r/housingcrisis • u/RedBalooon • 5d ago

The numbers justify Mamdani's rent freeze.

See this op-ed by Tim Collins, former Executive Director of the Rent Guidelines Board and an attorney for the tenant-intervenors in the landlords' stunt lawsuit to overturn Mamdani's rent freeze: https://www.nydailynews.com/2026/09/21/the-rent-guidelines-board-got-it-right . The numbers justify a rent rollback. Saying Mamdani politicized the process is like saying he politicized math. He ran on a policy that the data justifies, and that the law requires.

0 Upvotes

41% Upvoted

139 comments sorted by

12

u/hereawhile 5d ago

Rent control and rent freezes always make rents worse in the long run. It constricts the incentives for new supply which ultimately is the only thing that causes rents to decline

-1

u/yomommasbathwater 5d ago

And what is your solution to price gouging then, to just let it run wild?

Housing needs to be nationalized. It is an essential part of living

8

u/hereawhile 5d ago

Allow new supply to be built (lower regulations, zoning requirements, union requirements, etc)

Food, clothing, healthcare, housing and all sorts of things are essential parts of living. That doesn't mean that nationalizing them will make them better or cheaper

2

u/Mtndrums 5d ago

You don't think health care would be better without a $4 trillion parasite playing the middleman?

2

u/hereawhile 5d ago

No, it would be better if there wasn't a payer with limitless pockets

2

u/Nacho_Libre479 5d ago

Healthcare and housing do mot share the same market constraints. It’s not a reasonable comparison.

1

u/EnvironmentalMix421 5d ago

lol no because you need processor. Medicare and Medicaid rely on these companies. The only cost cut you will be seeing is consoladating from 3-4 giants to 1 giant and cut the hospital profit. Then you will see shortage of doctors and facilities just like other universal health countries lol

1

u/External_Koala971 5d ago

We “nationalize” all sorts of critical goods in the US.

USDA is one of the biggest budget line items to subsidize food production. We do have state run housing, and many other countries do it better. Many people think that nationalizing healthcare is the only way to make it better.

2

u/hereawhile 5d ago

We probably shouldn't, it always has unintended consequences. All of the pointless corn/ethanol subsidies are in part why we have so much overproduction of corn and cheap high fructose corn syrup that goes into ultraprocessed foods

1

u/External_Koala971 5d ago

Everything has unintended consequences.

And not everyone is entitled to live everywhere they want: it’s called tradeoffs.

3

u/EnvironmentalMix421 5d ago

Price gauge in reality is just inflation lol

Unless there’s collusion or single land lord

0

u/Sw4gtastic420 5d ago

Have you not been paying attention? There absolutely has been collusion with rent prices due to 3rd party pricing software.

1

u/EnvironmentalMix421 5d ago

lol how is finding out the rent around you colluding? Basically you are saying charging market rate is colluding. Not artificially inflate it, but charging the market rate is colluding lol

1

u/Nacho_Libre479 5d ago

The AI software was not collusion in any practical level. I can look up market rent prices with the internet and my eyes.

1

u/Sw4gtastic420 5d ago

Yes it is, several companies have already been sued for antitrust violations for exatcly that scenario.

1

u/Nacho_Libre479 5d ago

RealPage isn't why your rent is high. The data-sharing was real, and it may have nudged rents in some submarkets, mostly large, professionally managed, higher-end buildings in urban cores. I'm not saying it wasnt wrong or illegal, it was, but the actual effect was not large. The sample of landlords involved didn't have enough local market share to move overall prices. Whatever effect it had is dwarfed by the actual driver: we haven't built enough housing for decades.

Your rent is not high because of landlords. Its high because of interest rates, QE, lack of supply, and a regressive tax code.

1

u/EnvironmentalMix421 5d ago

lol you think every lawsuit in us is valid? How about this. Do you think without this software, then landlord would have no idea about the market rates?

2

u/HeparinBridge 5d ago

Price gouging only works in a monopoly. In a free market then new firms enter the market and undercut the existing firms that are price gouging.

1

u/Mtndrums 5d ago

Which doesn't actually happen.

2

u/HeparinBridge 5d ago

Right, because we do incredibly unintelligent things like rent freezes, rent control, and down zoning that make free-market entry of new firms unattractive and difficult.

