>I absolutely would not rent property to someone who has a recent criminal record

This include ANY record, or just the violent ones? Curious how you would interpret a "disorderly conduct" charge/conviction, considering it's an umbrella term used by police to slap on any individual they deem difficult.

For example, I had a conviction of disorderly conduct which resulted in a fine. All because I refused to ID myself to a LEO that demanded I comply even though I was under no suspicion of a crime or that I was about to commit one. Additionally I do not reside in a stop & identify state.

How would you interpret that if I were to submit a rental application and my other prerequisites were in line (mid tier job, mid 700 credit score)?

I'm not the person you are replying to, but I would definitely interpret that negatively. First of all, I'm not going to take your word for it on the details. I don't know you and everyone convicted of a a crime insists they are innocent or otherwise in the right. I'd actually feel better about someone who expressed remorse over the situation. Even if I believed you, you are still telling me that you are a generally difficult person to deal with. I would not want to rent to a tenant who goes out of their way to unnecessarily flex their rights because in my state a tenant can make their landlord's life hell that way. I'd want reasonable tenants who I can be sure will pay their rent and leave when their lease is up.

I don't have any property to rent so it's purely hypothetical, but I would only be concerned with violent crimes, vandalism, or theft.

While I wouldn't think much of "disorderly conduct", with the amount of tenants around and it being, you know, my property, why should I take a risk on someone with a criminal past when I may have a dozen competing applicants many of whom may come in clean and have good credit? It's on the applicant to make a compelling case for themselves.

Don't forget we now have to "price in" occasional years long eviction moratoriums.

Do you think this tool will be used again for less urgent issues than Covid was?

I'm not sure how to answer your question because it seems obvious to me that Covid was not the cause of the moratoriums.

I am completely at a loss to what your referring to then.

I know of eviction moratoriums that occurred after covid. It was sold as a way to avoid a massive surge in displaced people from job loss.

At the time I thought it was strange that this was the best solution because as you said it put the cost on landlords which in my opinion hurts smaller landlords the most.

I don't really see what else could have been the cause but I guess I will rephrase:

- Why do you think this tool was used if not for Covid? (It was as least sold to the public that way right)

- Do you think now that it's been done once that it will happen again?

He's simply pointing out that Covid was a just a BS excuse for politicians to transfer money from landlords to deadbeat tenants (thereby inducing people to become deadbeats).

Exactly. Government policies created an economic crisis. Then government policies exacerbated the economic crisis by doing things like eviction moratoriums.

Not OP but now that’s it’s happened, it will happen again. I would personally not be surprised to see some cities and states clamp down on evictions during the next recession, heat wave, drought, or similar.

These politicians are quick to take new powers and slow to give them back.