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.
Actually, the same tax break on mortgage interest that homeowners enjoy is also enjoyed by owners of apartment buildings.
So if they lost that tax break, guess who would have to make up the difference....Yes, you, the renter. The landlord would simply increase your rent.
Here in San Diego, it's a lot less expensive to rent than to buy.
That's true for pretty much all of coastal California.
And I suspect it's true for the central areas of all large, prosperous and desirable cities/metro areas.
You want to live where everyone else wants to live?
Get ready to pay for it.
Things weren't that great 50 years ago.
Let's see...you might have ended up getting drafted and serving as cannon fodder in Vietnam.
The tax break for the owner of the apartment complex is a business tax deduction, while for a primary residence, it is a personal one. Even if the latter is removed, the former will remain. Business expenses are deductible regardless of what is allowed as a personal deduction.
The real issue is my rent is too high because of all the freeloaders getting to use their section 8 vouchers making once nice apartments expensive AND ghetto. Sad that I have to pay as much as I do to live in what are now ghetto apartments.
The real issue is my rent is too high because of all the freeloaders getting to use their section 8 vouchers making once nice apartments expensive AND ghetto. Sad that I have to pay as much as I do to live in what are now ghetto apartments.
I was looking at apartment listings out of curiosity and they don't look like worse deals now than when I lived in Northwest Arkansas (most recently 2008).
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,585 posts, read 81,206,701 times
Reputation: 57821
Quote:
Originally Posted by jerseygal4u
All these homeowners whining about rent subsidies but yet nobody says anything when goverment subsidizes mortgages........
I am so sure you claimed your mortgage interest deduction.
What did i get as a renter? 0
I am middle class btw.
How is that fair?
It is fair, because you are benefiting from lower rent due to the owner deducting the mortgage interest on their loan. They also get deductions that homeowners do not, including maintenance costs, depreciation, utilities, and even travel costs.
It is fair, because you are benefiting from lower rent due to the owner deducting the mortgage interest on their loan. They also get deductions that homeowners do not, including maintenance costs, depreciation, utilities, and even travel costs.
Are you serious?
I do not get a deduction on my utilities which includes water,sewer,garbage,electricity,and gas.
I was only able to listen to half this podcast before changing the station in disgust.
All this talk about "rents thru the roof", "affordable housing" sounds like people have a major sense of entitlement. The "callers" on this podcast and that bleeding heart Mayor in Seattle think that people should have the right to live "close" to their jobs in the city. The take away from listening to this (and hearing all this bleeding heart talk about affordable housing) is not that people are really struggling to pay rent and on the verge of getting evicted But that they can't live in the part of the city of their choosing.
And this question is never answered. If "no one" could afford high rents then how are rents so high in the first place with close to record low vacancy rates?? Obviously someone is able to pay the asking rent and from what I see in the greater Boston area most of the new rental properties being constructed are fully rented by the time tenants can start moving in. So some people should be subsidized and allowed below market rents but others are supposed to pay higher rents to compensate.
And these 20 somethings are complaining that they may have to move to another city or have to commute a longer distance not that they are struggling to pay rent and about to be living on the street. More than 50% of people in who work in NYC commute by public transportation to work in some cases 60-90 minutes each way
See NYC in the 1970s & 1980s on the result of all the federal monies allocated toward low income housing as well as rent regulations.
And the suburbs do have a right to mandate strict zoning rules. Homeowners are paying in some cases five figure annual property taxes.
Supply and demand. The rents are high because fewer people are buying and more people are renting. X-Gen (about 70 million people) are in their prime home buying age (30-45) yet they are not buying homes as the previous generations did. Millennials are less interested in home ownership than even the X-Gen, and their purchasing power is on the low side.
Home prices took a huge hit in 2008 (I know, I was one of them) and millions of people were foreclosed, lost their good credit, and are forced to rent. The job market has bounced back in terms of numbers employed, but wages are not rising, and people are unable to purchase homes.
It's a perfect storm for causing a tighter rental market, especially in technology centers like Cambridge and SF, where the market is distorted by large numbers of highly paid technology workers, tech millionaires, financial industry, etc.
In the Boston area, where I live, there's also a built-in population of about 250,000 students many of whom must rent, and with very little new housing stock or rental units being built, the demand outstrips the supply.
In these high demand urban areas, people are getting creative, doubling and tripling up on housing roommates, going without cars, etc. The millennials are the most car-less generation in decades.
