News Brief: Seattle’s “first in time” rental law overturned by superior court judge

Via the Seattle Times: Judge rejects Seattle’s ‘first-come, first-served’ rental law as unconstitutional

Seattle’s law requiring landlords to choose among qualified applicants on a first-come, first-served basis violates the state constitution, a judge ruled Wednesday.

Adopted by the City Council in 2016 and in effect since last year, the groundbreaking law “has a laudable goal of eliminating the role of implicit bias in tenancy decisions,” King County Superior Court Judge Suzanne Parisien said in a written ruling.

But choosing a tenant “is a fundamental attribute of property ownership,” Parisien said in striking down the law.

The decision is a victory for landlords represented by an attorney from the Bellevue office of the Pacific Legal Foundation.

The law allows initial screening of applicants based on standards such as credit scores.

But the plaintiffs claimed forcing landlords to accept the first qualified applicant violated their property, due-process and free-speech rights, and the judge sided with them on each point.

Here’s the full judgement from the court.

In my opinion, this is good news. The law as written was a clear overreach by the Seattle City Council. It’s nice to see that the judge agreed.

From the ruling:

Choosing a tenant is a fundamental attribute of property ownership.

The FIT rule’s few concessions to landlords interests’ do not redeem it.

The FIT rule also violates the “private use” requirement.

The FIT rule is also an unreasonable means of pursuing anti-discrimination because of its sweeping overbreadth.

Of course, the city is likely to appeal, but given the forceful language in the ruling, it seems unlikely that they will succeed in doing anything other than wasting time and money defending an unreasonable law.

0.00 avg. rating (0% score) - 0 votes

About The Tim

Tim Ellis is the founder of Seattle Bubble. His background in engineering and computer / internet technology, a fondness of data-based analysis of problems, and an addiction to spreadsheets all influence his perspective on the Seattle-area real estate market.

103 comments:

  1. 1
    Ross says:

    In other news, Seattle’s First in Time rental law struck down: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4425849-First-In-Time-ruling.html

    The ruling is pretty one-sided against the city. Striking it down might actually help rental pricing in Seattle though.

  2. 2
  3. 3
    Eastsider says:

    RE: ess @ 2 – Perhaps the ban on rent-bidding platforms should be lifted since the “first-in-time” law has been ruled illegal.

  4. 4
    pfft says:

    By Eastsider @ 3:

    RE: ess @ 2 – Perhaps the ban on rent-bidding platforms should be lifted since the “first-in-time” law has been ruled illegal.

    Yeah, as we all know comrade Eastsider that tech companies always follow the rules.

    Comrade ESSSSSS, how should we deal with rental discrimination?

  5. 5
    ess says:

    By pfft @ 4:

    By Eastsider @ 3:

    RE: ess @ 2 – Perhaps the ban on rent-bidding platforms should be lifted since the “first-in-time” law has been ruled illegal.

    Yeah, as we all know comrade Eastsider that tech companies always follow the rules.

    Comrade ESSSSSS, how should we deal with rental discrimination?

    Rental discrimination has been illegal for decades, and there are both federal and state laws against it, and should be enforced. Any knowledgeable person that actually has been in the landlord business understands that both good and poor renters come in all sexes, family situations, nationalities, colors etc. , and it is foolish to reject or promote a tenant on the basis of any false premise.

    Furthermore, blatant discrimination on any level is actually bad for business. Dr. Thomas Sowell, eminent economist (and black) has written extensively on how blatant discrimination is bad for businesses in general, and puts those businesses at a major disadvantage.

    In addition, misguided policies such as the recent attempt by Seattle to impose illegal restrictions on Seattle landlord only make matters worse. How so? Be assured that with the types of restrictions in place , an increasing number of landlords would and started to use unofficial means, such as word of mouth, through religious and societal organizations to obtain tenants, and those rental units would never come on the market. In addition, I have talked to a number of mom and pop Seattle landlords who were actively planning to sell their properties, and perhaps they will not because it appears some of the restrictions placed against them are going to be eliminated.

  6. 6
    ess says:

    By Eastsider @ 3:

    RE: ess @ 2 – Perhaps the ban on rent-bidding platforms should be lifted since the “first-in-time” law has been ruled illegal.

    It would logically follow – wouldn’t it.
    On the other hand – I had enough experience with the court system to know that sometimes “logically” is a word that I would use hesitantly when reviewing those matters.

  7. 7

    By pfft @ 4:

    By Eastsider @ 3:

    RE: ess @ 2 – Perhaps the ban on rent-bidding platforms should be lifted since the “first-in-time” law has been ruled illegal.

    Yeah, as we all know comrade Eastsider that tech companies always follow the rules.

    Comrade ESSSSSS, how should we deal with rental discrimination?

    I was the one suggesting that the rental auction companies were illegal due to the first-come/first serve ordinance, but I don’t think it follows the other direction. IF the first-come/first-served ordinance were legal it’s hard to see how an auction system would work within that scheme. But that does not mean that because the one is illegal the auction one is too.

    As to rental discrimination, it is not illegal to discriminate on every possible basis, only discrimination against certain protected classes is illegal.

    As to ess’s comment, which I just noticed, it doesn’t logically follow at all. In fact they are exact opposites. The judge ruled the city cannot restrict the landlord to one choice. It didn’t rule that being restricted from one platform to make a choice is illegal. For example, the city might regulate the size or placement of “for rent” signs. There may be other reasons that the city can’t restrict the auction platforms, but I don’t see it pertaining to this decision.

  8. 8

    Here’s a link to the actual decision. I haven’t had a chance to fully review it.

    https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4425875-King-County-Superior-Court-ruling-first-in-time.html

  9. 9

    I take a prior statement back–the Free Speech part of the decision might impact the ban of rental auction systems.

    As an aside, I really wonder whether landlords would like those auction systems. On the sale side the highest offer is most often not the best offer, but there the concern is mainly whether the buyer can close. The seller doesn’t really care about much after that. In a rental situation, the landlord does care about the tenant after the transaction is executed.

    I wonder how these auction systems allow screening for things like past evictions, noise complaints, etc. Getting an extra $100 a month isn’t a good thing if it leads to weekly headaches afterward. Perhaps the tenants bidding the most are like desperate buyers, but desperate for reasons the landlord will not like down the road.

  10. 10

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 9
    That’s Where You Come in Kary

    The rental agreement contract is like a prenuptial for marriage…it may not hold up in court, but its a lot better than nothing.

  11. 11
    ess says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 9:

    I take a prior statement back–the Free Speech part of the decision might impact the ban of rental auction systems.

    As an aside, I really wonder whether landlords would like those auction systems. On the sale side the highest offer is most often not the best offer, but there the concern is mainly whether the buyer can close. The seller doesn’t really care about much after that. In a rental situation, the landlord does care about the tenant after the transaction is executed.

    I wonder how these auction systems allow screening for things like past evictions, noise complaints, etc. Getting an extra $100 a month isn’t a good thing if it leads to weekly headaches afterward. Perhaps the tenants bidding the most are like desperate buyers, but desperate for reasons the landlord will not like down the road.

    That is right – when the ruling is based upon “free speech” rather than some narrow “commercial speech”, it does tend to broaden the scope of things.

    Whether that business model is one that many would wish to follow is another matter.

  12. 12
    pfft says:

    By ess @ 5:

    By pfft @ 4:

    By Eastsider @ 3:

    RE: ess @ 2 – Perhaps the ban on rent-bidding platforms should be lifted since the “first-in-time” law has been ruled illegal.

    Yeah, as we all know comrade Eastsider that tech companies always follow the rules.

    Comrade ESSSSSS, how should we deal with rental discrimination?

    Furthermore, blatant discrimination on any level is actually bad for business. Dr. Thomas Sowell, eminent economist (and black) has written extensively on how blatant discrimination is bad for businesses in general, and puts those businesses at a major disadvantage.

    Are you really taking a libertarian view on this? It can actually be GOOD for business if your customers want you to discriminate. If you were right there never ever would have been segregation. But their was segregation and apartheid and housing discrimination.

    and the end of the day your only fix seems to be let the market do it’s thing. That is silly. We’ve already seen that that doesn’t work.

  13. 13
    pfft says:

    Let’s all remember that Donald Trump was sued by the Federal Government for housing discrimination. He lost and then was sued again when he was still discriminating. He denied a nurse from living in a building. A nurse! Who wouldn’t want a nurse living in their building. She may literally save your life.

    Trump employees had secretly marked the applications of minorities with codes, such as “No. 9” and “C” for “colored

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/inside-the-governments-racial-bias-case-against-donald-trumps-company-and-how-he-fought-it/2016/01/23/fb90163e-bfbe-11e5-bcda-62a36b394160_story.html?utm_term=.382e5158ae5a

  14. 14
    The Tim says:

    Note: I moved most of the above comments from the Case-Shiller Tiers post since they are relevant here.

  15. 15

    RE: pfft @ 13 – There’s probably not a single large landlord which is not been sued for discrimination because those actions are typically decisions occurring at the low end of the entity–the property manager. That there is enforcement action doesn’t mean it’s done at the direction of the landlord. And conversely, during tough rental markets those same property managers probably let in people with lower credit scores or more serious problems because they will be afraid a high vacancy rate will reflect poorly on them. So there they are letting too many people in.

    Then there’s also the enforcement action which just occurs out of the blue, such as when Washington’s now famous self-promoting AG went after a bunch of landlords because he decided that screening based on certain unspecified (to this day) criminal convictions was illegal because it might lead to discrimination against protected classes. Seemingly it was too hard to actually reach out to landlord associations and announce a new policy prior to trying to enforce it.

  16. 16
    pfft says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 7 – they are not protected classes kary, they want to be treated like everyone else.

  17. 17
    Rupert D says:

    The Tim, I see you do have editorial power…..please remove pfft’s ability to post to this site using his moniker or email address. He is very disagreeable and unpleasant with no purpose other than to instigate political discordRE: The Tim @ 14

  18. 18
    pfft says:

    By Rupert D @ 17:

    The Tim, I see you do have editorial power…..please remove pfft’s ability to post to this site using his moniker or email address. He is very disagreeable and unpleasant with no purpose other than to instigate political discordRE: The Tim @ 14

    I am on topic those whole post. More on topic than you are dude.

    “He is very disagreeable and unpleasant with no purpose other than to instigate political discord”

    There are plenty of people on the right side of the spectrum here that are way more annoying and off topic than me. You just don’t agree with me so you seek to shut me down. sad. bigly.

  19. 19
    D. in Ballard says:

    Pfft is right. Everyone else is trying too hard to deny racial discrimination exists. Having said that, I think a landlord should not have to accept the first person.

  20. 20
    David says:

    I only discriminate against Canadians. Their goofy bacon pushed me over the edge.

    Seriously though, I once rented a condo to a guy who checked off two different minority status’: ethnic & orientation. Thought I would cut him some slack even though my gut told me otherwise.

    BIG MISTAKE. He pissed off EVERYONE in the condo. He chain smoked ‘black and mild’ cigarolos. Had a constant stream of ‘friends’ going in and out.

    Trust your gut. Stereotypes are often true. And other members of their ethnic group don’t want you enabling those folks any more than you do. In other words, don;t be naive.

  21. 21

    By D. in Ballard @ 19:

    Pfft is right. Everyone else is trying too hard to deny racial discrimination exists. Having said that, I think a landlord should not have to accept the first person.

    I don’t think anyone’s denying discrimination exists, only whether this is the solution or overkill. Two of the posts actually prove discrimination is likely!

    If the Seattle City Council focused on speeding then rather than have the police look for and ticket more speeders, they would make cars and trucks illegal. That would stop the speeding.

    I also recall some procedural issues where they put landlords at risk of tenant indecision, but of course they wouldn’t care about that. They think landlords are evil.

    And BTW, the elephant in the room is that given their history, this ordinance was probably written by some special interest group and then passed by the council without amendment.

  22. 22

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 21:

    And BTW, the elephant in the room is that given their history, this ordinance was probably written by some special interest group and then passed by the council without amendment.

    Before pfft can respond, here’s the link! ;-)

    https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/citizen-watchdog-calls-out-seattle-city-council-for-blurring-lines-with-advocacy-groups/

  23. 23
    sfrz says:

    RE: Rupert D @ 17 – Disagree. Let everyone post Tim. If you disagree, simply scroll on. If not, we would only have these cheerleaders and back slappers cheering on the ever increasing mega bubble.

  24. 24
    Erik says:

    RE: ess @ 5
    Thomas Sowell is my favorite. Robert Schiller is great for people that want to debate and talk a lot. Thomas Sowell gives it to you straight.

  25. 25
    Erik says:

    RE: sfrz @ 23
    Wreckingbull has been submitting low quality comments for many years and nothing has been done. Atleast Pfft makes sense sometimes.

  26. 26
    pfft says:

    RE: David @ 20 – My friend rented a house to an old scandinavian couple once. The place smelled like lutefisk but the lingonberries they planted in the yard produced for years…

  27. 27
    pfft says:

    By Erik @ 25:

    RE: sfrz @ 23
    Wreckingbull has been submitting low quality comments for many years and nothing has been done. Atleast Pfft makes sense sometimes.

    you’re the closest thing I’ve ever had to a fan on here. I’ll take that as a win.

    My favorite is SWE. posting randomly about overpopulation for years. Have I ever whined about anyone except today? Like Trump said you gotta be tough! and smart! bigly!

    If some of you think I annoy you then what do you think that I think about you? The same thing of course. I don’t cry about it though.

  28. 28
    sfrz says:

    RE: pfft @ 27 – Preach.

  29. 29
    greg you says:

    keep on rockin in the free ballard!

  30. 30

    RE: pfft @ 27
    Democrats Turn Into Populists to Gain House Control?

    Hey, miracles happen….LOL….Roseane’s TV show ratings prove it ;-)

  31. 31

    Yes…the Rental Laws Are Warped

    When a hoard of foreign gypsies pack into your small rental to destroy it and you find out you can’t call ICE for evictions or our Washington St AG will press charges against the landlord….ya know organized crime has stretched the rules until they snapped.

    Reference recent lawsuit against Motel 6 case in courts.

  32. 32
    Rupert D says:

    RE: pfft @ 18

    regarding your comment..”I am on topic those whole post. More on topic than you are dude” – I rarely post anything so how can I be off topic. If one of your purposes is to create discord then you are good at it but you need to get used to contrary opinions. Maybe The Tim will act in the best interest of this forum.

    I think that pfft and sfrz are the same person.

  33. 33
    N says:

    https://www.ft.com/content/6478a8d6-32c3-11e8-b5bf-23cb17fd1498

    Issuance of securities backed by riskier US mortgages roughly doubled in the first quarter from a year earlier, as investors lapped up assets blamed for bringing the global financial system to the brink of collapse a decade ago.

    “The originator appetite to produce more of it is growing,” said Mr Nichols, who spent more than a decade running the residential mortgage business at Goldman Sachs. “It’s a question of loan officers learning about the availability of the products again and . . . being willing to teach realtors and borrowers that there is more credit available.”

  34. 34
    David says:

    RE: softwarengineer @ 31 – I called ICE yesterday on some tenants. An apartment full of illegal aliens that have had multiple murders in and around the units. Just don’t tell anyone at ICE your name. You are not required to.

  35. 35
    Brendan says:

    Well, the existing mechanism for preventing housing discrimination isn’t working. Racial discrimination in rental housing is pretty widespread. It’s illegal in theory, but people do it anyway, and enforcement seems pretty lax. In fact, the HUD is scaling back fair housing enforcement under Ben Carson.

    I don’t think it has anything to do with “unconscious bias” either. People know what they are doing. Even in this thread there’s the landlord saying “Trust your gut. Stereotypes are often true.”

    My attitude is that we don’t have rent control in WA, so landlords get a pretty good deal compared to most places. They should be willing to accept some level of protection for renters.

    When landlords act victimized by rules like this, I kind of roll my eyes. My experience with landlords in Seattle is that most of them are crooks. My last apartment I lived in for 7 years, paid the rent on time every time, had no damage to the place aside from the carpet being a little dingy after 7 years of use. They kept my deposit and then charged me another $150 on top of that…

  36. 36
    N says:

    @ Branden 35 – My guessing is you have never rented out a property. you say ” landlords get a pretty good deal compared to most places.” But actually Wa has one of the most tenant friendly landlord tenant laws on the books and Seattle’s is even more so.

    Many landlords are small time, 1-5 properties not all that different than then everyone else, just trying to hustle to make a buck in the long run. The way they are viewed by many as greedy, terrible people is misplaced. I’ve seen both sides as I am a landlord of one property and also am a renter of the home I live in. I’ve been really fortunate and had many great tenants but even the best often have a different view of condition then I do on move out.

    I can tell you that at least for me, and probably most landlords, when you read or say “trust your gut” it has nothing to do with race. Job, income, credit, debt, current rental situation, how they keep their car or current home, sure. but not race. I find people in Seattle so quick to point to race, and I lived in a large southern city for 8 years, but it comes up so much quicker here in Seattle.

  37. 37
    David says:

    RE: N @ 36 – “Race” in Seattle is almost always brought up by whiteys who have never lived in a place less than 95% white in their lives. It is a straw-man power play.

    You should NEVER do business with anyone who thinks this way. Avoid feeding their messiah complex.

    Also, I never took cash out of my rent payments but instead put every dollar into the loan/equity for every unit I’ve owned. It is a race against the clock and if real estate crashes you the landlord loses – tenants don’t.

    The City wants to exert power over your investment and mess around with monetary amounts that can bankrupt the landlord if it fails. Controlling your money because they think they are great investors to the point it qualified them to be politicians.

  38. 38
    pfft says:

    By N @ 36:

    @ Branden 35 – My guessing is you have never rented out a property. you say ” landlords get a pretty good deal compared to most places.” But actually Wa has one of the most tenant friendly landlord tenant laws on the books and Seattle’s is even more so.

    that doesn’t mean much if the overall climate if pro-landlord around the country. my guess is that in most cities landlords and developers have more clout and lobbyists than renters or renters’ advocates. They probably also give more money too.

  39. 39
    Ross says:

    By pfft @ 38:

    By N @ 36:

    @ Branden 35 – My guessing is you have never rented out a property. you say ” landlords get a pretty good deal compared to most places.” But actually Wa has one of the most tenant friendly landlord tenant laws on the books and Seattle’s is even more so.

    that doesn’t mean much if the overall climate if pro-landlord around the country. my guess is that in most cities landlords and developers have more clout and lobbyists than renters or renters’ advocates. They probably also give more money too.

    Pro landlord rules end up reducing risks, costs and growing the market, that results in more and varied supply, and lower rent for renters. Counterintuitively, so called pro renter laws like rent control, FIT, increase risk and costs for landlords, lowers supply and raises rent cost.

  40. 40
    wreckingbull says:

    By Erik @ 25:

    RE: sfrz @ 23
    Wreckingbull has been submitting low quality comments for many years and nothing has been done. Atleast Pfft makes sense sometimes.

    I’m actually glad you and pfft have found each other. It’s sort of endearing.

  41. 41
    sfrz says:

    RE: Rupert D @ 32 – You are incorrect. I am me. A previous landlord that has happily given up on that major headache and taxes. Being a landlord was a life lesson that I learned quickly. One time for several years is all it took.
    And, I am not a lemming following the others over the cliff. This is a massive Fed induced bubble, with no correction from the last bubble. Nothing learned. I follow this thread, hoping each day that I will see some bubble discussion. Instead, I see cheerleaders leading the sheep to slaughter. https://www.nationalmortgagenews.com/slideshow/10-cities-on-the-verge-of-a-housing-bubble#slide-10

  42. 42

    By N @ 36:

    @ Branden 35 – My guessing is you have never rented out a property. you say ” landlords get a pretty good deal compared to most places.” But actually Wa has one of the most tenant friendly landlord tenant laws on the books and Seattle’s is even more so. .

    His claim seemed to be solely based on the lack of rent control, but most the country doesn’t have rent control. That comment was sort of nonsensical, to put it mildly. It was sort of taking one factor that doesn’t exist in most the country, note that it doesn’t exist here, and then proclaim that landlords therefore have it pretty good!

  43. 43

    Ken Harney focusing on one of the reasons for the inventory shortage (and mentioning a few others).

    http://www.telegram.com/news/20180329/kenneth-harney-why-wannabe-sellers-are-looking-but-not-listing-their-homes

  44. 44

    And an article about the law firm that is behind Seattle loosing in court so much.

    https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/meet-the-pin-to-seattles-liberal-bubble-attorney-ethan-blevins/

    This quote of the attorney sort of relates to my prior post about Seattle passing ordinances written by special interest groups.

    “I think the city sees itself as an activist in its own right,” he says. “Not a government weighing the pros and cons of an issue, but an activist. I’d say that’s where most of the problems originate.”

    This was also intersting:

    Blevins said it ought to concern the city that all three of these rulings were made by liberal Seattle judges. (Before becoming judges, all three had made political donations to Democrats or liberal causes.)

  45. 45

    RE: David @ 34
    Good Idea

    Make your political phones calls during work hours on your personal iPhones…another example of the NWO war against skills and experience. The iPhone is the open border pundit’s sword.

    The Populists can fight back with their sword, anonymous calls to ICE.

  46. 46
    ess says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 43:

    Ken Harney focusing on one of the reasons for the inventory shortage (and mentioning a few others).

    http://www.telegram.com/news/20180329/kenneth-harney-why-wannabe-sellers-are-looking-but-not-listing-their-homes

    But some of this should be good news for those who say a new housing bubble is being formed.
    Some owners of homes are unable to buy another property because there is “nowhere to go”. Many homeowners wish to abandon perfectly fine houses to “move up”. They have been swayed by the myriad sources that indicate one must reside in a residence with at least 1000 sq feet per occupant, including granite counters, spa bathrooms, walk in closets, vast “great rooms”, fancy and excess fixtures, stainless steel appliances, three car garages and all the other absolute necessities that make life barely livable. Unless they go crazy remodeling their own homes, the lack of available housing is doing some of these people a favor – keeping their expenses down, and protecting them for the next real estate downturn which is sure to happen.

  47. 47

    RE: ess @ 46 – Yes, there’s good and bad. One of the worst “bads” would be where the addition of new children means the family has outgrown the residence, particularly in condo situations. Although I would note people in the 50s somehow seemed to raise relatively large families in a 1,200 square foot house. Sharing bedrooms was more common.

  48. 48
    Doug says:

    No confirmation on final price, but I know for a fact this just went pending for over $1.1mm.

    https://www.redfin.com/WA/Seattle/8536-11th-Ave-NW-98117/home/101070

    Appreciation will be 10-15% again this year.

  49. 49
  50. 50
    David B. says:

    RE: pfft @ 27 – I doubt I spend even four seconds per year thinking about what anyone on this blog’s comments section thinks of me. It has absolutely no impact on my life whatsoever whether most here love my comments, positively detest them, or are utterly indifferent to them.

  51. 51
    sfrz says:

    RE: David B. @ 50 – “I’m good enough, I’m smart enough, and doggone it, people like me.” Stuart Smalley, SNL

  52. 52

    RE: pfft @ 4
    Yes Pffft:

    No matter what judge ruling that supposedly protects landlord rights….will the lower courts enforce it or oppose/ignore it. The track record for local Sanctuary Cities obeying the laws is grim.

  53. 53

    RE: jon @ 49
    I Agree With Trump On Amazon

    Amazon smells like a dirty dog pen to me when it comes to monopolizing business sectors, paying no taxes and illegally profiting off personal information scams. And this is coming from a billionaire against a billionaire on legal business ethics.

    They’ve become way too big not to fall. Europe agrees with Trump too on Amazon. The HQ2 site sold their soul to the devil to get Amazon from paying taxes.

  54. 54
    David B. says:

    RE: softwarengineer @ 52 – Sanctuary Cities are legal. Federal law says that if local law enforcement collects data on whether or not arrestees are citizens they must share it. Sanctuary Cities merely choose not to collect it, thus have nothing to share. No law mandates collection of such data.

    Not that I expect facts to make much difference to your ranting.

  55. 55
    Eastsider says:

    RE: David B. @ 54 – Why don’t we have a vote on the ‘Sanctuary’ city policy? For example, should we taxpayer pay for illegal immigrant’s K12 and college education, school lunch, subsidized housing and healthcare?

    Btw, our school district do not ask for student citizenship so they can spend taxpayer money on illegal immigrants. This is illegal IMHO. Do not get me started on Facebooks’s ‘legal’ dealings…

  56. 56
    David says:

    It is impossible to arrest someone or determine their legal name without knowing they are here illegally. This is why they charge people with providing ‘false information’.

    Nope, these sanctuary cities are aiding and abetting illegal aliens – a stand-alone crime.

    Personally, I would welcome the military administration of Washington State and/or the sanctuary cities here.

    By David B. @ 54:

    RE: softwarengineer @ 52 – Sanctuary Cities are legal. Federal law says that if local law enforcement collects data on whether or not arrestees are citizens they must share it. Sanctuary Cities merely choose not to collect it, thus have nothing to share. No law mandates collection of such data.

    Not that I expect facts to make much difference to your ranting.

  57. 57
    pfft says:

    By David @ 56:

    It is impossible to arrest someone or determine their legal name without knowing they are here illegally. This is why they charge people with providing ‘false information’.

    Nope, these sanctuary cities are aiding and abetting illegal aliens – a stand-alone crime.

