The defenders of the rights of tenants want Quebec creates a rent roll. To prevent increases in “abusive”. When I ask owners of apartment buildings what they think, they all tell me: when a record of bad tenants?

Subsequent stories: an owner must pay $ 1,500 because a cat has peed all over the carpet, to the point where the owner had to pull the carpet and replace it entirely. A tenant has painted in dark red two-room apartment – even if the regulation prohibits the building. A pig’s waste piles in the living room. Or throw out the window …

Returning to the rent roll. It would allow tenants to know, in a phone call, the last price paid for an apartment that interests them. And go complain to the Board if the new prices posted their is too high. This proposal is defended. It is a question of law and transparency.

But the part of owners, who often benefit from a change of tenant to raise their prices, it is feared the arrival of such a register. A growing number of new tenants could use to limit rent increases.

The real problem
The crux of the problem is the control by the Board of Housing rents in Quebec. The increases suggested for years, are disconnected from market realities. And well below the price development of the buildings.

Yes, rents rose sharply in 10 years. But much less than the cost of homes and buildings. What about municipal taxes, following the same trajectory. Should we be surprised that the owners seek to increase their rents to reflect the market and cover their costs?

Abuse surely exist, as everywhere. The owners are not angels. They are there to make money. But in the context of sudden increases in rent can sometimes be justified. For example, if the previous tenant had been limited for years the price of the rent with the Régie, some owners will take advantage of the move to put the price of their rent in the market.

Vicious circle
Above all, control of rents – if it does not match the reality of the real estate market – can have disastrous long-term effects. First, it makes it less profitable to build new rental housing (why do you think it is built so many condos in Montreal, and so little rental housing?)

Not only reduces the stock of buildings, but also its quality. The owners will be reluctant to invest and renovate their homes if they can cover their costs with an increase in rents. And given the housing shortage and price controls, some do not even feel the need! They know that renovation or not, their homes will be rented at the same price.

In the end, you end up with less housing, and shortages. Result: the owners remain with the upper hand. We’re no further ahead.

To help households to collect higher rents, it would be wiser than the government directly subsidizes families and individuals. Such direct assistance would target those who need it – for the wealthy also benefit from rent control. Above all, avoid the negative effects of a policy of rent control, which in the long run, cause more damage than good.

Th Apple’s business innovation. Time, it passes it to design and build computers, phones and tablets that throw you down. Creating thousands of jobs, and opens the way to entire industries. Not to eat filet mignon with a politician to elicit privileges. Language Facebook: I love.

(In defense of Microsoft, it must constantly defend themselves against charges of obstruction of competition, particularly for its Windows software. Hence the need to make friends in Washington … Also note that a company will lobby not necessarily in a Machiavellian purpose, and some simply have no choice.)

Even more surprising: the baby of Steve Jobs has never formed political action committee (PAC). This type of organization which raises funds for the campaign of your favorite politician, or influence the adoption of a law. A common practice among lobbyists in the U.S., including large companies.

The big myth
Take the opportunity to debunk a myth in tough economic discourse: the idea that large companies like the free market. They want less government, less government. Nothing is further from the truth. Large companies are interest groups like the others. Pulling the covered board, and try to stuff yourself – such as unions, professional associations and lobbies of all kinds – in the candy dish government. Whether sucking subsidies, or regulations that penalize their competitors. Many companies have a horror of true Capitalism, competition. They much prefer to state capitalism, as here in Quebec. Where one can succeed in becoming buddy-buddy with the proper official – talk to engineering firms and construction!

Do you seriously here, Bombardier and Pratt & Whitney, to take just two examples, wanted the state shrinks? They spend less? When 10 years, both companies have been together for hundreds of millions of dollars of your money in grants, almost zero interest loans and loan guarantees? Apple is certainly not as white as snow. Nor apolitical. His company gives to political parties, especially Democrats. It has a department of “General Government”, like any large company. It sustains an army of lawyers – like its competitors – to settle disputes patent. But Apple has built his kingdom devoting most of his energies to inventing remarkable products. Instead of playing the game policy, as too many companies do. On October 5, we lost more than a genius. We also lost a model entrepreneur.