Obviously the requirements would be significantly less if two people were paying equal costs for the apartment. But thereās a few issues here. One this kind of sounds like communism sharing an apartment whatās next?
Two people sharing an apartment is friends and/or family. Something that communism always tries to weaken. Communist nations prefer multiple families crowded in apartments as we often have with illegal aliens here.
Letās just have four people share one apartment that is literally what occurred in the Soviet union massive amounts of families were in tiny buildings.
Exactly. Because government told people where to live instead of a free market for real estate. Multiple families wouldn't choose to live together unless they were escaping an even worse situation.
Two loneliness and depression are high for young people in America. They might not even have close friends to share an apartment with let alone a significant other.
Then let us remember in November that the Democrats and their operatives spend the majority of 2020 dreaming up and enforcing rules designed to keep us isolated from each other - outdoing even their Soviet role models in that respect.
I thing The idea of a couple sharing an apartment sounds pretty good, but we have a record number of young people who are single and using a bunch of drugs so thatās an issue with there as well. Btw traditional masculinity opposes this and demands that the man take care of all of the costs, even at a young ageā¦ that kind of situation built America gave us the strongest military and middle class economy in world history.
The feminist movement was hugely successful in stamping out "traditional masculinity." Today's young males are scarcely recognizable as the same demographic as the young men with whom I grew up.
One point I wanted you to pick up on from my one-sentence post is that we have long been a two-income economy. Feminists insisted women go to work and not be "just a housewife." Employers loved it. Women in the office and behind cash registers worked almost as cheaply as illegal aliens and they smelled nicer. Prices simply went up in response to the greater number of dollars an extra breadwinner brought in, so there was no rise in standard of living.
In fact, a man working a semi-skilled job could afford a house for his stay-at-home wife and children in the fifties. Try that today.
It's terrible, but there is not much we can do to change it. We can cry about it or adapt and overcome.
This is how government worshippers alway do you. They make it very difficult for an individual to succeed on their own, and then ridicule the idea of pair bonding and family teamwork that gives people a chance in the economy they themselves created.
It is much easier to understand Democrats when you realize that the failure of individuals is not a side effect of their policies, it is the goal of them.
Bottom line prices are astronomical today compared to under Trump. I often wonder in this conversation when Iām talking with Trump supporters it sounds like Iām actually talking with anti-Trump peopleā¦ because its Donald Trump himself who is bringing up the high costs in this country today where as during his administration the costs were much lower.
I'm not sure what you're hearing from Trump supporters. Every Trump supporter I know complains about the Harris-Biden inflationary policies.
Let me ask you this, since I'm not sure where you are coming from: If a young person wants to live in an apartment all their own, do I as a taxpayer and/or consumer somehow owe them that at the cost of my own financial goals?