    Personally, I would welcome the military administration of Washington State and/or the sanctuary cities here.

    By David B. @ 54:

    RE: softwarengineer @ 52 – Sanctuary Cities are legal. Federal law says that if local law enforcement collects data on whether or not arrestees are citizens they must share it. Sanctuary Cities merely choose not to collect it, thus have nothing to share. No law mandates collection of such data.

    Not that I expect facts to make much difference to your ranting.

    there is no such thing as sanctuary cities. it’s a made up term by right wingers who don’t like hispanics. legally it means nothing. cops don’t ask about citizenship because they won’t get the community help they need to solve crimes. If the community is afraid of the police bad hombres will prey on them with impunity. Read about the disaster that Joe Arpaio was. Immigration is an issue for the Feds, not a state and local issue. It’s unconstitutional to hold someone longer than their sentence. That’s been ruled.

    “It is impossible to arrest someone or determine their legal name without knowing they are here illegally.”

    Didn’t you watch homeland the other day? They are booked as Jane or John Doe.

  58. 58
    pfft says:

    By Eastsider @ 55:

    RE: David B. @ 54 – Why don’t we have a vote on the ‘Sanctuary’ city policy? For example, should we taxpayer pay for illegal immigrant’s K12 and college education, school lunch, subsidized housing and healthcare?

    Btw, our school district do not ask for student citizenship so they can spend taxpayer money on illegal immigrants. This is illegal IMHO. Do not get me started on Facebooks’s ‘legal’ dealings…

    if I were an illegal immigrant I would say does that mean I don’t have to pay sales tax and property tax and etc? The one problem is that the kids didn’t make the choice to come here, their parents did. I’ve never really thought if it would even be legal for an illegal immigrant to keep their child out of school. Doesn’t anyone know?

    It’s Easter right? I wonder what Christ would do? Would he stand in the doorway of an elementary school class and turn away illegal immigrants? Would he let illegal immigrant children go hungry? Happy Easter!

  59. 59
    David B. says:

    RE: Eastsider @ 55 – We’ve already had many such votes, effectively. If a majority of Seattle citizens want to elect Trumpist xenophobes to the city council and the mayor’s office, those seats will become occupied by Trumpist xenophobes and Seattle will quickly cease to be a sanctuary city.

    I suppose there’s now going to be an argument made that it’s all just mass voting by illegal immigrants that’s responsible for City of Seattle’s liberal majority…

  60. 60
    David B. says:

    By David @ 56:

    It is impossible to arrest someone or determine their legal name without knowing they are here illegally. This is why they charge people with providing ‘false information’.

    Rubbish. A driver’s license or state-issued ID card provides proof of identity but not of citizenship or immigration stations.

  61. 61
    David says:

    Rubbish: Most illegal aliens cannot acquire driver’s licenses. Unless the State is aiding and abetting illegal aliens.

    RE: David B. @ 60

  62. 62
    Brendan says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 42

    LA has rent control. The SF bay area has rent control. Maybe small towns in the middle of nowhere don’t have it, but the big west coast rental markets do.

    I’m not saying rent control is a good idea, it’s not, but hearing landlords act victimized in the current rental environment is rediculous.

    Seattle landlords are raking in the money right now, on properties that weren’t worth that much 5 to 10 years ago. They are the group that has benefited the most from the economic growth in Seattle by far.

    This thread is crowing about the defeat of a law that allows landlords to set any criteria they want, set any rent they want, but simply provided for the first time an effective way of preventing the rampant housing discrimination that exists today. Oh, poor landlords! Poor, wealthy racist landlords.

  63. 63
    pfft says:

    By David @ 61:

    Rubbish: Most illegal aliens cannot acquire driver’s licenses. Unless the State is aiding and abetting illegal aliens.

    RE: David B. @ 60

    Let’s not act like being here illegally is the crime of the century.

    Unlawful presence is neither a felony nor a misdemeanor, said Ilya Shapiro, a senior fellow in constitutional studies at the libertarian Cato Institute. It is a civil infraction that results in removal and a bar on re-entry for a certain period of time.

    http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2017/mar/15/florida-conference-catholic-bishops/being-united-states-unlawfully-crime/

    My guess from a quick google is that how we viewed the world(no licenses for illegal immigrants!) collided with reality(we have a ton of illegal immigrants driving and it’s a public safety problem). States probably figured their wasn’t any way to effectively end unlicensed driving so the next best thing was to license them and teach them how to drive so they weren’t a safety risk.

    Just read this:

    Licensed drivers know the rules of the road and have a proper understanding of traffic regulations.

    Licensed drivers will be more likely to obtain auto insurance, reducing the cost of accidents involving uninsured motorists and potentially lowering insurance rates for everyone.

    Individuals with driver’s licenses will be less likely to flee the scene of an accident.

    Unlicensed drivers are 5 times more likely to be in a fatal car accident.

    Why States Should Provide Access to Driver’s Licenses to Undocumented Immigrants
    https://cliniclegal.org/resources/articles-clinic/why-states-should-provide-access-drivers-licenses-undocumented-immigrants

  64. 64
    David says:

    Landlords CANNOT set any rent they want in Seattle. They can only charge what the market will allow. I’m only in FAVOR of rent control if the rents are set at 200% of a mortgage payment. You seem to think that landlords should only suffer the downside of a market – and never get the advantage of the upside.

    RE: Brendan @ 62

  65. 65
    Eastsider says:

    RE: David B. @ 59 – You know your argument cuts both ways, don’t you? Remind yourself who sits in the White House today. LOL.

    I suppose there’s now going to be an argument made that it’s all just mass voting by deplorables, sexists, racists, and xenophobes that’s responsible for the current POTUS…

  66. 66

    RE: Brendan @ 62 – I wasn’t disagreeing with most of your original post #35, just the claim that landlords have it good because ” we don’t have rent control in WA, so landlords get a pretty good deal compared to most places. ”

    Two cities and probably NYC are not “most places.” Rent control is the exception, not the rule.

    I do have a bit of a problem with your last paragraph of the recent post, but that’s not because I don’t think discrimination occurs. It’s because the Seattle solution was so much overkill that it was absurd, and again I think it also had procedural issues. I wonder how many lessors of SFR housing in Seattle just decided enough is enough and sold to get out from under the finger of Seattle? That would be a good use of a 1031 exchange assuming they didn’t want to give up on being a landlord entirely.

  67. 67

    By David @ 63:

    You seem to think that landlords should only suffer the downside of a market – and never get the advantage of the upside.

