To the editor: The Times’ reporting shows that public pensions are driving rents higher, worsening California’s affordable housing crisis. Thousands of military veterans have no roof over their heads, and the rent is too high for millions of others.
Shelter is arguably our most important need, so equilibrium between the needs of the commercial real estate market and human rights is essential. Yet the debate over renters’ rights is polarized between outsized profits and the thesis that rent control will kill housing.
A healthy community supplies housing across all income levels. A sick one makes housing affordable only to the upper crust and, through government assistance, the very impoverished. That is a death spiral.
As recently as the 1950s, Detroit was the wealthiest city in the world. Despite affluent suburbs such as Grosse Pointe, Mich., Detroit’s bottom dropped out. This is now happening in cities like Los Angeles and San Francisco.
We are sacrificing the California dream of freedom, equality and opportunity to the greed of billionaire corporate landlords who have a stranglehold over our politicians. They demonize rent control as a communist plot. The truth is that rent control in the United States has been around since 1919 and fits very appropriately into the framework of utility regulation.
Is it sensible that the gas and electric companies must apply to raise rates, but landlords in most cities can do almost anything they want? Of course not. Without rent control, the California dream will die.
Michael Weinstein, Los Angeles
The writer is president of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, which is a leading proponent of the rent-control ballot measure Proposition 33.
..
To the editor: It is reasonable to expect that returns on investments in shelter be in line with returns on investments in food and clothing. The more basic the commodity, the more modest the return.
Individuals and families should not be competing against private equity for the necessities of life.
Mary Bomba, Los Angeles
..
To the editor: Any institution that includes sociopolitical factors in its investment decisions will likely have less money for the benefit of its constituents. Not no money, but less.
Capitalism can be a double-edged sword.
Alan Bell, Los Angeles
..
To the editor: It’s a dirty little secret that universities invest in rental property. That’s not a people-friendly investment. These modern robber barons are ruining lives and throwing people out on the streets.
Shelter, as with the air we breathe, should never be an investment vehicle.
Mindy Taylor-Ross, Venice
