Smith states that rent control cannot protect vulnerable renters drawing his readers in with generalizations about a variety of social solutions that regularly fail, but then leads us to some more solid evidence with a study and its results that look at San Francisco and the effects of rent control. The authors claim that rent control is ineffective by offering proof that shares behaviors that do not align with helping those intended. Behaviors such as reduced rental option and higher …show more content…
A change like this would allow for distribution of the bill. What it does not disclose is a solution that ensures the readers a solid solution to cover the price. Understanding that there are more options than just rent control seems like it might be the only thing to consider. The article does not allow the reader an understanding of how each option impacts the users and non-users of a government-sponsored social insurance benefit. Insurance is designed to be an all pay in and some will get paid for the event. It works like an exclusive club. If someone decides to not be part, then they will also opt out of any future benefit. Smiths’ possible bias leaves the reader with an understanding that it would be treated more like a