Paywall removed: https://archive.is/MbQYG

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 80 points 2 years ago (6 children)

3% was the top annual pay increase at the Fortune 500 company I used to work at. 3% max increase for those that "exceeded all expectations". Probably less than 1/3 of employees.

So if it's good enough for a Fortune 500 company, it's good enough for every landlord. 3% max, and only to max 1/3 of their locations/rooms.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    One of the issues is if material costs to maintain the property increase steeper than this cap.

    Though the solution is pretty practical -- cap it at inflation.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 37 points 2 years ago* (2 children)

    Don't really care honestly, since the prices they're charging now are nowhere near their operating costs as it is.

    They can take a hit to their profit. Or sell an "unprofitable" property.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    This is the truth. You need to create conditions that make renting unprofitable and unsustainable, and all of a sudden property prices will begin to fall as landlords sell. This happened in London after WW2, when renting was over-regulated and most of the residents ended up owning their own apartments as landlords sold off property. After deregulation, the reverse trend began again.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment