The economics of the votes work like this:Some people in elected positions have adopted an absolute hatred towards real estate investors, and that hatred gets captured in policy.
Despite real estate being one of the few ways a regular middle class person can actually lift themselves into wealth and become free from corporate wage slavery, their philosophy instructs that all rental property owners are sharks preying on the poor.
As such, policies get implemented to “protect” renters but which ultimately protect the mega real estate corporations who can financially absorb instances of abuse like this case. It destroys competition from smaller investors by creating a risk profile that’s too steep to bother with.
It is mind blowing.
1) There are always more renters than landlords, a fact
2) It is easier to get votes if you pass rent control than investor protections, just easier to pick the deeper pockets.
3) Most people don't care how things go either way if it doesn't affect them personally.
4) We end up with rent controls that exclude single family home
5) Investors know this, so they buy single family homes to rent out (and it is easier to sell as the next buyers will just get a normal loan instead of having to sell to another investor like multi-family units).
6) Home price is propped up, reduced affordability
7) More blame on investors, but more rent control on non single family home