Why would I yield something that doesn't exist? But, sure, okay, yes, I would be willing to yield rent control in the situation where it wasn't necessary to prevent displacement. I guess I miss your point?
I asked if you would yield price controls, which certainly do exist, and I was curious whether wild market fluctuations were pivotal to your position. I'm assuming this is why you haven't addressed the essence of my point.
I haven't addressed the essence of your point because I don't know what it is.
Rent control only really exists in large cities that have experienced wild market fluctuations (in the form of surging rent prices) that displaced renters.
If there weren't surging rents displacing people, why would there be rent control? In that case, I would yield them... but in that case, they wouldn't have existed in the first place. So I still miss your point.
No, wild fluctuations are wild -- your adjective -- continual change up and down. May I suggest a dictionary?
fluc⋅tu⋅a⋅tion [fluhk-choo-ey-shuhn] Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. continual change from one point or condition to another.
2. wavelike motion; undulation.
This does not subsume longer-term trends.
EDIT: I want to know if your issue is simply with rising prices. If it is -- and it seems pretty clear that it is -- don't use misleading/distracting/inaccurate verbiage like "wild fluctuations".
Dude, come on. Your contribution to this conversation is really going to be latching onto my use of 'wild fluctuations' instead of 'large price increases' as somehow disingenuous?
