If the problem was caused by 100s of small decisions, then we need 100s of small solutions. I don't see why one of those can't be disallowing "more than 90 percent of units in large buildings" from sharing software that encourages them to agree on an artificially high rent floor. You can't charge San Fransisco prices in Baltimore, but you can charge 10% higher than the local market price if you get enough landlords on board, which they did.
Absolutely. But as below, my guess is that it's a few % points. Worth fixing for sure, but I'm also wary of 'bogeyman thinking' where people think this 'one thing' is going to solve the problem. The reality is that we need a lot more housing of all shapes and sizes and that is going to take a lot of work.
I guess that's fair, although I haven't seen any bogeyman thinking in the complaint or article or comments yet. I'd recommend reading the linked Propublica investigation though, it's more than a few percentage points.
Oh, I wasn't referring to the complaint at all. That's correctly focused on the issue at hand.
What I mean is the casual observer wondering why housing prices are bad. Blackrock, AirBnB, this outfit... people want to blame someone besides the local and state politics that got them where they are:
