Now... ask yourself how it would go down if someone suggested offering free housing in city parks. Homeless encampments tend to get cleared out by local governments, not encouraged.
I favor allowing homeless to camp in appropriate places.
But in my ultra-liberal town, no place is ever deemed appropriate.
They have 2 choices....
1) Stay in the few very costly (to taxpayers) shelters.
2) Find some other place where they're continually
on the move cuz the city doesn't want them there.
They allow no solution in between those extremes.
I've allowed living at my storage facility, as long as
they don't attract attention. Of course, this is
illegal. Sometimes the law is wrong.
The factors are different, but I think you knew that.
The factors are more alike than you'll admit.
Please don't pretend that switching housing providers is as easy or cheap as switching bread providers.
Please don't pretend that short term housing is no option.
Tenants opt for longer leases voluntarily because they're
cheaper per month.
Some investments have carrying costs. The investor always pays for them. Sure, they do it with the hope that the revenue will offset the carrying costs over the long term, which is still a fair hope for a landlord.
Being a landlord is a business, with the net income stream
determining the value. Operating costs.differ.from.the.carrying
costs.of.a.non-business.investment,eg,raw.land.to.be.developed.
We.have.insurance,utilities,maintenance,replacement,labor,
regulatory,&.much.higher.property.taxes.
Imagining.that.eventual.sale.is.where.the.profit.lies.is.a.liberal.
fantasy....There.would.be.no.increase.in.value.without.profit.
during.ownership,ie,the.asset.must.be.productive.
It doesn't appear that reality is sinking in,given.that.you're.
repeating.the.same.errors.