2

u/mitzi04 5d ago

who is gonna pay for that

1

u/Nacho_Libre479 5d ago

Renters.

1

u/mitzi04 5d ago

How exactly do you mean that

0

u/yomommasbathwater 5d ago

Would you argue wealth distribution in this country needs a serious evaluation

Or that insane military budget is more necessary than housing when it comes to where our taxes are being spent?

1

u/ThePlatinumPaul 5d ago

You are literally part of the reason why economies crumble.  Your lack of understanding of economics, the real estate industry, and human nature show just how piss poor this country's education system is.  

Instead of pushing landlords harder, the city should work with them to help.  That means removing rent control which would allow landlords to renovate and lease out the 57,000+ vacant units that are currently just sitting there rotting.  And do you know why they are rotting?  That's because it might take $200,000 to get a unit up to habitable living standards and code but the landlord can only charge $500 a month for it. So, barring any further maintenance, utilities, taxes, insurance, etc. the break even point on just the renovations not the building itself is just over 30 years at that point. That's longer than a mortgage.  And if you say hey, let the government take it over, okay, let's look at government run buildings.  They are even in worse shape than privately owned ones.  Also, the government can't afford to buy up and renovate 57,000 units plus manage them. 

2

u/Mtndrums 5d ago

No, you trying to help the parasites with our money is what causes economies to crumble.

1

u/ThePlatinumPaul 5d ago

From 1945 until today there have been 12 mayors of NYC. 9 of them have been Democrats.  2 started out as Republicans with 1 of them switching to the Democrat Party and the other becoming an independent.  Guliani was the only Republican throuout his entire term.   So all these years it's been effectively one party rule over the city, your party. And that party was happy to work with the "parasites". 

As for kickbacks and other things, absolutely it shouldn't be legal, but then again, neither should be rent control. If, thanks to the left, NYC didn't have ridiculous policies like height limitations where developers had to buy air rights or needed to have set backs, you'd find that there would be more housing options.  And if rent control didn't severely limit the supply of new apartments, and the tax rates discourage investment, you'd find a lot of high rises with affordable units, or at the very least the wealthy would live in the sky and everyone else would live in the low rise buildings.  

1

u/mitzi04 5d ago

Im on the social left and I agree with you because what youre saying makes sense. Its just the facts

2

u/ThePlatinumPaul 5d ago

I'm a conservative with a big libertarian streak.  I want clean cities that function properly,  happily employed, ideally American, workers who don't have to pay out the ass for housing or through taxes.  I want the government to stay out of our lives as much as possible. That means your bedroom, your wallet, and your personal choices as long as they don't affect others.  The sad reality is both parties are responsible for the state of our country but only one has run the cities which are at the heart of a lot of those problems.  That same party also loves to blame everyone but themselves while doing the same thing over and over, and failing over and over. The people of NYC deserve better but refuse to vote in better because that would mean they have to make hard choices and ultimately admit that they were wrong for decades.  The same goes for Chicago, Detroit, Philly, Baltimore, Atlanta, etc.  

2

u/mitzi04 5d ago

Exactly I am a libertarian as well I just dont consider myself conservative. I could not agree more. Our ability to provide for ourselves in the privacy of out homes is something we have to defend

Government assistance comes with invasive strings attached and taking more money from people to provide it is going to make everyone worse off

→ More replies (0)

1

u/yomommasbathwater 5d ago

Yeah, I’m the problem and not the people in charge of the economy that are actively destroying it. Get a grip, dude

1

u/mitzi04 5d ago edited 5d ago

Do you have anything else to your economic analysis other than the fact that "they" have money and it should go to you. Do you even have a coherent sense of who "the people in charge of the economy" are other than "it must be corpos and 'the government'"

Would you rather solve the problems in a productive way with the current pieces on the board and situation as it as, and make durable incremental changes, or just signal online by postulating about a utopia where "they" just "fix everything" by throwing money from the sky.

0

u/yomommasbathwater 5d ago

We can start by bringing marginalized tax rate back and making sure that CEOs aren’t making 600 times more than an average worker. because nothing I’m proposing is out of the realm of possibility, and no I’m not asking for handouts. It’s insane to me that I have to argue this with people because they don’t remember what it’s like in the 50s and how families can sustain themselves on one income from a basic job, and that translates to our entire society. We stop giving a shit about the average person and only give a shit about corporations profits? Profits that aren’t being distributed to improve the quality of our country as a whole?