    You raise a good point there. People get all upset when market conditions are less than ideal and a seller of one type of product starts doing really well. But those situations are usually temporary. Look at the oil and oil exploration industries today, they are not doing nearly as well as they once were, but they still have to invest in the future to continue to survive.

    And as I’ve mentioned in the past, back when I was doing bankruptcy law it was not uncommon to see someone who had moved from some other part of the country where the RE market had collapsed. Sometimes they would even own several rental units in that area but have a hard time keeping them rented for amounts to cover the rents.

  68. 68
    pfft says:

    By Eastsider @ 64:

    RE: David B. @ 59 – You know your argument cuts both ways, don’t you? Remind yourself who sits in the White House today. LOL.

    I suppose there’s now going to be an argument made that it’s all just mass voting by deplorables, sexists, racists, and xenophobes that’s responsible for the current POTUS…

    Unfortunately, yes. trump basically hold all those views.

  69. 69
    David says:

    I was a practicing lawyer too for many years doing criminal law – typically felonies including contracted conflict cases for the most heinous murder trials you can imagine. I won about 40% of murder trials by being a cynical but good student of human nature.

    Seeing through people’s BS to their underlying actual thoughts is a cultivated skill.

    I stopped that practice 15 years ago for more lucrative and enjoyable work in foreign markets.

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 66:

    By David @ 63:

    You seem to think that landlords should only suffer the downside of a market – and never get the advantage of the upside.

    You raise a good point there. People get all upset when market conditions are less than ideal and a seller of one type of product starts doing really well. But those situations are usually temporary. Look at the oil and oil exploration industries today, they are not doing nearly as well as they once were, but they still have to invest in the future to continue to survive.

    And as I’ve mentioned in the past, back when I was doing bankruptcy law it was not uncommon to see someone who had moved from some other part of the country where the RE market had collapsed. Sometimes they would even own several rental units in that area but have a hard time keeping them rented for amounts to cover the rents.

  70. 70

    By pfft @ 67:

    By Eastsider @ 64:

    RE: David B. @ 59 – You know your argument cuts both ways, don’t you? Remind yourself who sits in the White House today. LOL.

    I suppose there’s now going to be an argument made that it’s all just mass voting by deplorables, sexists, racists, and xenophobes that’s responsible for the current POTUS…

    Unfortunately, yes. trump basically hold all those views.

    A lot of people held their noses and voted against Hillary. Trump and Hillary were the worst two choices in modern history. Even worse that Bush/Gore, by far.

  71. 71
    ess says:

    By David @ 63:

    Landlords CANNOT set any rent they want in Seattle. They can only charge what the market will allow. I’m only in FAVOR of rent control if the rents are set at 200% of a mortgage payment. You seem to think that landlords should only suffer the downside of a market – and never get the advantage of the upside.

    RE: Brendan @ 62

    And remember – the upside (as you call it) of rental markets are in area where the progressives where they thought they were doing good have tried to control rents to lower them, i.e. rent control. Most of the markets that have rent control – NYC, SF, London etc have been controlled by the progressives for many years. . Rents for all on average is higher for renters in cities that have rent control – because renters in non rent controlled apartments are the ones that really suffer in a rent control environment through artificial shortages created by a market that is unable to function properly.

    Just one example – think people aren’t putting their houses up for sale because there is no where to go? With rent control – people stay for decades – even if they wish to downsize, but can’t because smaller apartments would still cost more. Which causes artificial housing shortages as old widows and widowers reside by themselves in 3 bedroom apartments, while families can’t find anything to rent.

    Thomas Sowell has an extensive discussion as to why rent control fails in his Basic Economics text that is well worth reading.

    And as Hardy used to say to Laurel – ” That is a fine mess you have gotten us into now”.

  72. 72
    David says:

    What should really happen is to think like a conservative and reduce regulation and government fees so housing naturally expands and prices are lowered. Smaller houses allowed, cheap sewer access, etc.

    Make America Affordable Again. And thank you Trump for trying to make life easier in the business community and fighting for the little guy.

    RE: ess @ 70

  73. 73
  74. 74
    David B. says:

    RE: ess @ 70 – Rent control actually works quite well as part of an overall set of housing-affordability policies in Vienna, Austria. But for a number of reasons, I suspect that if Seattle ever got rent control it would end up having a lot more in common with rent control in San Francisco (i.e. not working well at all to preserve overall housing affordability).

  75. 75
    pfft says:

    By ess @ 70:

    By David @ 63:

    Landlords CANNOT set any rent they want in Seattle. They can only charge what the market will allow. I’m only in FAVOR of rent control if the rents are set at 200% of a mortgage payment. You seem to think that landlords should only suffer the downside of a market – and never get the advantage of the upside.

    RE: Brendan @ 62

    And remember – the upside (as you call it) of rental markets are in area where the progressives where they thought they were doing good have tried to control rents to lower them, i.e. rent control. Most of the markets that have rent control – NYC, SF, London etc have been controlled by the progressives for many years. . Rents for all on average is higher for renters in cities that have rent control – because renters in non rent controlled apartments are the ones that really suffer in a rent control environment through artificial shortages created by a market that is unable to function properly.

    Just one example – think people aren’t putting their houses up for sale because there is no where to go? With rent control – people stay for decades – even if they wish to downsize, but can’t because smaller apartments would still cost more. Which causes artificial housing shortages as old widows and widowers reside by themselves in 3 bedroom apartments, while families can’t find anything to rent.

    Thomas Sowell has an extensive discussion as to why rent control fails in his Basic Economics text that is well worth reading.

    And as Hardy used to say to Laurel – ” That is a fine mess you have gotten us into now”.

    link link link link link or it never happened.

    “Most of the markets that have rent control – NYC, SF, London etc have been controlled by the progressives for many years.”

    what would rents be in these cities if there wasn’t rent control? how many apartments are in rent control? what percentage are those of all rentals that are on the market.

    New York’s problem is distorted by Wall Street money and the fact that it’s apartments and condos are used as safety deposit boxes in the sky by the world’s rich. Don’t ask me for links I refuse:)

  76. 76
    pfft says:

    By David @ 71:

    What should really happen is to think like a conservative and reduce regulation and government fees so housing naturally expands and prices are lowered. Smaller houses allowed, cheap sewer access, etc.

    Make America Affordable Again. And thank you Trump for trying to make life easier in the business community and fighting for the little guy.

