• NevermindNoMind@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    There’s tons of legislation, proposed and enacted, aimed at lowering rent prices, primarily aimed at increasing supply. Things like prohibiting zoning restrictions that limit single family housing, providing incentives for infill developments and affordable housing bonuses, and allowing rent control ordinances.

    The article doesn’t say “there is only one bill related to housing this legislative session and it’s for pets”. Just because a bigger problem exists doesn’t mean you have to ignore every other problem until the big one is fixed.

    Landlords prohibiting pets is a housing issue because it effectively limits the housing that is available to people. I know when I was looking for an apartment because I had two cats that eliminated probably 50% of housing options I had. I don’t know what this does to the market overall, but I’d bet it does something.

    Per ownership is also an objectively positive thing, both for animals in shelters that need homes and for the mental health of people. Landlord restrictions functionally turn pet ownership into a privilege only available to the landed gentry. It’s shitty.

    So anyway, this bill addresses a problem and does some good. Just because it won’t singlehandedly solve all the country’s housing affordability problems in one swoop doesn’t mean you have to dismiss it.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      10 months ago

      There’s tons of legislation, proposed and enacted, aimed at lowering rent prices, primarily aimed at increasing supply. Things like prohibiting zoning restrictions that limit single family housing, providing incentives for infill developments and affordable housing bonuses, and allowing rent control ordinances.

      If that is the case, I have certainly not been hearing about them. Maybe those are what should be reported on rather than this, which is nowhere near as consequential.