Fairfax County Residents Paying for Luxury Items for Low-Income Residents (middle-class, rent)

[Yankeesfan]

Originally Posted by CAVA1990

Did the developer say who actually ended up in them?

It hasn't been built yet -- waiting for the economy to improve, probably.

[Yankeesfan]

Originally Posted by CAVA1990

Many people dream of their kids becoming doctors and lawyers. I've recently been dreaming mine become plumbers and car mechanics.

[brooklynborndad]

Originally Posted by khuntrevor

I agree with this. This program seems more like legalized extortion of the developers. If people want to do business in high cost of living areas; they can pay the wages.

Say you're Fairfax county. SOME of your county employees are older folks who have lived here forever, living in houses with low payments (or paid off), or are spouses of folks with high paying DC jobs for whom they are going to live close in anyway, and a public sector job in PW or farther out is unappealing. Others are people you need to attract from far away, who will need to move here for the job.

If you raise the wage you offer, you can attract the far away folks, but you ALSO increase the amount you pay to folks would work for you anyway. Concievably by offering housing at a discount, you can attract the far away folks, at a lower cost than increasing wages for all public employees.

(this is kind of like the retailer who offers a holiday sale, so they can get the price sensitive shoppers, without lowering prices for the less price sensitive folks who dont shop on holiday weekends so much)

[brooklynborndad]

Originally Posted by Yankeesfan

Yes. The builders who built our house told us they would pay more for skilled labor, but FCPS doesn't do much to accommodate non-college-bound students so they end up dropping out instead of learning skills that could help them acquire decent-paying jobs without a college degree.

except FCPS has a range of vocational programs available. The "public schools arent doing vocational ed" any more is another oft repeated meme that isnt really true.

[The Dissenter]

Originally Posted by brooklynborndad

except FCPS has a range of vocational programs available. The "public schools arent doing vocational ed" any more is another oft repeated meme that isnt really true.

.....but students are being pushed toward college in epic numbers. Training for blue-collar careers can be looked down upon in HS.

[brooklynborndad]

Originally Posted by Alanboy395

.....but students are being pushed toward college in epic numbers. Training for blue-collar careers can be looked down upon in HS.

given that thats a statement about high school culture (i guess) its pretty hard to empirically test. Its further difficult because there really isnt a simple line between "vocational ed for blue collar" and "college for doctors and lawyers" = community college is huge and itself includes lots of vocational programs. Federal educational policy goals include college OR post HS vocational/apprenticeship - IIUC some radio hosts have taken that to mean "OMG they want everyone to get a BA in liberal arts!"

[pvnova]

Originally Posted by dkf747

...and it doesn't provide for those who can't earn as much.

Sure, for those who CANNOT (as opposed to "would not") there are (and should be) safety nets, providing MINIMUM accommodations (whichever could cheaply be purchased on their SSI check), not luxury apartments in the middle of one of the most expensive counties in the country.

[Yankeesfan]

Originally Posted by brooklynborndad

Say you're Fairfax county. SOME of your county employees are older folks who have lived here forever, living in houses with low payments (or paid off), or are spouses of folks with high paying DC jobs for whom they are going to live close in anyway, and a public sector job in PW or farther out is unappealing. Others are people you need to attract from far away, who will need to move here for the job.

If you raise the wage you offer, you can attract the far away folks, but you ALSO increase the amount you pay to folks would work for you anyway. Concievably by offering housing at a discount, you can attract the far away folks, at a lower cost than increasing wages for all public employees.

(this is kind of like the retailer who offers a holiday sale, so they can get the price sensitive shoppers, without lowering prices for the less price sensitive folks who dont shop on holiday weekends so much)

It's not the responsibility of employers to provide housing, or to manipulate which of their employees live where, or to differentiate on employee pay based upon where the employees live.

[pvnova]

Originally Posted by Tone509

IMO:

There's probably something to be said about those housing-subsidized residents who may not necessarily be doing their best to find employment.

On the other hand, for those who are gainfully employed but work in lower-paying positions (e.g. restaurants, retail), they have to live somewhere.

Sure, and plenty of cheap housing is available elsewhere.

Originally Posted by Tone509

If left solely to market forces, many of these people may be commuting from way out in Prince William County or across the river in Prince Georges County.

And the people who commute from afar right now will gladly take those same formerly subsidized housing at market rates, balancing the commute equation, and making the commute time just (you earned to commute less - you commute less).

Originally Posted by Tone509

Or perhaps they might not be here at all, causing would-be managers to scratch their heads, wondering why "no one wants to work".

Nothing a market-based salary cannot fix (instead of underpaying people and relying on taxpayers to subsidize their employees - practically subsidizing the owners of the businesses who employ such people - *cough*Waltons*cough*).

[pvnova]

Originally Posted by saganista

Do you contend that these were actually market-demand effects? The average price per barrel of crude in August 2007 was around $64. In August 2009, it was around $63.

And in 1998 it was $12 (and Exxon had the second most profitable year of its history), and by 2001 (Bush won) it was $20. And now it is $100.

Originally Posted by saganista

In between, something strange happened. What was it? Investors fleeing from suddenly scary mortgage-backed securities markets discovered (with some help from the folks at Goldman Sachs) that good money could still be made at relatively low risk in the markets for oil futures contracts. As the result, the share of those markets held by speculators (those holding a position for no purpose other than to resell it) rapidly rose from less than 30% to more than 70%. It turned out of course that the market was too small to accommodate such an influx, and as the pump price of gasoline soared past $4.00 and calls for government action were heard, the speculative market began to shrink and its influence essentially dissipated nearly as fast as it had first appeared.

And the practical result is that price of oil can (and should) be radically lower than it is now.