Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Texas 7th, Houston 3rd worst nationally among states, cities in housing affordability for poor
A report released this week by the National Low Income Housing Coalition says the housing cost burden for extremely low-income families in Texas, and particularly families in Texas major metro areas, is now among the worst nationwide.
Texas ties for seventh worst in the number of affordable housing units available to households earning at or below 30% AMFI (Extremely Low Income or ELI). Statewide, Texas has only 29 housing units available and affordable for ELI households.
If housing affordability is this bad in development-friendly Texas - especially in Houston with its minimal land use restrictions - poor people across the country are doomed.
This article is talking about "extremely low income" people. This is $11,000 a year or $23,000 for a family of 4. iIts not even possible to have a full time job and make less then $11,000 a year.
Extremely low income can't expect to have affordable housing. They are not only poor, they are extremely poor.
This article is talking about "extremely low income" people. This is $11,000 a year or $23,000 for a family of 4. iIts not even possible to have a full time job and make less then $11,000 a year.
Extremely low income can't expect to have affordable housing. They are not only poor, they are extremely poor.
Which corresponds roughly to the government definition of "extremely low income", which is "below 30% of metro median family income". (More specifically, below 30% of the metro median for relevant household size - which where I live is about $22,000 for a family of 4.)
Some conservatives have proposed a "subminimum" "training" wage for inexperienced workers. Why not some "subminimum" housing standards for extremely low income, which would allow the private sector to affordably provide housing?
Texas 7th, Houston 3rd worst nationally among states, cities in housing affordability for poor
A report released this week by the National Low Income Housing Coalition says the housing cost burden for extremely low-income families in Texas, and particularly families in Texas major metro areas, is now among the worst nationwide.
Sounds like great incentive for people to make more money. Everyone can move up from "extremely low-income" if they try.
Sounds like great incentive for people to make more money. Everyone can move up from "extremely low-income" if they try.
Not everyone can do so, many cannot. At my workplace, we have lifers in their 40s, 50s, 60s, and 70s earning minimum wage. As long as there is a surplus of low-wage labor, mass advancement from the bottom rung is not going to happen .
Baby boomers had a somewhat similar experience; the early boomers got the good jobs first, and for their working lives, late boomers had a glut of more-experienced workers ahead of them, impeding the late boomers' advancement path.
It's Official: Private Sector Will Never Meet Low Income Housing Needs
Yes, I saw where the article article made projections about the entire nation and all low income people far into the future and concluded low income housing needs will never be met. I also saw where this advocacy group was given sole title as the "official" word.
I've seen extremely poor people on this forum documenting how they make one poor financial/career/life decision after another, willfully ignoring all counsel from others and pining their hopes on idiotic schemes instead of accepting what choices need to be made to advance out of their rut.
Moderator cut: .
Last edited by toosie; 03-22-2017 at 06:15 PM..
Reason: This one comment prompted others to pile on - off topic and personal.
The issue is people like to define worth by financial success. So that guy sweeping the floors is below the guy coding the computers or shuffling paper on his desk and they are below the CFO and CEO etc.
Until we get out of that mindset and the face the fact that many people are simply fit for low end jobs we will continue to have these circular debates about how workers should be able to advance themselves so it is ok for corporations to basically screw them by paying them nothing because if you don't like it get another job.
No one can survive on minimum wage well and we should be rewarding workers that work by paying them something reasonable. The entire idea that we should have people working for wages that low is completely moronic as is the fact that it hasn't been raised since 2009 and if indexed for inflation should be $10.55/hr. Which would be far more reasonable.
In a couple of decades the idea of being able to work, any job, is going to be something special. Our outlook on these low end jobs and treating low end workers like subhumans will have to stop. We are already seeing automation, outsourcing and productivity gains strip workers from the workplace and the trend is for it to happen faster and faster.
At some point, many of the good jobs are going to go away. It has already been in full swing for manufacturing but as more and more people from the second and third world get educated, have better work ethic and will work for much less money the more those jobs will drift over seas.
You are already seeing tons of programming work leave our borders for India and you can place server farms and VOIP lines in any country you want. Consulting firms can be from anywhere as can engineers, mathematicians and just about anything else that doesn't require you to touch something here in the USA.
Automated cars and trucks, auto check outs at stores, robots stocking shelves, realtors, insurance agencies etc are all goign to erode jobs as entire professions either get eliminated or automated. Everything is either failing (traditional department store retail), consolidating or cannibalizing existing stuff (Amazon). Fifth Element's Zorg Industries here we come.
Not everyone can do so, many cannot. At my workplace, we have lifers in their 40s, 50s, 60s, and 70s earning minimum wage. As long as there is a surplus of low-wage labor, mass advancement from the bottom rung is not going to happen .
Baby boomers had a somewhat similar experience; the early boomers got the good jobs first, and for their working lives, late boomers had a glut of more-experienced workers ahead of them, impeding the late boomers' advancement path.
Many other threads on low income earners.
AGAIN.....minimum wage was never designed to be a long term livable wage. One needs to educate themselves and find a job with a livable wage. Minimum wage jobs are intended for students and part-time workers. Anyone making minimum wage with a family to support should be looking at ways to better their situation.
I would not think of living in a major metro if I were poor. I live in a small town and a room at the local flophouse goes for $70 a week.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
