Kudos to for covering the unintended but entirely foreseeable consequences of CA's anti-price-gouging law for L.A. fire victims.
1/3
Conversation
![David Watson 🥑](data:image/svg+xml,<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="96" height="96"><rect fill-opacity="0"/></svg>)
Post your reply
Now, will modify his executive directive & incentive the people who own habitable, underutilized space in L.A. to rent it to fire victims?
Or will the feel-good vibes of banning "price gouging" continue to trump the needs of fire victims?
2/3
California governance seems dependent on a pathological belief that incentives don't exist, and I can never understand why that is.
How many times do you need to be taught a lesson before you finally learn it?
It's possibly the biggest #airpollution-deaths study in India 11 years, 655 districts, 16.6 million deaths
I spoke to the AG's office about this, they confirmed in writing that leases longer than one year are exempt:
How did they reach the $10K threshold, what if that is a 10 bedroom mansion with very high end amenities? one would expect it to be normally rented in those areas for more than $20K a month.
If it's entirely foreseeable what makes you think it's unintentional? Understand the evil we're dealing with.
He just bought a $9 million mansion in the most exclusive county in the country. Pretty sure junkies aren't camping in the dry brush surrounding his neighborhood. Who exactly are these mythical folks he cares about?
That's not a price gouging rule at all. It's a simple cap. Unbelievable...
The #EatonFire , #PalisadesFires , and Hurst fires, which roared through homes, businesses, and schools in the US since last Tuesday have sent billows of toxic smoke throughout the region.
I guess they’re going to have to sell their rental properties instead (and I think the people who would be the ones renting the $20k a month properties have the $2 million in cash ready to buy them)
A mortgage at today's rates for the median valued home in Pacific Palisades would run at almost exactly double that cap, or just over $20k, assuming 20% down payment and 7% interest rates.
Oh, what lavish lives are in such peril. We commoners despair. May the fires spare you and the sparrows fire you.
The 10% thing sounds fine and they don't say that is limiting housing stock.
The 160% "fair market rent" seems too distortionary and hope they fix it to some better metric or eliminate completely. Perhaps limit to 110% $/sqft of the average at that zip code or census tract?
So, rather than make $10,000 month, the owners aren't renting out at all. Interesting.
Yeah I don’t think the people he’s concerned about are looking for 10000 a month rentals.
If many/most burnt-out homeowners have these sort of fire insurance clauses, then I wouldn't be surprised if the insurance companies "recommended" this price cap
So they’re NOT renting properties out? Not making money at all because they can’t rip people off?
GIF
Just like good little communists - making sure that even when you pay for a house, you don’t really own it
10k/ mo. is like a 1 bedroom in LA. California should be the biggest economy on the planet, but democrats are REALLY fucking stupid and only care about being in power.