Only if these corporations are actually required by regulation to make these houses available for rent, and at market-adequate rates. If a company is as cashed up as this one is likely to be, they’ll only rent to people who are willing to pay higher rents, and if there’s nobody who wants to rent a specific property, they’d rather leave it sitting vacant than lower the rent.

This isn’t hypothetical, it’s happening in practically every property market where wealthy investors are buying up housing stock.

Please humble yourself and acknowledge that maybe you’re not an expert on the subject after reading “the basics of…” book about it. Just a thought.

Keep in mind that there are people who have dedicated their careers/lives to studying this stuff. Don’t disregard rebuttals just because your “basics of economics” or whatever book didn’t get there yet.

The real world just doesn’t work that way. But maybe if you went beyond Econ 100 level shit (or honestly, not even), you would have learned that.

Have you considered looking outside every now and then? What’s your answer to the discrepancy between any previous generation and modern day? https://www.investopedia.com/millennial-homeownership-still-lagging-behind-previous-generations-7510642 https://www.nar.realtor/blogs/economists-outlook/millennials-still-underperforming-amid-gains-in-homeownership-rate https://www.supermoney.com/inflation-adjusted-home-prices/

No, free market never works, because all people cannot be experts on all subjects at all times.

Because of that, you end up with people dying as “collateral damage” while the free market “corrects itself.” Things like: “Well they should have done their research and known that brand of car has faulty brakes, and went to a different company instead, so it’s kind of their own fault.” Or, “this is just part of the process. Now everyone will know (lol right) that this company makes cars with faulty brakes and stop buying their products,” while completely ignoring that these are fucking people that are dying. That’s not ok.

And what if a company decides to hide things about their product from the public? What happens when that very product ends up giving people mesothelioma, but because that’s an illness that can take decades to manifest after exposure, there’s no clear causal link to the regular consumer. How does the free market correct that one? Or do we just let people suffer and die horrible deaths so that we can keep using the cheaper kind of insulation and save a few bucks?

Sorry but the loss of human lives is not ever acceptable “collateral damage”. Especially not when the loss is 100% unnecessary.

They don’t know. Look at their comment above, the book they recommended to everyone was “the basics of economics” or something.

I really hope it’s a troll, because holy shit the narcissism it takes to read an Econ 100 level (if even that) book, and think you’re an expert on the subject. Wild.