    RE: ess @ 70

    Are you kidding? Conservative areas are some of the most restrictive when it comes to housing. They don’t want apartments because it will damage home values and the character of the neighborhood will change. You are asking people to lower the values of their own homes. not gonna happen. The tiny house movement has come up against NIMBYism.

  77. 77
    David B. says:

    RE: ess @ 70

    Just one example – think people aren’t putting their houses up for sale because there is no where to go? With rent control – people stay for decades – even if they wish to downsize, but can’t because smaller apartments would still cost more. Which causes artificial housing shortages as old widows and widowers reside by themselves in 3 bedroom apartments, while families can’t find anything to rent.

    Of course, precisely the same argument can be made against Proposition 13 in California, which has created similar distortions in the owner-occupied segment of the housing market.

  78. 78
    pfft says:

    I thought the Bush Great Recession put to an end whether we thought businesses should self-regulate? How many times do businesses like Facebook, Wall Street and Uber have to screw us over before we realize we need rules?

  79. 79
    David says:

    YOU are the dissembler. I’ll quote you your own source: “unauthorized immigrants to obtain a driver’s licenses” and includes WA State in that group. This means they know these ‘illegal aliens’ (the proper legally accurate term) and are aiding and abetting illegal aliens acquiring driver’s licenses.

    So when you quote a leftist organization – you need to concentrate on the details. Reading comprehension helps.

    By David B. @ 72:

    RE: David @ 61 – Factual accuracy isn’t precisely your strong suit.

    http://www.ncsl.org/research/immigration/states-offering-driver-s-licenses-to-immigrants.aspx

  80. 80

    Seattle’s war on cars is making the news again. Apparently they are going to vote tomorrow on whether to allow new buildings to be built without parking. That will be a gift to developers and a burden on the first owners of the building.

  81. 81
    S-Crow says:

    Off topic……….Remember the movie “The Big Short?”

    It’s worth your time see the new documentary film “The China Hustle” (Amazon $6.99)

    Trailer: https://www.thechinahustlefilm.com/

    “The Most Important Film Of 2018.” – Forbes

  82. 82
    pfft says:

    RE: David @ 78 – got a link for your claim of illegal immigrants being a proper legal term? A law link not an op/ed.

    Most illegal immigrants have committed far lesser crimes(being here illegally is a civil infraction) than the Trump team. How many have been indicted or pled guilty? Our Attorney General had to recuse himself from the Russia investigation because he lied to Congress!

  83. 83
    redmondjp says:

    Stop asking people for links, pfft. It’s so tiring. It’s like my kids asking me to do their homework for them, which happened earlier today.

  84. 84
    Eastsider says:

    I wonder if using a false SSN to get a job is a civil infraction. Hello pfft? …I can’t hear you.

  85. 85
    ess says:

    By redmondjp @ 83:

    Stop asking people for links, pfft. It’s so tiring. It’s like my kids asking me to do their homework for them, which happened earlier today.

    NY Times – hardly a conservative mouthpiece for the far right had a very nice summation of the rent control situation in NYC which I think was the issue when a “link” was called for.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/28/magazine/the-perverse-effects-of-rent-regulation.html

  86. 86
    wreckingbull says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 70 – Indeed. Run the worst candidate in the history of U.S presidential elections against the will of your party’s own base, add in the f*ckery and fraud of the DNC in the summer of 2016, and you get President Donald Trump as the output.

  87. 87
    ess says:

    By David B. @ 77:

    RE: ess @ 70

    Just one example – think people aren’t putting their houses up for sale because there is no where to go? With rent control – people stay for decades – even if they wish to downsize, but can’t because smaller apartments would still cost more. Which causes artificial housing shortages as old widows and widowers reside by themselves in 3 bedroom apartments, while families can’t find anything to rent.

    Of course, precisely the same argument can be made against Proposition 13 in California, which has created similar distortions in the owner-occupied segment of the housing market.

    David

    Happily I don’t reside in California so I have no real estate canine in the fight.

    But intellectually I don’t support a resolution such as the one adopted by prop 13. As I view it, not only did it distort the real estate market, but it is really unfair to recent arrivals to the real estate market. Those who benefited years ago do so at the expense of later arrivals because there is only a finite amount of tax resources. Furthermore, there is no real incentive to limit government spending by those who advocate for their pet projects, but are not directly impacted as their property tax rate is artificially low. Better to have a tax reduction program that benefits everyone across the board which would hopefully produce a government that prioritizes government services based upon real need, and lives within its means.

  88. 88
    wreckingbull says:

    By pfft @ 82:

    RE: David @ 78 – got a link for your claim of illegal immigrants being a proper legal term?

    There it is, folks. Remember this moment. We have officially hit “Peak Pfft”.

  89. 89

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 21
    The Open Border Progressives Write Books

    Preaching that its RACIST to hire experience and skill over DIVERSITY [DEFIES a BASIC EEO principle BTW]? Hades, the open border nuts are making me HATE DIVERSITY now….LOL….BTW, I was a trained EEO representative for Hispanic, African American…..they trusted me.

    The Dems abandoned DACA and they’re running around in circles screaming we’re all Racists, except them….LOL…get a life.

    Obama killed and defunded EEO BTW.

  90. 90

    By wreckingbull @ 88:

    By pfft @ 82:

    RE: David @ 78 – got a link for your claim of illegal immigrants being a proper legal term?

    There it is, folks. Remember this moment. We have officially hit “Peak Pfft”.

    LOL. I’m going to guess the proper term is “illegal alien” since the alternative is being a “resident alien.” Looking up the proper term would be a waste of time without any real benefit.

    But that brings up a story and the reason for posting. A girlfriend during my college years was from England and a resident alien. We were at Jafco (remember that?) and the cashier asked her for additional ID. She said: “I have my alien card.” The cashier’s eyes got huge, obviously thinking of aliens from other planets! :-D

  91. 91
    ess says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 90

    Had a temporary pre Christmas job at the Jafco warehouse behind the store in the South End,
    We are both dating ourselves – that is for sure!!

  92. 92

    RE: David B. @ 77
    Yes David

    Most of the homes in the Seattle area are owned by singles [80%], not families. Hades I’m a single home Seattle area owner because I [and everybody else too?] we are afraid that a divorce would totally destroy our future in Seattle high costs, dividing it with an ex-spouse. Divorces would similarly cause MASS foreclosures in Seattle too.

    Its nice to see just my name on the deed.

