Quote:
Originally Posted by Great68
|
This kind of proves the math that donk was laying out though.
They pay a $19,000 penalty, but they sell/sold the place at peak market, I'm sure they did much better than $19k...
And if the tenants rent costs went up 45% moving to a new place, that means they were paying at least 45% under market... even if the landlord had re-rented it out to someone that $19k would have been made back so fast.
I don't know what the problem is society wise, but I can see both sides... you don't want to see people forced out of places, but at the same time why should anyone be shielded from the price of things rising?
Do you just ban anyone from owning secondary properties? Does that help? I'm not sure tbh.