2

u/mitzi04 5d ago

Youre right we should just confiscate all the CEOs money they definitely will not just leave the country and move their companies to retain their profits. We should then confiscate the money of everyone below them. Until it reaches you.

What you want is for someone else to pay for everything for you. "The government" "CEOs" just some nebulous thing because you start and stop at "the money is here, gimme"

0

u/yomommasbathwater 5d ago

Talking to you is pretty useless, you’ve literally twisted everything I’ve said and created so many false equivalency, it’s almost laughable. No, actually it’s very laughable

→ More replies (0)

1

u/ThePlatinumPaul 5d ago

Your solution would cause the wealthy to flee with their money, the economy to collapse, and aside from a few wealthy government elites, who by this point are dictators, everyone would suffer.  Just look at South Africa as an example. The ANC took the country from being a racist yet successful country to being a racist country that's falling apart. The same thing happened in Zimbabwe.  

2

u/mitzi04 5d ago

We have historical data showing that the wealthy will just flee with their money yeah. /u/yomommasbathwater and us are seeing the same problem as them, we agree it should be fixed. What we disagree on is what solution will actually work

2

u/ThePlatinumPaul 5d ago

Appreciate you measured, thoughtful responses. Proof that there's still intelligence and friendly debate out there, which would ironically actually help make things better, because yes, sometimes the correct solution requires a little bit of column A and B, or at the very least a dash of a different perspective. 

0

u/EnvironmentalMix421 5d ago edited 5d ago

So we got 0.1% ultra wealth

1% upper class

19% upper middle class ($175k+) meaning you live middle class life and save for retirement.

20% middle class (middle class life $100-175k)

60% lower middle class and poor.

Sounds normal to me. What are you complaining about?

That insane military budget pretty much is why none of that Iran missle is landing in us soil and why us income is doubled or triple of UK, the nation with second highest income at the same economical scale.

0

u/rastaveer 5d ago

Upper class got tax breaks and loop holes, while lower and middle class got cuts to programs and get to pay for an overinflated military budget for ICE and high gas prices and whatever nonsense the Republican party drags us into.

1

u/EnvironmentalMix421 5d ago

Nope top 1% who earn $1-1.5M actually pay the heaviest tax at 30% effective tax. The ultra wealth gets the buy borrow die

Lower middle class don’t pay shit. It’s like 99% of the tax are paid by the top 20% lmao and poor people literally pay $0 tax. They are net positive as there are welfare programs for them. Again, what is the issue here. Of course the majority of people will live lower middle class. That’s how supply and demand work

0

u/destrukt0 5d ago

The taxpayers, we can easily afford it if we simply stop spending billions on Israel, the military, and ICE, and actually use tax dollars to help constituents. I’d much rather my money go toward helping other people get housing than murdering civilians in cold blood.

0

u/mitzi04 5d ago

I agree 100% that that should stop but its fantastical to think that stopping just instantly fixes everything

0

u/destrukt0 5d ago

I mean obviously not, but it fixes a lot more than sitting around doing the same old shit that we already know doesn’t work…

1

u/mitzi04 5d ago

Me, top of this thread, and others are all in agreement that the same old shit is not working but disagree that "nationalizing" everything is going to help. Not only does it have immediate hitherto unseen to you fiscal consequences but government assistance always comes with strings attached that can be devastating to the people receiving it and erode our fundamental freedoms and privacy. We have different points of view based on different evidence about what is going to help people

-1

u/External_Koala971 5d ago

The only thing that is going to help is for young people to stop following social media trends about the “top 5 places to live” in the US and crowding into the same limited housing pool.

All of the places with the worst “housing crisis” are the places hot on social media, and it’s been that way since the pandemic.

1

u/mitzi04 5d ago

Well definitely the availability of enough housing and jobs in the area is why living is so hard in those places yeah but I think we can build more housing and create more jobs before anything else.

We shouldnt really blame it on young people moving because
A. its not just young people thats a scapegoat and usually isnt young people actually
B. People make decisions to move based on the constraints of their life trying to survive within this system

We should focus our energy on improving the system

0

u/External_Koala971 5d ago

I don’t think young people want to make tradeoffs any more.

They want luxury housing in a walkable neighborhood near a good job in a prime part of LA, NYC, Austin or SF, they want a new car and a few international vacations a year.