  93. 93
    Boater says:

    By David B. @ 74:

    RE: ess @ 70 – Rent control actually works quite well as part of an overall set of housing-affordability policies in Vienna, Austria. But for a number of reasons, I suspect that if Seattle ever got rent control it would end up having a lot more in common with rent control in San Francisco (i.e. not working well at all to preserve overall housing affordability).

    What are Venna’s rent control and housing policies? And when you say they work who do they work for? Landlords and tenants, just tenants? How do they keep prices reasonable while encouraging investment?

  94. 94
    pfft says:

    By redmondjp @ 83:

    Stop asking people for links, pfft. It’s so tiring. It’s like my kids asking me to do their homework for them, which happened earlier today.

    how tough is it to link to where you read something? I do it all the time. There really isn’t an excuse in the google age.

    “It’s like my kids asking me to do their homework for them”

    I didn’t make the claims just asking where they got the info.

  95. 95
    pfft says:

    By Eastsider @ 84:

    I wonder if using a false SSN to get a job is a civil infraction. Hello pfft? …I can’t hear you.

    It’s just the working man getting around a big government regulation that harms the economy, costs jobs and raises prices:)

    If you wonder…google it.

  96. 96
    David B. says:

    RE: Boater @ 93 – Vienna has some of the lowest big city rents in Europe, without there being a housing shortage and long wait lists.

    The trick is massive amounts of public housing. A huge chunk — I forget the exact number — of Viennese live in public housing, including many middle class people. And it’s good-quality, well-mainteined housing. But:

    Vienna is not surrounded by a wide ring of suburbs and sprawl like Seattle is, so Vienna has been able to build that new housing by annexing existing undeveloped land adjacent to the existing city and building on it. Cities in Austria also have significantly more autonomy than cities in Washington State, so Vienna was able to levy taxes to fund the initial batch of housing (I believe it’s tended to largely self-fund via user-fees, a.k.a. rents, since then). Plus Seattle (much like San Francisco) is infected with NIMBYism.

    Of course, it’s not impossible to change Seattle to the point where it would be possible to implement something approaching a Vienna-style solution, but it would be a steep uphill battle. All of which makes me strongly suspect any rent control regime in Seattle would end up resembling SF far more than it does Vienna.

    http://www.governing.com/gov-affordable-luxurious-housing-in-vienna.html

  97. 97
    David B. says:

    By David @ 79:

    So when you quote a leftist organization – you need to concentrate on the details. Reading comprehension helps.

    NCSL is a bipartisan organization, not “leftist,” as a cursory glance of the page that details whose on their executive committee would reveal.

  98. 98
    pfft says:

    By David B. @ 96:

    RE: Boater @ 93 – Vienna has some of the lowest big city rents in Europe, without there being a housing shortage and long wait lists.

    The trick is massive amounts of public housing. A huge chunk — I forget the exact number — of Viennese live in public housing, including many middle class people. And it’s good-quality, well-mainteined housing. But:

    Vienna is not surrounded by a wide ring of suburbs and sprawl like Seattle is, so Vienna has been able to build that new housing by annexing existing undeveloped land adjacent to the existing city and building on it. Cities in Austria also have significantly more autonomy than cities in Washington State, so Vienna was able to levy taxes to fund the initial batch of housing (I believe it’s tended to largely self-fund via user-fees, a.k.a. rents, since then). Plus Seattle (much like San Francisco) is infected with NIMBYism.

    Of course, it’s not impossible to change Seattle to the point where it would be possible to implement something approaching a Vienna-style solution, but it would be a steep uphill battle. All of which makes me strongly suspect any rent control regime in Seattle would end up resembling SF far more than it does Vienna.

    http://www.governing.com/gov-affordable-luxurious-housing-in-vienna.html

    And to follow up affordable housing in the US=minorities in many people’s mind’s so that would be a non-starter. Now if you made affordable housing really nice that would be an even bigger non-starter.

  99. 99
    Boater says:

    By David B. @ 96:

    RE: Boater @ 93 – Vienna has some of the lowest big city rents in Europe, without there being a housing shortage and long wait lists.

    The trick is massive amounts of public housing. A huge chunk — I forget the exact number — of Viennese live in public housing, including many middle class people. And it’s good-quality, well-mainteined housing. But:

    Vienna is not surrounded by a wide ring of suburbs and sprawl like Seattle is, so Vienna has been able to build that new housing by annexing existing undeveloped land adjacent to the existing city and building on it. Cities in Austria also have significantly more autonomy than cities in Washington State, so Vienna was able to levy taxes to fund the initial batch of housing (I believe it’s tended to largely self-fund via user-fees, a.k.a. rents, since then). Plus Seattle (much like San Francisco) is infected with NIMBYism.

    Of course, it’s not impossible to change Seattle to the point where it would be possible to implement something approaching a Vienna-style solution, but it would be a steep uphill battle. All of which makes me strongly suspect any rent control regime in Seattle would end up resembling SF far more than it does Vienna.

    http://www.governing.com/gov-affordable-luxurious-housing-in-vienna.html

    Interesting. It’s all built around the government having monopoly control over the land ownership which is not the case in any US city. Lacking that I don’t see how it could work.

  100. 100
    David B. says:

    By Boater @ 99:

    Interesting. It’s all built around the government having monopoly control over the land ownership which is not the case in any US city. Lacking that I don’t see how it could work.

    I see the main thing it’s built around in a more general sense: recognizing that in the absence of price controls, prices send signals related to demand. So if price controls are established, alternate means of signaling demand must be created, lest the lack of such signals result in supply:demand imbalances.

  101. 101
    David says:

    See Arizona v. United States, 132 S. Ct. 2492 (2012).

    RE: pfft @ 94

  102. 102
    pfft says:

    By David @ 101:

    See Arizona v. United States, 132 S. Ct. 2492 (2012).

    RE: pfft @ 94

    no thanks. how about some quotes?

  103. 103
    Boater says:

    By David B. @ 100:

    By Boater @ 99:

    Interesting. It’s all built around the government having monopoly control over the land ownership which is not the case in any US city. Lacking that I don’t see how it could work.

    I see the main thing it’s built around in a more general sense: recognizing that in the absence of price controls, prices send signals related to demand. So if price controls are established, alternate means of signaling demand must be created, lest the lack of such signals result in supply:demand imbalances.

    Price control is much more limited than actual physical control of the property. What Vienna can do via land monopoly is more than simple prices. It’s location, competition, transportation support,parks etc. You can’t get that level of control in any major US city.

Leave a Reply

Use your email address to sign up with Gravatar for a custom avatar.
Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Please read the rules before posting a comment.