I think it’s the pound sand thingy.
What about shop owners? Offices?
Those rents are pricey.
I think you got the picture. When people are cut off from their source of income, how do they do things like eat. The only successful people in this rent process is the lowest people on the totem pole, the renters. They have to work for a living to pay the rent normally. They will be the only ones that have an income. So the renting people won’t have to pay rent, but can’t buy food and medicine.
It’s that old slippery slope thing that liberals never can seem to understand. It’s bigger than the little guy.
But if the renter can’t pay the whole rent, can they pay any money to the cost. It’ll just drain them slowly as they can be put on a target to pay for their amenities like water, electricity, or garbage. That’s not rent, that’s costs.
rwood
And this will lead to a chain reaction where the big fish (creditors of landlords) will eat the little fish landlords and ultimately renters because there will be new landlords who will demolish buildings because the land is worth more.
An unlawful taking.
What I’d like to see is a landlord, preferably an elderly one who lives off of the rental income, file a lawsuit against the state demanding that they pay her the rent owed, which the state just took from her.
Also, this is an interference with an contract. Any contract lawyers able to comment on that issue.