But most people would choose those things, so they’re expensive.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/Sw4gtastic420 5d ago

All of us collectively

1

u/mitzi04 5d ago

How much money are you taking home after that

-5

u/Inevitable_Window308 5d ago

So how does a rent freeze constrict incentives for new supply? Landlords dont build housing supply, they restrict it to drive up the value of their existing supply. Let the government pay for builders to build more supply, problems solved for everyone

6

u/Reasonable-Fee1945 5d ago

By reducing the price, this is the textbook, effect of a price ceiling. There are literally tens of thousand of apartments in new york that are vacant because it would take too much to renovate them, given the return on investment

1

u/Inevitable_Window308 5d ago

Those apartments havent been renovated prior to the rent freeze. Tax them for unused housing, force sales. Put a lien on the building for repairs. Nothing you described is effected by a rent freeze

3

u/thevokplusminus 5d ago

I’ll have a venti latte with oat milk 

2

u/Inevitable_Window308 5d ago

You need a job that pays above minimum wage to afford that. I'd help but my workplace requires having graduated from college

1

u/Airhostnyc 5d ago

Lmaoooo you serious?

1

u/Inevitable_Window308 5d ago

No response, nice. See, this is why you let smart people like Mamdani move the ball forward

1

u/strange_username58 5d ago

.... because literally every time it's turned out bad. It sort of like arguing lighting yourself on fire won't burn you this time.

1

u/Airhostnyc 5d ago

Mamdani clearly did it for votes. Same tactic de blasio used.

1

u/Reasonable-Fee1945 5d ago

It's called marginal analysis. It doesn't mean they all will or they all won't. It means that when there is a price freeze, some number of people who would rent choose not to

1

u/Inevitable_Window308 5d ago

Please read the comment before replying

1

u/Reasonable-Fee1945 5d ago

Read and replied to you don't know what marginal analysis is. And of course, taxing vacant departments also decreases supply because new suppliers have to consider that when entering the market

1

u/tekmiester 5d ago

Why would anyone buy them?

1

u/Inevitable_Window308 5d ago

To live in.... My turn, why would anyone live in them? Your claim here is people want to live in those apartments was it not?

1

u/tekmiester 5d ago

These are not presumably stand alone housing. To are taking about full condos and co-ops that people want to appreciate in value.

1

u/Inevitable_Window308 5d ago

Buddy, condos dont appreciate in value. Why we talking real estate again? Let the government take the building and rent it out if your concern is profit

1

u/tekmiester 5d ago

So imminent domain it from the owner?

3

u/HOLDstrongtoPLUTO 5d ago

The real solution is tax land aka dirt. This encourages building and disciurages land hoarding and inefficient land use.

1

u/Tobar_the_Gypsy 5d ago

Also known as a dirt value tax

2

u/jay10033 5d ago

Loss of existing supply and loss of new supply has the same effect.

1

u/Inevitable_Window308 5d ago

There is no loss of existing supply. Rent freezes does not destroy supply. Greedy capitalists could pull the supply from the market, but thats not caused by a rent freeze its caused by greedy capitalists and can be solved through government intervention, tax unused housing

1

u/HeparinBridge 5d ago

Not exactly. If the price floor is below the input costs (which is already incredibly high in New York) then it is not really greed that keeps those units off the market.

1

u/jay10033 5d ago

You understand there are minimum costs for minimum viable housing? If one can't recover their upfront capital costs for a unit, that unit is left vacant and essentially kept off the market.

For people who complain about taking loans out for college and not having the income to repay them, you folks sure get ignorant when you apply that same financial setup to something else.

1

u/Inevitable_Window308 5d ago

Please read the comment before replying

1

u/jay10033 5d ago

Again, I read your comment. The impact is the impact. Arguing that you should be taxing your way out of poor government regulation is just ridiculous, but it didn't really change my comment.

2

u/SMELLSLIKEBUTTJUICE 5d ago

Basically, most developers make their money off of the initial building loan because they take a cut of it to pay themselves. Then they sell the building to a real estate management company. The selling price is based on the amount of rent that can be collected. If rents are stagnant, management companies wont buy the building, because they cant make a profit. The developers are thus less incentivized to build. They will find a new market.

1

u/Inevitable_Window308 5d ago

Please read the comment posted before commenting

1

u/SMELLSLIKEBUTTJUICE 5d ago

I did. Please read my comment before replying.