Not sure how this will all shake out in the next 20 years, as the X-gen start to move toward retirement and millennials move into prime home-buying years. Of course there's plenty of housing stock in the Midwest and Southwest, and you know, the Internet is making the world a much smaller place. You can buy a lovely home in Phoenix for $150K -- three beds two baths two car garage decent yard -- a house that might cost $600K in many parts of Boston -- but wages there are lower. If I could persuade the wife, we'd move back to Phoenix in a flash, instead of paying $2,000 to rent this little 80-year-old shack with no garage, we'd be living in a palace with a $1200 mortgage!
I was only able to listen to half this podcast before changing the station in disgust.
All this talk about "rents thru the roof", "affordable housing" sounds like people have a major sense of entitlement. The "callers" on this podcast and that bleeding heart Mayor in Seattle think that people should have the right to live "close" to their jobs in the city. The take away from listening to this (and hearing all this bleeding heart talk about affordable housing) is not that people are really struggling to pay rent and on the verge of getting evicted But that they can't live in the part of the city of their choosing.
And this question is never answered. If "no one" could afford high rents then how are rents so high in the first place with close to record low vacancy rates?? Obviously someone is able to pay the asking rent and from what I see in the greater Boston area most of the new rental properties being constructed are fully rented by the time tenants can start moving in. So some people should be subsidized and allowed below market rents but others are supposed to pay higher rents to compensate.
And these 20 somethings are complaining that they may have to move to another city or have to commute a longer distance not that they are struggling to pay rent and about to be living on the street. More than 50% of people in who work in NYC commute by public transportation to work in some cases 60-90 minutes each way.
See NYC in the 1970s & 1980s on the result of all the federal monies allocated toward low income housing as well as rent regulations.
And the suburbs do have a right to mandate strict zoning rules. Homeowners are paying in some cases five figure annual property taxes.
THIS is PRECISELY how income inequality is playing out on the ground. This is happening in Portland - metro rents up 63 percent since 2006 and renter incomes up only 39 percent. (The rise in renter incomes has been driven largely by high-paying tech startups; the low-wage workers being evicted - large-scale evictions and wholesale displacement are happening - have seen negligible income gains.)
In Portland, it's NEWCOMERS - many from higher-priced California - who are able to afford the soaring rents, while long-time residents are being priced out - it's not the "locals" who are affording the high rents, it's the outsider newbies.
An inconvenient truth of capitalism is that the needs of the poor are served ONLY after the needs and wants of all more profitable market segments are satisfied. While new construction is booming all over Portland, virtually NONE of it is affordable to lower-income residents. With high-income people moving in from other areas, the supply of "more profitable" market segments is seemingly inexhaustible, suggesting that local housing in Portland may never again be affordable to low-wage workers.
Suburban homeowners are CHOOSING to pay high property taxes by CHOOSING to exclude taxpaying property uses - the NYC bedroom suburbs with astronomical property taxes have very little non-SFR property tax base. Most states have higher property tax rates on rental property than on owner-occupied homes. Do homeowners have a right to impose higher taxes on Other People's Property than homeowners are willing to pay on their own homes?
Yes because of this almost pathological sense of entitlement.. Anyone want to take a stab at answering the question about high rents?
Basic market economics ---- If "no one" could afford the asking rent then how is it that the asking rent is what it is with almost record low vacancy rates?? NYC is a special case because of rent regulations but in these new nouveau yuppie cities like Austin, Washington DC, San Diego, Raleigh NC?? And honestly these places sound so stuffy, snobby & sterile that I would choose not to pay the asking rent of some "luxury rental" in these nouveau rich gentrified neighborhoods. You dress the wrong way, drive a car that is too old or look out of place you will have the police harassing you (yes even if you are white)
The problem with renting is that you don't control your destiny, your landlord does.
Renting means being able to live somewhere ONLY as long as nobody else is willing to pay more to live there. As soon as someone else is willing to pay more than you, you're out.
My solution to this is to ALLOW - less government, more liberty - ownership of tiny properties, so that low-wage workers can buy property and thereby control their housing destiny.
Zoning rarely if ever allows this, because nobody wants poor people owning property in 'their' neighborhood.
I wish I could have called in to that guy Tom Ashbrook. I would have been blunt and asked this being careful not to say anything that would get me instantly disconnected.
And maybe these 20 something millennials could buy an inexpensive no contract pre paid smartphone and ditch the 24 month $150 + month iphone committment & $5.00 Starbucks Lattes at least to start
??? ???
For the past ten years, I have paid half my income to live in crowded houses. I've discovered that when you are poor and share housing with other poor people, nobody has a smartphone or goes to Starbucks.
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.
