Uplifting News
Welcome to /c/UpliftingNews (rules), a dedicated space where optimism and positivity converge to bring you the most heartening and inspiring stories from around the world. We strive to curate and share content that lights up your day, invigorates your spirit, and inspires you to spread positivity in your own way. This is a sanctuary for those seeking a break from the incessant negativity and rage (e.g. schadenfreude) often found in today's news cycle. From acts of everyday kindness to large-scale philanthropic efforts, from individual achievements to community triumphs, we bring you news—in text form or otherwise—that gives hope, fosters empathy, and strengthens the belief in humanity's capacity for good, from a quality outlet that does not publish bad copies of copies of copies.
Here in /c/UpliftingNews, we uphold the values of respect, empathy, and inclusivity, fostering a supportive and vibrant community. We encourage you to share your positive news, comment, engage in uplifting conversations, and find solace in the goodness that exists around us. We are more than a news-sharing platform; we are a community built on the power of positivity and the collective desire for a more hopeful world. Remember, your small acts of kindness can be someone else's big ray of hope. Be part of the positivity revolution; share, uplift, inspire!
view the rest of the comments
Because having your rental unit taken away from you does not remove you from the rental market. You might consider leaving the rental market and buying property if housing prices collapse, but outside of that most people are going to have to look around for a new rental unit in a now tighter market.
It does remove another renter, though. The market would only be tighter if they reduced supply by more than demand.
How does being evicted remove a renter from the rental market?
The new homeowner is the renter removed from the market, not the previous renter.
That's a big assumption that the new homeowner was a previous renter and not just someone cohabiting or buying an additional home.
Not when we're looking at large groups of people - there's no reason to think the average number of occupants per home would change.
I didnt mention anything about the average number of occupants per home. What i did say was that, if 100 homes go from being rented to being sold, not all 100 homes will go to previous renters, for the reasons I mentioned above. Doesn't that make sense?
If the average number of occupants isn't changing, then cohabitation and second houses are irrelevant to this discussion.
To whom is the apartment being sold?
Perhaps you can find some statistics to back up your general point? If you're right, then we should see the opposite correlation - higher homeownership with higher rents.
The average number of occupants doesn't change because everyone will still be living somewhere (excluding homelessness but we can ignore that). However, that does not mean cohabitation and second houses are irrelevant.
Both of these scenarios are excluded from your example above. As a consequence of them, some renters will have to start cohabiting (or become homeless). The fact that there are more people who want to rent their (own) place then there are rental units will drive up rental prices.
https://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/aer.20181289
Here you go.
That's an interesting comparison, thanks! I'll think about this.
Cheers