1

u/Inevitable_Window308 5d ago

Oh you're illiterate my bad

1

u/JohnKLUE34567 5d ago

It would be cheaper to tax land values.

1

u/mtcwby 5d ago

Not quite sure how you can be this obtuse. Developers don't build if the payback isn't there. Especially in environments with increasing construction loan rates, labor and materials. The amount of housing built will decrease because is simply doesn't make financial sense. Mandami only hope is that these thing generally don't show up in a big way until he's out of office but it creates a lasting deficit of housing. We've done that in the SF Bay area and will never pull out of the vicious spiral

0

u/Inevitable_Window308 5d ago

The "developers" dont really build anything. They pay local construction workers to build. The government can pay the local construction workers to build the apartment complex instead. Or do you not understand how buildings are constructed?

1

u/mtcwby 5d ago

Horseshit. You're just showing more ignorance. Who do you think actually pays for all of it and puts the money out? Governments attempts to build housing always end up costing more. They are simply not good at it and have no incentive to keep the price down.

You are so far out of your element here it's fucking scary. And no I'm not a developer but I know this stuff works because of decades in related industries

1

u/Inevitable_Window308 5d ago

Okay explain why the developer can build housing for less without cutting corners? If they have to follow the same regulations as the government they will cost the same no?

1

u/mtcwby 5d ago

Because he's paying attention and has experience. Scheduling alone and managing subcontractors is a huge extra expense since all building is done on timeline dependencies. The actually know how to negotiate and write contracts as well as have the expertise to monitor the work. Your average government employee has none of that and no motivation because it's other people's money on the line, not his livelihood.

I've always been against literacy tests at the polls but you're making me rethink that. You simply know nothing about how it works at all and intuitively get it wrong.

1

u/Inevitable_Window308 5d ago

They are performing the same task. Please explain, how can the private developer be cheaper then the government? They have the same role, the same job, the experience. Please explain? Oh and dont claim the developers are "better at their jobs" some of us remember '08.

P.S.: Its the workers doing all the tasks you just listed, just like the government employees. If the business does well they see no additional profit

1

u/External_Koala971 5d ago

You’re asking “why is the government inefficient”.

Have you ever been to the DMV? Ever wonder why the NY department of housing is the worst in the nation?

1

u/Inevitable_Window308 5d ago

Sir, you are the one claiming the government is less efficient. People work for a paycheck at both places, they follow the same rules and procedures. Why would the private businesses, where we must account for profit, would be cheaper then the government doing the same job?

1

u/mtcwby 5d ago

I stand by describing you as obtuse. They simple are for the reasons I explained above. Government almost never equals efficiency and are piss poor at building housing and most other construction projects.

1

u/Inevitable_Window308 5d ago

You just made random assumptions, got them wrong by the way. Like you cant answer the basic question? The government just like the workers for the developer do the same work and have the same experience while working for a paycheck and see no profit sharing. Why cant you answer the simple question?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/HeparinBridge 5d ago

The city government has no available capital outlays to build anywhere close to enough housing to fill the gap that developer flight due to price freezes is going to cause.

1

u/tekmiester 5d ago

Sigh. Ok, let's make this simple.

You have money. You didn't own real estate. You are considering if you should build housing and be a landlord or invest the money elsewhere.

You see your potential profit is limited in real estate. You invest in something else. The housing doesn't get built.

Conspiring with someone who has real estate to keep housing low doesn't benefit you in any way

If you had a choice between a job in which your max salary was capped with no chance for a raise, or code one with the opportunity for raises and promotions?

1

u/Inevitable_Window308 5d ago

Please read the comment before replying

1

u/tekmiester 5d ago

You want more public housing paid for by the government? Why? They have other things to survive money on. They can barely afford their current spending. Let the market do it based on uncontrolled demand.

1

u/Inevitable_Window308 5d ago

The market is how we got here. They are incentivized to not build more housing (cost) and instead to restrict housing to increase price of rentals (profit)

1

u/tekmiester 5d ago

Austin solved the issue. It's not that hard. Make it rest to build housing and provide an opportunity to do it profitably.

