Is Defending Rent Control a Form of NIMBYism?

Cara asks whether defending rent control is nimbyism; Mike distinguishes intent and notes vacancy controls create other problems.

Play episode from 12:08

chevron_right

Transcript

chevron_right

Transcript

Episode notes

Host Cara Stern is back from parental leave, and she and Mike are jumping right into one of the most debated topics in housing policy — rent control. Inspired by Zohran Mamdani's campaign rent freeze proposal, they dig into how these rules shape the housing market, not just for landlords and tenants, but for entire cities. While rent control offers stability and predictability for those lucky enough to have it, it can also quietly freeze people in place — making it harder to move for a new job, grow a family, or even downsize later in life.

In this episode, they explore how rent control affects mobility, opportunity, and fairness between long-term renters and newcomers. From young families trying to upsize to seniors staying put in oversized apartments, Cara and Mike unpack the tradeoffs behind this well-intentioned policy. Is rent control helping affordability, or holding cities back from building the housing we actually need?

Chapters:

01:00 Introduction

01:19 Zahran Mamdani's rent control policy overview

01:44 Rent control explained

02:19 Mike gives an example of how rent control locks people into place

05:20 How being locked into place effects family planning

07:28 How being locked into place effects seniors downsizing

09:34 Rent control hurts people who need to move

10:03 The distributional consequences of rent control

10:45 How newer tenants subsidize newer tenants

12:39 Cara proposes an NIMBYism theory

13:21 Mike counters with “unintended consequences”