Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Michael M who wrote (64665)	12/2/1999 12:43:00 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Respond to of 108807

I am in the supply and demand camp. I do not care for, "From each according to his means -- to each according to his needs (desires)." I get the impression you know of (or have lived in) SF... is that right? Because you realize that SF has laws that restrict the closing of any gas station... without those laws the property would be annexed by the dot com industry no doubt (since the land is worth more than any gas station can generate in profits at this point)... All these libertarian ideas sound great in theory until you really look at what makes a city go and how capital tends to distribute itself if you let it run free.

To: Michael M who wrote (64665)	12/5/1999 6:01:00 PM
From: Grainne	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

<< Ah, the greedy landlord argument. Rent control, perhaps? I am in the supply and demand camp. I do not care for, "From each according to his means -- to each according to his needs (desires).">> Some kinds of rent control seem to be necessary in cities like San Francisco, where the demand hugely outreaches the supply. If there are no controls at all, then you lose all the poor and most of the working middle class like teachers and policemen who serve the needs of the city. Do you want a functional community or an enclave of the very rich only? Who will actually sweep the streets and teach your children? I think these are real questions that communities like San Francisco need to think about. Rent control here is pretty fair, incidentally. Landlords can raise the rent as much as the market will bear on units that become vacant, but cannot evict tenants willy nilly to do that unless they violate their rental agreements, or to move in a close family member. Landlords buying in San Francisco know that there is limited rent control, so they are making informed decisions when they buy. Landlords who owned their properties before the institution of rent control bought them so long ago that their mortgages are tiny or nonexistent, and the value of their properties has increased probably twenty fold, at least, so they are profiting greatly. <<BTW, if you're against free world trade, the first thing that has to go is the internet. If you think mom and pop took it in the shorts from Starbucks, they're going to get positively reamed by dot com. Are YOU going to take the pledge to never buy on-line, Christine?>> I'm not sure I agree with your statement, Michael. A lot of dot.com entrepreneurs were just computer savvy small businessmen who were very clever, and thought of something novel. Certainly there is nothing wrong with that. An example would be the founder of ebay, who was simply trying to create a place where his girlfriend could trade Pez. A lot of these people took giant risks to start their businesses, and deserve to be rewarded for their ingenuity.