Robin and/or Carey asked how much rent can be charged and whether or not cities should control rent. Many answered about how much it can go up. I'll try and answer some of her other questions.
> We as a city can and should have this discussion. The city of Mpls can not impose rent control. Last I checked, the state pre-empts the cities from doing such. And then we should put > some controls on rent. Sure is nice to have the conclusion before you have the discussion. I always like quick meetings. We can accommodate small landowners while defending > against large firms buying numerous properties and simultaneously raising > the cost of living for an entire neighborhood. We (the city) shouldn't get into the business of picking the winners and losers of the market place. > > In my opinion, having lived through the late nineties as a renter in this > town, "what the market will bear" is unbearable. Your older sistren and brethren got the benefits of no increases or declining rent from 1987-1993. Shelter is a basic human > need, and a humane society would see it as a basic human right. It is not a constitutional right. If it was we could all live in our Moscow like brownstones. We must > admit that the free market does not protect and serve the populace in > situations where a) the commodity is necessary to survival and b) the free > choice of the consumer is constrained by the difficulty of "switching > services." Two points. A) Food prices are almost completely unregulated. They are cheap, our society pays less of it's earnings for food then anywhere else in the world. No one, no one is dieing of malnutrition by want. Maybe by parental abuse. No one starves, period. Free food is plentiful for those who need it. B) The larger point of switching services. Simple answer. The bigger the ticket the harder the switch. Houses, college education, cars, re-fridgerators all have big ticket costs, that prohibit quick changes. Meaning you live with your decisions. Rent is 99.9% of the time a one year or less committment. Life isn't easy, sometimes you move. Changing one's residency to find the best deal (as theoretical > capitalism expects an intelligent consumer to do) is completely unlike > buying the cheaper bag of potatoes at the store. Moving is time-consuming, > stressful and financially difficult. All the hallmarks of an unlikely > behavior for those in poverty - especially those working full-time-plus > hours. Add in the fact that the very behavior theoretical capitalism > expects of intelligent consumers - moving often - is frowned upon by > landowners and can limit choice further. > > What you get out of this equation is exactly what we've got: a poor, > marginalized population suffering at the caprice of an inhumane system. > Protecting the public is the role of government. It's time for some > reasonable rent control. > > So let's start throwing those numbers out. Twelve? Seventy-seven? > Fifty-eight and a half? > > > Robin Garwood > Seward Any one new to the list can check out my postings in the archives from March of 2001. We addressed rent control quite thoroughly back then. Those who wish new information, can post me off list. There is plenty out there. Craig Miller Former Fultonite [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
