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.
Are you referring to rent? Then yes, I do support that. I've rented and owned. That rent payment allowed my family to have a roof over their head, a fair value for the rent we paid.
But this was my question, what sort of fees do you think homeowners should pay? My neighborhood is zoned for a certain size home, but the neighborhood around the corner allows much smaller homes and many more are rentals there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt View Post
The solution to NIMBYism is to require NIMBYs to pay fees for "mitigation" of the excessive housing costs they cause.
I rent a room in an overcrowded house. (Nine people in a 3BR/1BA house, with people living in living room, garage, dining nook, and an RV on the property. House has crawl space and no basement.)
Assessed value ~$125K, last sold ~$110K. Gross rents $2500 per month.
Are we getting fair value for the rent we pay? (Some of us are paying up the wazoo while others are getting free rent.)
I wouldn't say they are segregating poor people. I just looked and the cheapest one of those condos in my home neighbourhood is $600,000, and it has every bell and whistle.
What people want are a bunch of cheaper older fixer upper entry level home. There are simply so many of those out there though. You can't make more of them though (unless you want to wait a few decades). I would guess that free reign on development would probably make that issue worse in fact, because if a developer wants to build expensive new condos (because that's what they will build, not the cheapest possible condo) a package of cheap older houses are the first thing to get torn down.
Where I live, zoning prohibits multifamily construction in most neighborhoods, so apartments and condos are being built only along arterials and in transit corridors (i.e. within a few blocks of arterials).
People are buying the cheaper older fixer uppers here, and instead of fixing them, buyers are tearing them down in order to build mcmansions.
Ah, in-fill. Who is not familiar with that? The problem is that homes in the 50's and 60's were built with small everything -- small windows, small closets, small kitchens, small bedrooms, small dining rooms, small family rooms -- you name it and it's likely to be too small to meet contemporary standards. Not to mention that probably retrofitted HVAC systems are apt not to be up to par. The solution is to tear down the old one and use modern building techniques to put a much more suitable and efficient home onto the same or nearly the same footprint. It happens all over.
I rent a room in an overcrowded house. (Nine people in a 3BR/1BA house, with people living in living room, garage, dining nook, and an RV on the property. House has crawl space and no basement.)
Assessed value ~$125K, last sold ~$110K. Gross rents $2500 per month.
Are we getting fair value for the rent we pay? (Some of us are paying up the wazoo while others are getting free rent.)
Nobodies making you stay there. You decided to live there. Don't like it? Move...
Houston has de facto zoning through its voluminous land-use and related codes. These are why the city doesn't look any different from Dallas or any other sizable Sun Belt sorts of cities. There aren't any brothels next door to churches in Houston, and you can't put up a convenience store in a residential neighborhood either. If it quacks like a duck...
Nobodies making you stay there. You decided to live there. Don't like it? Move...
Artificial supply constraints = insufficient supply = many people here literally cannot find a place into which they can move, or cannot find a place into which they can afford to move.
In a free market, capitalists would take advantage of exorbitant rents by building more housing, but government gets in the way.
I rent a room in an overcrowded house. (Nine people in a 3BR/1BA house, with people living in living room, garage, dining nook, and an RV on the property. House has crawl space and no basement.)
Assessed value ~$125K, last sold ~$110K. Gross rents $2500 per month.
Are we getting fair value for the rent we pay? (Some of us are paying up the wazoo while others are getting free rent.)
Well, out of all the available rental options, you chose this one, so you must have thought it was a best value for you. What were your other choices?
How many more hours would you need to work to afford a one bedroom apartment?
Considering my unfixable bad credit, a one bedroom apartment is not a realistic option.
It might be if you made better choices.
For example, you acknowledged way back in May that having a simple smart phone would solve the pretend internet connectivity challenges you've been constantly griping about, yet months later you still hadn't bought one. It has even been pointed out your current pay-as-you-go offered smart phones for free or nothing.
That is the life choice process of someone who will remain in crappy living conditions. Claiming smart phones are too complex (12 year olds have them) or inventing barriers to purchase (don't want to be ripped off) just so you don't have to actually get up off the couch and do something.
Instead you continue paying storage fees you don't have to pay, while claiming you can't get on the internet to take pictures to sell that stuff. It is a farce.
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.
