mandryka
pfm Member
this kind of legislation, onerous as it might be, is more easily borne by large landlords,
A priori yes, but in reality it is hard for them too. Some large landlords with tenancies and houses in multiple occupation struggling to make their business plans work. One large landlord recently decided to sell off those assets it thought would be hard to make energy efficient (there is a major change to the energy requirements of rentals in the pipeline). I don't have any HMOs but there the issue is to do with increasingly stringent licensing requirements (I think -- not my market!) I have a vague memory that housing associations are also in trouble because of legislation. I can supply references if you want.
Another is that the author sees the state not simply as acting in the immediate interest of landlords but as mediating between rentiers and renters: you guys can’t have it all your own way because you’re stupid and selfish, no offence, and will exploit renters so severely that the whole racket will collapse - you need protecting from yourselves.
Oh, in that case, I am grateful to the conservatives for saving me from myself. However I didn't sense any collapse in the air when I was free from all the legislation.
Thirdly, the rentier category is being used quite broadly here, to refer to companies that make money from assets, including infrastructure and intellectual property.
This is a reasonable point. But whereof I cannot speak, thereof I will remain silent.