Hacker News Reader

The parent comment is proposing a system where nobody is punished, everything is deferred. Not all landlords are fat cats in a mansion, if you remove the flow of cash to only some people, those people will be crushed if they depend on that flow to send it further upstream.

View on HN

Deferring payment without interest is punishment. Goods in the future are worth less than the same goods in the present.

And where's someone unemployed going to get 3 month's of rent if they only work in 0 or 1 of the next 3 months?

That's why you're supposed to have savings, but it seems these days people prefer to spend frivolously

Landlords and tenants alike it seems.

But we've increased rent to rule out savings.

I mean, by definition, landlords own more homes than they need. Worst case scenario, the asset doesn't disappear, it just gets put to auction for someone that can afford it to buy it.

Possibly the government could restrict that auction to non-property owners to help sort out the first-sentence problem.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com