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, racism would more aptly be applied to developers who come in and RAZE communities "of color" and build skyscrapers to house wealthier white people. After all who can deny that is EXACTLY what "Gentrification" means to everyone who sees the word.
No it doesn't. Gentrification is an economic phenomenon, not a racial one. No developer nowadays "razes" minority communities to purposefully house white people. That's quite frankly an idiotic statement that's an insult to developers who come in, have to deal with miles upon miles of bureaucracy, and actually invest in and bring people to formerly-neglected areas. I'd rather see that than the abandonment and disregard from the 1970s. If that makes me racist (which it doesn't), then so be it.
Well,
Any development that adds 663 units of affordable housing, I'm for.
So I take it you don't mind having neighbors that are destitutes right? Cause that's pretty much what "affordable housing" is. "Affordable housing" attracts hood people, NOT middle class people, the way it should be.
"Middle class" with their $100K can find their own market rate apartments, you know, the ones you landlords assume ALL rentals should be.
Quote:
So I take it you don't mind having neighbors that are destitutes right?
Nope, I have no prejudices against someone working but earning only $23K, nor against someone trying to exist on a social security check or some other rotten retirement plan.
For the "destitute" there is Section 8 (lots of greedy landlords to take them as you well know,) NYCHA, and the shelter system. These are NOT what is typically called "affordable apartments," or 80-20 developments.
"Middle class" with their $100K can find their own market rate apartments, you know, the ones you landlords assume ALL rentals should be.
No, they can't. Nearly everyone I encounter professionally or anywhere else for that matter, people whom we might term "middle class," nearly everyone is struggling with enormous student loan debt. The exceptions are always people from significant parental money because that is needed these days to fund even an undergraduate degree. The presence of student loan debt curtails tremendously the amount of rent people can pay.
And one of the major challenges is the fact that most "affordable" housing application processes, directed at, say, that $100,000 a year demographic, do not take the required monthly payments on this staggering debt into account when deciding what people can afford.
Seriously, a student loan payment imperative of $2,500 a month is not uncommon. And the programs, "income-based repayment" and similar ... ? The income ceiling is around $45,000. Could even be lower. So this is scarcely a middle-class beneficial program. If you are making $45,000, common in education, nonprofits, etc., are you REALLY middle class ? In New York ?
What I have seen: The people getting the "affordable" places in professional-level income buildings (read: not forced to live with generational poverty), those approved for them, are people from significant parental money and therefore no student loan burden and who work in nonprofits. The playing field is quite seriously not level.
So I take it you don't mind having neighbors that are destitutes right? Cause that's pretty much what "affordable housing" is. "Affordable housing" attracts hood people, NOT middle class people, the way it should be.
Not true. There are plenty of programs for professional-level people.
Not true. There are plenty of programs for professional-level people.
I'd like to know of these programs, I've been searching. I'd like to go from renting to owning, but my salary is largely outside the range of these affordable programs.
I'd like to know of these programs, I've been searching. I'd like to go from renting to owning, but my salary is largely outside the range of these affordable programs.
Many buildings have some spots for higher-income people. This is the infamous "mixed-income" plan.
The Balton, for example, on St. Nicholas Avenue, had such spots - probably none left. The rents were not so low, around $2,500, and bear in mind that there you are literally surrounded by projects and social service housing.
Another example is the place across from the Police Athletic League building on Manhattan Avenue. "Very low income" and luxury mixed. I would imagine that the rents are about the same, and that the income ceiling is similar as well. I would never recommend this building because of the management agency, but that's another topic.
Your problem may actually be that you make too much to be "low income" and too little for the upper reaches. If so, there are many people in your position.
So in this discussion, I consider student debt a red herring. Someone making $100,000 certainly doesn't need public help in houusing if he is carrying a debt load of $23K. With a bit of frugality such a debt could be paid of in its entirety in ONE YEAR.
As for the med school graduatings whining about a $200,000 debt...they are contemplating a 1/2 million dollar income in a couple years unless they are total cretins.
So suck it up, stop whining, and pay market rent because many making $50,000 or less do.
Some poor guy making $23K is the one who needs society's help if he is to live in this city. (Hey, someone has to wipe the asses of the rich, right? So you cannot toss the lowest 35% into the Hudson. )
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.