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.
So what would affordable be? Based on my google searches -
"Affordable" for a median income household ($59k/yr) would be about $1700 a month (30% of gross income), which would come out to around a $265,000 sale price (by median factors, obviously it rises or decreases based on individual factors like property taxes and interest rates). Let's say a person just starting out needs to pay half that, so they need housing for around $850 a month to rent, or $132,500 to buy.
According to my Zillow search for properties with at least 2 bedrooms and 1 bath, and 750 square feet - California only has about 1100 properties currently for sale or rent that fit that definition. Not a lot for such a big state.
But the midwestern states have thousands of properties and rentals that fit that definition. Ohio alone has about 13,000 properties by that 132.5k/850mo criteria currently for sale or rent, in a state that has less than 1/3rd of California's population.
Did the respective state governments cause that? Or is it the market?
Is there anything that California can do to increase its affordable housing stock by about 4000%? By my napkin math, Califnornia needs to have about 44,000 properties on the market at any given time that meet the 132.5k/850mo criteria to have as many available proportionally as Ohio, and thus make its housing market look more like Ohio's. It only has 1100.
That's a ridiculous thing to say considering the profits of most of the larger employers in the U.S. have been quite high. Since the 80's or so everything is about sending all the money to shareholders. Cut wages, cut benefits, cut everything for the people who make the success of these corporations possible. But that is having an effect on the overall economy as we can see. Those nearly half of the population who can't afford basic expenses because of this situation are people who are not going to be buying too much.
You post lacks any evidence of analytical, rational, economic, thoughtful analysis. It is pure emotion.
Historically, in the early days of the U.S., corporations were only granted charters if they could show they would provide some public benefit.
And in other unhelpful economic history, the first modern for-profit corporation was commissioned by Queen Elizabeth I in 1600, predating the USA. It was the British East India Company.
Last edited by RationalExpectations; 06-14-2019 at 10:31 AM..
You post lacks any evidence of analytical, rational, economic, thoughtful analysis. It is pure emotion.
It's also almost pure accuracy. The fanatic drive to maximize not just company profits (which is pretty much a constant) but share price, dividends and market cap has crippled every other aspect of our economy, with disastrous results for anyone not above the Mendoza line.
You may picture me stomping, wailing, and tantruming here if it makes you feel good, but at least I'm not doing it in the Oval Office.
The post-Reagan notion that all wealth belongs to whoever scrabbles it together and that every dime taken from the pile is a form of theft is one of the most destructive and pernicious notions this country has ever adopted - and I find it absolutely boggle/fascin/repulsive that it's the middle-successful who fiercely defend the rights of all those richer than them to keep every dime. If not the middle-struggling. The truly rich do retain much of that old notion of obligation beyond what can be clawed loose through taxes.
It is mental illness of a national scale.
You accidentally posted this here in the Economics forum; clearly you intended it for the Creative Writing forum. After all, it is a straw-man you've created and live in between your ears.
Why do some or many think the US economy is bad? Because for many...it is:
Many Americans say their financial situation is worse since the Great Recession
I did read this article this morning. All I have to say is that if people cannot prosper in the greatest economy on record and in the greatest bull market in history then there is no hope for such people.
These people are totally financially illiterate and responsible for their own predicament. They don't save and invest in the markets, instead blow all their cash on frivolous purchases to satisfy their short term desires.
For the record the market is up 350% since the 2009 Great Recession lows, unemployment is under 3.5% - at the lowest in history! Real Estate has double, tripled and even quadrupled based on geographic location. Incomes have increased briskly over the last couple of years. And yet people are still complaining that they have no money?
I did read this article this morning. All I have to say is that if people cannot prosper in the greatest economy on record and in the greatest bull market in history then there is no hope for such people.
And so many around are completely clueless, too.
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.
