|

Theft by Any Other Name is Still Theft

Lawmakers and political activists like to frame their policy proposals in terms that hide their real meaning. An example of this is a proposal in Colorado to impose “rent stabilization” on mobile home parks. Rent stabilization is nothing more than a euphemism for theft.

The bill would require park owners to pay up to $30,000 to each household if the park is closed. The bill’s sponsor said that mobile park residents are often “handcuffed” to the park because they can’t afford to move their home. The solution, he believes, is to simply rob park owners.

The sponsor said that the bill is a response to an influx of wealthy investors who buy mobile home parks and raise the rents. “We’re no longer dealing with sort of a mom-and-pop market,” he said. Bills like this are almost guaranteed to make that a reality. Wealthy investors often have the resources to overcome government regulations, but smaller investors do not. When their income is arbitrarily limited by government fiat, they often have little choice but to sell.

The bill would also limit rent increases to 3 percent per year. Last year, inflation was 7 percent, which means that park owners would see their real income decline by at least 4 percent per year. Declining income means a reduced return on investment. And that means that investors will move their capital to more profitable uses.

If someone paid their rent, and then demanded a refund at gunpoint a few days later, we would recognize that action as robbery. The principle doesn’t change just because government acts the proxy and demands the refund at the time rent is paid.

Colorado, like nearly every other state, has a severe shortage of affordable housing for low- and moderate-income households. Bills like this simply add to the cost of providing housing and discourages new investment.

Depriving people of their property without their consent is theft. And that is true whether it is called rent stabilization or anything else. Theft is theft, no matter how politicians and pundits want to label it.

Similar Posts

  • Exacerbating the Problem

    Progressive Regressive “journalist” Patrick Range McDonald informs us that renters paid a total of $512 billion to landlords in 2019. This, he wants us to believe, is evidence of “corporate landlord greed.” Certainly, that’s a lot of money. However, it proves nothing other than McDonald’s inability to consider the full context. In doing so, he…

  • A Lesson from Road Subsidies

    In the early twentieth century the Good Roads movement successfully framed improved roads as a “public good.” Better roads, the movement argued, would enable food and manufactured products to be more easily distributed and everyone would benefit. Therefore, free, improved roads should be provided by government. Today, housing advocates are making a similar argument. If…

  • A Flawed Framework

    As I point out in my book, The Affordable Housing Crisis: Causes and Cures, for more than one hundred years housing policy has been dominated by the same flawed framework. Each “new” housing policy simply repeats policies that have previously failed. New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani is an example. He ran on a promise…

  • The Right to Property

    For decades, property rights have been under attack across America and Texas. From environmental regulations to zoning ordinances, from business regulations to soda taxes, governments at every level have engaged in a relentless assault on the right to property. The right to property means the freedom to create, use, dispose, and trade material values. It…

  • |

    Property Wrongs

    A neighborhood association in Boise is fighting a proposal to develop a 226-unit subdivision. The Northwest Neighborhood Association (NWNA) contends that the development would prejudice its “substantial rights to ‘open space and rural character.’” Rights pertain to freedom of action. If one desires to live in a neighborhood with open space and a rural character,…