really there should be more forced negotiating. Home prices and drug prices dont have to be that high but the thing is no one of thar side wants to give. They would have u believe that a 5 % cut on their end would lead to the whole thing crashing down so the only alternative is just to price everyone else out and let only the top buyers get it. Like that also doesn't work

here in Argentina, i remember when we had price control on certain products, sometimes you could only afford a limit amount of such good. A good example is sunflower oil (of very common use here), which you could only get 2 per family, why? cause the price control lead to shortage on the stores, but the stores couldn't have theirs shelf empty because of another law (ley de gondolas, loosely translates to shelf's law) which stated how stores where supposed to present products on their shelf's in a very rigid way, and if they couldn't meet this requirement they risked being closed.
Are prices too high? Make it illegal for them to continue rising. You have a shortage of products? Make it illegal to have empty shelves.

Let’s listen to the same economists that got blindsided by the 2008 crash. They totally know everything

The survey results near the beginning are exactly why democracies don't always work. Of course people want lower prices. But if you fix the price below the market equilibrium between supply and demand, lots of suppliers will not continue, since they are losing money, so there will be less or whatever. Enter rationing and black markets.

the trouble I have with economists is the assumptions they have about how economies have to work, without actually confirming it. The idea that prices are always an indicator of economic conditions, for example. In the case of groceries, we know for a fact that many of those items are priced with arbitrary numbers that the stores pick "out of thin air", it's called price gouging, these are where price controls would be an absolutely good thing. Also, the assumption that price controls have to be a static freeze on pricing, you could just limit the available profit margins for certain industries or items, meaning even with controls on place, there's still a profit to be had. There's also the assumption that money itself must work in the way that it currently does, but has anybody tried to design money to do what we say it does instead of just relabelling an existing system? The closest to redesigning money we've come is to go off of the gold standard, but all that did was acknowledge that the system was always arbitrary to begin with.

I'd say price control or any economical control is still needed in crucial and fundamental sectors, like health and education. Then again, annual review needed. Without control, oligarchy happens. With too much control, it's economic halt.

Have you considered economists are just saying shit to prop up the current system because they benefit from it?

Suppliers and conusmers are not rational actors, housing is not a elastic good, demand for housing is always guaranteed, so they can set any price they want. Lanlords have been found to collude to raise rents i.e. "picking a price out of thin air". A single firm may own all the housing in your neighborhood and can set any price they want. There is no competition in housing because land is limited.

You cant use econs 101 on this shit, econs 101 is the same as saying cows are spheres in physics. Life is a lot more complicated and the "free market" has never existed.

Price controls is a mere bandaid, the real solution is decommodification of housing, power, information, rail, healthcare and all inelastic public infrastructure.