Yeah I agree, they would probably just give it the bare minimum amount of coverage possible. Unless it leads to mass protests of some kind, then it might force the news to actually give it more attention.
It'll depend on how many it happens to at once I think as well. If it's a slow trickle of people being pushed through months long eviction procedures there might be enough buffer time there to prevent any serious rioting from the affected.
It's just going to kick the can a bit though, the systems we have in place with credit and renters history prevent you from basically ever renting or owning again once evicted or foreclosed on so it's possible it'll be quite a big deal in the coming months or years.
That latter part is one of the pieces of the puzzle that the out of touch don't think about, as it's a consequence of systems in place instead of outright written as law, so it might literally be they aren't seeing that possibility.
The flip side of this is that landlords need tenants, or they don't get any "passive income". What's more likely is that we go back to some combo of tenement style homes and extra fees and deposits for people who have eviction records or are "subprime" renters.
Of course it could be worse. In the Soviet Union, families frequently lived in dorms and had to share kitchens and even a bathroom!
Yeah I agree, they would probably just give it the bare minimum amount of coverage possible. Unless it leads to mass protests of some kind, then it might force the news to actually give it more attention.
It'll depend on how many it happens to at once I think as well. If it's a slow trickle of people being pushed through months long eviction procedures there might be enough buffer time there to prevent any serious rioting from the affected.
It's just going to kick the can a bit though, the systems we have in place with credit and renters history prevent you from basically ever renting or owning again once evicted or foreclosed on so it's possible it'll be quite a big deal in the coming months or years.
That latter part is one of the pieces of the puzzle that the out of touch don't think about, as it's a consequence of systems in place instead of outright written as law, so it might literally be they aren't seeing that possibility.
The flip side of this is that landlords need tenants, or they don't get any "passive income". What's more likely is that we go back to some combo of tenement style homes and extra fees and deposits for people who have eviction records or are "subprime" renters.
Of course it could be worse. In the Soviet Union, families frequently lived in dorms and had to share kitchens and even a bathroom!
On the one hand someone else might be homeless, but on the other hand, I can imagine sharing a bathroom and that's icky!
Hopefully the road runs out soon. But yeah all good points and things I didn’t consider in my first post