The Tom and Tim Show! Live from Bernal Heights, where the rent hikes are insane!

1. Not to labor the point here but clearly you cannot demonstrate the point.

   I do like have you have retreated from your original claim but surely you understand how “Asking a market rent is not an outrage.” is entirely subjective?

2. No. No you cannot.

   You’ve not demonstrated anything.

   You’re not grasping the fundamentals I’m afraid.

   Rhetorical fallacies though they are great aren’t they?

3. Evidenced by what exactly?

   Help us save local journalism!

   Every tax-deductible donation helps us grow to cover the issues that mean the most to our community. Become a 48 Hills Hero and support the only daily progressive news source in the Bay Area.

   Learn more

   Who or what are you “trusting”?

4. Again, I have no control over what you feel outrage about. I can, however, demonstrate why outrage is irrational.

   Asking a market rent is not an outrage.

5. Evidently people read these comments and I trust them. Why don’t you.

6. No, no you can’t. That statement doesn’t make any sense.

   You are literally attempting to define someone else’s subjective reality. “That house isn’t on fire, it’s merely glowing”.

   If i’m a dyed-in-the-wool conservative or libertarian or communist or progressive or christian democrat or whatever etc and I think this market is outrageous for whatever subjective reasons & beliefs i hold – pointing out that my outrage is irrational is not just ignorant it’s futile. The reverse is also true.

   It’s the intellectual equivalent of starting a sentence with “I’m not a racist but…”

   You might want to look in studying rhetoric it’s a wonderful subject.

   This is a handy poster you could print out:

   http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/rhetological-fallacies/

7. what readers? this isn’t your blog, what are you talking about? I know nothing about how you make your living nor do I care.

   Spouting comments that satisfy your own world viewpoint does not a cogent argument make. You do understand that right?

8. Since I make my living from knowing how markets work, and you do not, I’ll let readers decide who to believe

9. I don’t think you understand how markets work.

10. My point was that the market isn’t outrageous. It’s just a thing.

    I cannot control what outrages others, but I can point out where such outrage is irrational.

11. Who or what is a subjective ideologue?

    If 8K is four times 2K, then 2K is a quarter of 8K. Problem?

12. “now, I don’t know if the market rent for this home really is 8K a “month but, if it is,”

    “You may think that is “outrageous” but it merely is what it is.”

    Ehhh… right.. so apples.. oranges? Same thing?

13. “Because the two are mathematically equivalent.”

    They are only “equivalent” if they satisfy a given subjective ideologue

    You do understand the difference right?

14. More market worship gobbledegook. Praise the Lord!

15. A market rent can be an exact number. If I advertize a home for rent for 8K a month and someone takes it, then that by definition is what that home is worth in the market. Something is worth what someone is willing to pay for it. Landlords get pretty good at figuring what a market rent is because their viability depends on getting it right, and because they frequently engage in price discovery.

    In this case, it seems the actual (formerly controlled) rent was about 2K. Now, I don’t know if the market rent for this home really is 8K a month but, if it is, then a quadrupling of her rent is not outrageous. It is simply where the market is.

    Also bear in mind that the tenant is being offered a bigger place here – her new space will include the basement storage that was previously the now-defunct illegal unit. So it is not a quadrupling in rent-per-square-foot terms, but less. Tom and Tim omitted this important fact.

    As I noted on another thread, there are currently 212 listings on CL for rentals at $8K a month and over. You may think that is “outrageous” but it merely is what it is.

16. Wrong again. Rents are an exact, known number. A “market rent” is not. Perhaps you can call it an ‘n’ factor and devise a formula for to figure it out its value for a given moment. Meanwhile, your original statement relies on a great deal of magical thinking.

17. The equivalence is mathematically sound. If the controlled rent is 25% of the market rent, and rent control then goes away. an increase of 400% transforms the rent into a amrket rent.

    If you are “outraged” only because you think that market rents are a lot, then that is another discussion. But they are what they are.

18. Because it IS outrageous. (Your your last sentence doesn’t even resemble a mathematical equation. Garbage statement.)

19. It’s interesting that you are outraged that the rent can quadruple on a particular unit.

    But it doesn’t outrage you at all that the rent might be set at one quarter of the market rent.

    Because the two are mathematically equivalent.

Comments are closed.