Rent caps accelerate gentrification
Rent caps incentivize the construction of new builds to avoid limits, leading to more properties being demolished to make way for swanky new rental properties.
< (3 of 5) Next argument >
New builds are almost always exempt from rent caps. They have no previous rental value against which the cap can apply and landlords are usually able to charge the first tenants in a new build whatever they want. This incentivizes landlords to demolish older, capped properties and build new properties to lease for much higher rates. This hastens gentrification and an influx of new constructions.
Rent caps do the opposite. They protect against gentrification. When rent caps are not in place, landlords are free to rapidly increase rent prices each year, pushing lower-income tenants out of their properties and accelerating displacement. Cambridge, Massachusetts is a case in point. When rent caps were repealed in Cambridge, rent prices shot up, pushing out lower-income residents and fueling gentrification.
Gentrification is bad.
[P1] Rent caps incentivize demolishing older properties to make way for new properties. [P2] This hastens gentrification.
Rejecting the premises
[Rejecting P1] Without rent caps landlords can increase prices. This fuels gentrification far more than rent caps.