Where does it say anywhere that you have a right to live in San Francisco?
You couldn’t pay me to live in CA.
Alameda is not a suburb of SF. Stupid writer obviously doesn’t know the Bay Area
Built my home 15 years ago (in CA) and I’m 64 years old and thinking of retiring. Home is paid for, but rents here are about $2,500 to $3,000.
He needs to move then. People are stupid, they think that fast food workers need $15 and hour, but landlords can’t keep their rents within the market.
I have agricultural rental property and yes, rents have gone up the last 10 years, but it is also a landlords market - if you can’t afford the rent, you can’t afford to farm that much. Also, for ag business, rentals are a better ‘investment’ than buying land right now - just for the deduction.
The government does not have the right to control (set) rents, salaries or prices.
Well let’s see...his landlord is now going to have to pay his lawn care people $15 per hour and his sidewalk sweepers, and his touch up painters, and his cleanup people, and his handymen, and his 24 hour security staff....he is going to get his money from somewhere and it is from his renters....that’s how it works....everywhere.
It will actually hurt existing tenants by allowing minimum wage workers to bid rents up.
This is found in the Economics 101 book that no liberal has ever read.
Meanwhile, 100 miles away in the Sacramento area you can rent an entire house with a yard for half the median Bay Area rent.
