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.
And then the cost of housing increases again and again, and you're constantly re-inventing yourself just to be able to afford what is a basic right. Perfect scheme to keep everything going
Knowing this, perhaps you should buy something and use it as an opportunity to build wealth instead of whining about housing being a basic right, which it is not.
back in 95, Clinton's chief of HuD, Henry Cisneros started the 95-06 housing bubble..aided by Clinton's second chief of HUD the now disgraced Andrew Cuomo
just TODAY Biden's Chief of HID, Marcia Fudge, just declared that housing is a Constitutional Human RIGHT...…….. prices are going to skyrocket due to her comment
its the government that is the problem... and the fascist liberals continue to push bigger, and bigger government
Many have suggested roommates. Yes, anyone could get a roommate - or three or four. Needing roommates to make median rent implies unaffordable housing.
Roommates is not the solution to this nationwide issue.
Getting a roommate puts you at risk. If the roommate commits a crime in the apartment then you can be evicted or even arrested. The roommate can deadbeat and you can end up paying for everything. The landlord would evict you along with the roommate if you can't pay it all. The roommate can steal from you. Lots of bad things can happen.
Exactly. No one is saying someone flipping burgers (although there is nothing wrong with flipping burgers) should be able to buy a SFH. But a single schoolteacher in my county would not be able to buy a house in today's market on a starting teacher salary.
In fact, he or she would even be hard-pressed to find a rental in the area, since three times that salary per month would leave 1319.00 for rent which would not be enough in this area.
The same would apply to a nurse (RN).
Again, I refer to starting salaries and single family incomes.
You want to hear something crazy? I have a colleague who used to teach in San Francisco. She literally couldn't afford to live in the city where her students lived. I would imagine the same is true for police officers, public works employees, and various other city jobs. How is it possible that in America, people cannot afford to live in the city who employs them?
Quote:
Originally Posted by calgirlinnc
Why do you think I’m not grateful? You keep judging me.
Your whole attitude towards me is so throughly leftist—just stop and take your nonsense elsewhere.
The only person here with the attitude is you. Your comments throughout the entire thread have been snarky and condescending. But what what else would we expect from a Karen who apparently has the time to keep tabs on some random guy posting on a forum for six years.
And then you pull the politics card.
Last edited by lepoisson; 03-23-2022 at 09:44 PM..
The only person here with the attitude is you. Your comments throughout the entire thread have been snarky and condescending. But what what else would we expect from a Karen who apparently has the time to keep tabs on some random guy posting on a forum for six years.
And then you pull the politics card.
At least I didn’t have to pull the racism card.
And don’t flatter yourself that I have kept tabs on you. Your whining has been unforgettable.
With 30 days notice? These areas are people and families who work as mechanics, teachers, nurses, at Publix, at Wawa. These are not big industry areas. At all.
And these increases were not over time. They were immediate. Like I said, I know of a family whose rent went up $600/mo. Immediate. Know what happened? They got evicted. They tried but in that short timeframe couldn't get it together. Last I heard they were living in a week-to-week motel.
Your solution is difficult for EVERYONE to implement with 30 days notice.
That is the piece that no one seems to "get."
what you are saying then is either:
a. the tenants had fulfilled their lease, and were on a month-month basis.
b. the language of the lease only required 30 days notice at the end for extension of lease, tenant vacating, or a new lease/new price.
a. the tenants had fulfilled their lease, and were on a month-month basis.
b. the language of the lease only required 30 days notice at the end for extension of lease, tenant vacating, or a new lease/new price.
so, which is it?
Way to miss the point. 30 days is 30 days ... contrasting your scenarios makes no difference in outcome.
For working families, a jump of $600/mo is a terrible hardship. It's next to impossible to pivot quickly to meet that need when there are kids involved as you and your spouse can't just go to those second 20 hour a week jobs and leave your kids home alone.
You're usually a smart poster. Not sure why you're not understanding this. Willful misunderstanding, I think.
There are 2 issues:
1st is the overall increase and the effects. That is NOT what I am talking about.
2nd is the how quick and drastic the increases are. THAT is what I am talking about.
The Federal Reserve destroyed affordable housing with its reckless money printing. Foreign money from all those Chinese and Russian billionaires doesn’t help.
Until now, housing affordability was a problem limited to the big coastal cities. Now almost everyone is feeling the pain.
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.