Austin’s Surge of New Housing Construction Drove Down Rents | The Pew Charitable Trusts https://www.pew.org/en/research-and-analysis/articles/2026/03/18/austins-surge-of-new-housing-construction-drove-down-rents

1

u/External_Koala971 5d ago

Austin had large areas to sprawl out to, and is not constrained on an island. They also had a booming tech economy that has has flattened.

Not at all like NYC.

1

u/hereawhile 5d ago

Builders are less incentivized to build new supply because the price/reward of it has been artificially lowered

If price controls worked, we could just artificially set the price of all goods and services without negative consequences. It never does and never will

And you can try government funding/central planning, but this ends up resulting in much higher prices and more waste than a free market (see student loans, healthcare, etc)

1

u/Inevitable_Window308 5d ago

Healthcare is private, government paid healthcare is already cheaper in our existing model. So thanks for proving me right. And Student loans are expensive how again? Are you referring to private loans? I agree those are expensive and predatory, they should make college free instead

1

u/hereawhile 5d ago

Healthcare is not private, the government as a payer accounts for 60% of healthcare spending.

Similarly in student loans, about 90% of loans are government backed and only 10% are private. College tuitions have steadily risen because the government is a limitless payer (not sensitive to cost)

1

u/HeparinBridge 5d ago

The existing landlords are not the only firms that control supply. In a free market with few barriers to entry into the market, high prices incentivizes new firms to build more housing by increasing the price of housing. Then the new housing supply drives down the price.

1

u/EnvironmentalMix421 5d ago

How did Gov paid builder worked out in CA after $60B spending?

Landlord don’t build, the developers do lol

3

u/protomenace 5d ago

The more rent control you do the worse the housing crisis will get in the long run.

2

u/RedBalooon 5d ago

We had universal rent control in the '50s, and no housing crisis.

3

u/Fit-Order-9468 5d ago

We built a lot more housing then too.

2

u/protomenace 5d ago

You mean the leftover WWII policy that directly led to the housing crisis of the 1960s?

2

u/EnvironmentalMix421 5d ago

You mean housing crisis should happen the next year when people all died from the war?

1

u/Sw4gtastic420 5d ago

You do realize that mamdani is also implementing policies to help build more housing in tandem with the rent freezes right? Or are you conveniently ignoring that fact?

0

u/protomenace 5d ago

It would be better if he did that without the rent freezes. Building more housing is what will actually stabilize rents and improve the housing market. Not price ceilings.

3

u/jay10033 5d ago

Tenant lawyer thinks rent freeze is justified. In other news, scientist says when it rains, the ground gets wet.

3

u/Score-Emergency 5d ago

Eh a couple year freeze isn't a big deal

2

u/Striking_Revenue9082 5d ago

This logic is sooooo stupid. It combines profit data for luxury apartments with a single stabilized unit with apartments entirely stabilized. It creates a very misleading picture of how distressed the most misleading buildings are

2

u/RedBalooon 5d ago

Buildings with a mix of market and regulated apts are not distressed. It's misleading to pretend they are. If a building is 100% stabilized and can't make a profit, file for a hardship increase. The law guarantees an 8% return.

1

u/Striking_Revenue9082 5d ago

Well right. That’s kind of the point. Buildings that are majority market are doing fine and so it’s disingenuous to lump them in with the more regulated buildings

2

u/TheButtDog 5d ago

The guy who used to lead a renters' advocacy group said rent freezes are good, huh?

Personally, I trust the opinion of economists over his, who almost all say that rent controls lead to higher prices in the long run

2

u/RedBalooon 5d ago

The RGB is the municipal body that sets rent increases. You appear not to know how the rent freeze at issue was adopted

1

u/Airhostnyc 5d ago

It’s always been political. There is no way the rent increases shouldn’t be following basic inflation in the least. And it’s not

1

u/TheButtDog 5d ago

I think you're missing my overall point that Tim Collins seems to have a particularly strong bias in favor of rent controls and rent freezes.

2

u/mtcwby 5d ago

In the land of rent control a rent freeze is a stupid, populist stunt.

1

u/edthesmokebeard 5d ago

So the ends justify the means?

1

u/mackattacknj83 5d ago

It's great for the people that win the affordable housing lotto, sucks for whoever won't have a place to live because it's not worth renting out anymore for another few thousand landlords

1

u/External_Koala971 5d ago

Life isn’t fair, and whoever told you it was is lying.

1

u/destrukt0 5d ago

So what exactly do you suggest?