> A landlord can only get the amount of rent that a tenant is willing to pay.
A place to live is a rather inelastic commodity. If the price goes up across the board, people will pay, until they can't possibly afford the going rent and are driven into homelessness.
> this service is not responsible for higher rents, the market is.
This service has effectively cornered the market, and is manipulating the market through shortages, driving rents higher.
> A place to live is a rather inelastic commodity.
People always say this when prices are going up. Then prices go down, like in 2008.
The thing is, it is elastic. For example, people get roommates to split the rent. They get larger or smaller places based on their willingness to pay. More convenient or less convenient. More or less amenities.
Here’s what that looks like on the history: 2008 caused a brief flattening but it’s clear why people are talking about rent going up because that’s what it has overwhelmingly done.
Yup. Everyone claimed it wasn’t supply and demand, but as soon as Covid and WFH hit (and people could live anywhere), rents dropped fast in SF, probably ~20% in 6 months.
Oh, no argument - but for how long relative to the time they have been going up? I wouldn’t say they never go down but there’s been a pronounced trend for ages. I bought a house relatively early (thanks dotcom bubble!) and was constantly reminded of how much extra income I had relative to my friends who were renting, and that really adds up over the decades where people in decent jobs were struggling to amass down payments.
A place to live is a rather inelastic commodity. If the price goes up across the board, people will pay, until they can't possibly afford the going rent and are driven into homelessness.
> this service is not responsible for higher rents, the market is. This service has effectively cornered the market, and is manipulating the market through shortages, driving rents higher.