[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
Economy Title: Here's Why Housing Is Unaffordable for the Bottom 90% This is the direct consequence of the Federal Reserve's decades of unprecedented stimulus: extremes of wealth and income inequality that gave the wealthiest households the means to bid up housing to the point it's no longer affordable to the bottom 90%. The superficial conclusion that the reason why housing is unaffordable is a scarcity of housing misses a key dynamic in supply and demand: who has too much money and where do they park it?? Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest There's also the factor of massive population growth. When I was born, the US population was a little more than half of what it is right now. In the intervening decades, the population has doubled, which crudely would mean double the amount of housing needed. But actually that number is bigger. When I was born, there were about 73 million children. That's a little less than 1 in every 2 people was a kid. Beyond that, 72% of the adult population was married. Today, the population has doubled, but there are still only 73 million children in the US, and the marriage rate population has tumbled to 45%. So, we need at least three times as much housing as we used to, and most of the housing stock has turned over since then, as have the regulatory restrictions on building houses. All of this drives up the price of houses by at least 300%, even if our money was literally gold and silver and there was no inflation at all.
#2. To: Vicomte13 (#1) If we deported the illegal invaders housing and beef would both be cheaper. Bacon too.
#3. To: A K A Stone (#2) That's probably true. Interestingly, in the cities around us in Connecticut (Stamford, Norwalk and Bridgeport), crime rates have plummeted because of the arrival of the Hispanics. Hispanics are often illegals, so they don't have the option of welfare. They have to work to eat. Also, there's no welfare support for their rent, no "Section 8 housing". So what has happened is that landlords find they can charge Latinos full rent, whatever the market will bear, and they do. With welfare recipients on Section 8, they were very limited by the government in what they could charge. So what has happened is that the really bad parts of all of these cities have "Latinized", meaning that the Latinos have moved in, and pay higher rent, and work three jobs so they're never on the streets, while the poor blacks have been forced out of the area up to Hartford, where there are not so many service jobs for the Hispanics to do. Net result, crime has plunged in the cities that used to be terrible. When we moved here, Stamford had about 150 murders a year, and Bridgeport was worse. Last year, Stamford has 4 murders, Bridgeport had 16. But Hartford? It's a smaller city than either Stamford or Bridgeport, but it had several hundred murders last year, and a horrible welfare problem and gang problem. On Connecticut's Gold Coast, immigration from Latin America - legal and illegal - has been a godsend. Lots and lots of workers to do the jobs that the whites are too rich and educated to do (so everybody has a well- trimmed lawn now), who work hard because they don't get benefits, who have to pay market rent because they don't get Section 8, which then drives the black ghettos right out of the region. The Hispanic ghettos are much better kept, because the landlords have three times as much money, and a vast labor pool to draw on. And crime has plummeted, because idle hands are the Devil's workshop, and Hispanic hands can't afford to be idle: they have to eat! Is there something inherently racist about enjoying seeing the poor black population with all of its crime and welfare fraud replaced by working Hispanic poor? Probably. But I'm all for it. Fear is gone from the streets of Stamford and Norwalk, even at night, and crime is so much lower in Bridgeport that young white college students get apartment there now. It is "gentrifying". Hartford isn't, because that's where the poor blacks flock to, bringing all of that crime and dysfunction with them. I don't like the open border, and I don't like the lawlessness of it. Trump's policy was better. But the Hispanic immigrants themselves? In Connecticut, they're a welcome replacement for the ghetto blacks.
#4. To: Vicomte13 (#3) i dont doubt huspanics work hard. my brother runs a high dollar restraunt. he says the mexicans have replaced his dish washers a d they do à better job. now they have mexicans running the food lines and the sa.e o es also doing dishes and that cuts his labor cists alpt. i dont think he should hire them but those are the facts. I think the mexivans and others bring more crime overall.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|