Who would provide this insurance and who would pay for it? Government (Freddie Mac and HUD) stepped in to create the Syracuse program, so government would seem to make the most sense here, as well. And given government involvement in Syracuse, there is an equity argument to be made also. Such insurance, by protecting renters from displacement due to rents increasing faster than their incomes, would make neighborhoods more stable, and also make renters positive stakeholders in their neighborhoods: they would enjoy neighborhood improvements without being displaced in the process. Government would benefit from increased stability, reduced social costs, and even increased property values and tax revenues. Government would also be best situated to make the necessary calculations to offer actuarily sound insurance, as it has the best data for the purpose.

While the renters most in need of this insurance would probably be the least able to afford it, employers could step in here to help. To encourage this, I also propose an explicit tax break for this insurance: employers could expense this insurance (just as they expense health insurance premiums and parking benefits), while the employee would receive this benefit tax-free (just as their health insurance and parking benefits are tax-free).

What do you think of this idea or comment?
(You can change your vote at any time)

I agree

No opinion

I disagree