🎭 Live Mentor Debate

I inherited an apartment building from my grandmother. She kept rents low for decades—many tenants have been there 20+ years, paying far below market rate. Some are elderly on fixed incomes. Some are families who've built their lives around this affordable housing. I can't afford to do what she did. Property taxes have tripled. Maintenance costs are crushing me. I've been subsidizing the building from my own salary, but I have kids approaching college age and no retirement savings. If I raise rents to market rate, most of these people will have to leave. They can't afford anything else in this city. One woman told me she'd be homeless. My financial advisor says I'm being foolish—"You're not a charity. These people would have had to move eventually anyway. You didn't create the housing crisis." He's right that I didn't create it. But I'm being asked to enforce it. My grandmother sacrificed her own financial security for these tenants. Was that noble or naive? Am I obligated to continue her sacrifice, or is it fair to finally pursue my own interests? — The Landlord's Dilemma in Los Angeles

Economics & Social Justice Debate: When personal sacrifice is unsustainable, what do we owe to those who depend on us?

Debaters:Charles DickensAdam SmithModerated by Stella Sharpe

penn7

Welcome to this Economics & Social Justice debate. Our central question: "I inherited an apartment building from my grandmother. She kept rents low for decades—many tenants have been there 20+ years, paying far below market rate. Some are elderly on fixed incomes. Some are families who've built their lives around this affordable housing. I can't afford to do what she did. Property taxes have tripled. Maintenance costs are crushing me. I've been subsidizing the building from my own salary, but I have kids approaching college age and no retirement savings. If I raise rents to market rate, most of these people will have to leave. They can't afford anything else in this city. One woman told me she'd be homeless. My financial advisor says I'm being foolish—"You're not a charity. These people would have had to move eventually anyway. You didn't create the housing crisis." He's right that I didn't create it. But I'm being asked to enforce it. My grandmother sacrificed her own financial security for these tenants. Was that noble or naive? Am I obligated to continue her sacrifice, or is it fair to finally pursue my own interests? — The Landlord's Dilemma in Los Angeles" Charles Dickens, you've said "No one is useless in this world who lightens the burdens of another—we are bound to those who depend on us" — but I want specifics. Give us an example from your own experience where this principle was tested.

Charles Dickens

Ah, a most poignant predicament! I see echoes of my own trials in this landlord's dilemma. Consider the plight of the Cratchit family from *A Christmas Carol*. Bob Cratchit, a man of meagre wages, toils tirelessly for the miserly Scrooge. Despite his poverty, Bob's spirit remains unbroken, his heart full of love for his family, especially his ailing son, Tiny Tim. Scrooge, blinded by greed, sees Cratchit merely as a means to an end, failing to recognize his humanity. Yet, when confronted with the potential consequences of his actions, Scrooge undergoes a transformation, realizing his obligation to lighten the burdens of those dependent upon him. He raises Cratchit's wages and becomes a benefactor to the family, saving Tiny Tim's life. It is a powerful lesson in the interconnectedness of society and the moral imperative to care for one another, is it not?

Adam Smith

I must respectfully disagree with the assertion that *A Christmas Carol* does not grapple with the economics of the situation. While I concur that personal ethics play a significant role, the underlying issue is the efficient allocation of resources, is it not? The landlord's plight is a microcosm of a larger system. In *The Wealth of Nations*, I explore how the pursuit of self-interest, guided by the invisible hand, often unintentionally promotes the public good. However, this principle assumes a competitive market, where no single actor holds undue power. In this situation, the rising property taxes distort the market, creating a situation where the landlord's self-interest may not align with the welfare of the tenants.

penn7

That's an interesting perspective, Charles Dickens, but I wonder if *A Christmas Carol* truly grapples with the *economics* of the situation. Scrooge's conversion is a matter of personal ethics, not systemic change. Adam Smith, you argue for the "invisible hand" of the market to guide resource allocation. Where does that hand fall in this situation? Is the landlord's self-interest truly aligned with the greater good if it leads to the displacement of long-term tenants? And Charles Dickens, how would Bob Cratchit fare if Scrooge had merely been a more efficient capitalist, instead of a transformed one?

Charles Dickens

An astute observation. While I celebrate Scrooge's transformation, the spectre of unbridled capitalism looms large. Were Scrooge a mere "efficient capitalist," as you say, Bob Cratchit's fate would remain precarious indeed! It highlights the inherent flaws in a system that prioritizes profit over people. As for the landlord's conundrum, it strikes me that we must not view this as a solely economic quandary. To speak of "market rates" and "efficient allocation" while ignoring the human cost is to strip these tenants of their dignity. I maintain that empathy and a sense of social responsibility must temper the cold calculus of the marketplace.

Adam Smith

Indeed, a crucial question. The "invisible hand" suggests that individual self-interest, in a competitive market, promotes overall prosperity. However, that prosperity is best achieved when individuals act with justice and benevolence, not unfettered avarice. If the landlord raises rents to market rate, it may maximize their immediate financial gain. But if this action destabilizes the community, causes widespread hardship, and ultimately leads to a less productive society, it is not in alignment with the greater good. Government may need to step in, or other forces, if one actor has power over others in the market.

Want to join the conversation?