‘Housing for All’: Democrats push for big government response to soaring rents

[danielpalos]

Housing for all is not a radical idea. the American people support it, even though Crazy Bernie supports it

The American people support government giving them housing? Then why isn't everybody on HUD?

What incentive would they have to climb the ladder and improve their credit score to buy a home.

If they are going to provide housing, I want a free car rental too--hybrid please.

then, stop complaining about the homeless.

 

[Dschrute3]

Yeah, we're only $22 Trillion in Debt. Let's spend more money we don't have.

 

[danielpalos]

Housing for all is not a radical idea. the American people support it, even though Crazy Bernie supports it

The American people support government giving them housing? Then why isn't everybody on HUD?

What incentive would they have to climb the ladder and improve their credit score to buy a home.

If they are going to provide housing, I want a free car rental too--hybrid please.

That's the problem we have already. Government will provide you with housing in the suburbs, free food, utility assistance, free medical care, free schooling or daycare........what's the point of working?

Means testing. Only corporate welfare let's you keep you multimillion dollar bonus.

 

[danielpalos]

great, let's end our alleged wars on crime, drugs, and terror; the right wing refuses to pay wartime tax rates for them anyway.

/—-/ Nothing stopping you from paying war time taxes. Get out the old checkbook...

fake wars, fake tax rates.

don't ask for cuts to social spending. we have a general welfare clause.

we don't have a general warfare clause.

General welfare meant something different to our FF's than what it means to you.

No, it doesn't. The right wing simply has lousy reading comprehension.

Actually I first heard about it in Switzerland, and as conservative as I am, it didn't sound like a bad idea. The catch is everybody would get this universal income, but it would be the elimination of all social programs.

In other words you get this money and do what you want, but if you F up or don't plan for the future, too bad, starve to death.

Our current social programs come with all kinds of problems. We have lowlifes living off them when they could otherwise work, moving into fancy neighborhoods that never wanted them in the first place, theft that takes place in these programs by the billions every year, and this dichotomy between the working and the users.

Universal income as a replacement to our social programs brings a solution to a lot of long standing problems. I believe the equivalent of their money equaled about 18K of US dollars.

So okay, you are a lowlife that doesn't want to work, so you take your 18K and do as you like. But because there is no HUD, you have to provide housing for yourself. Because there are no food stamps, you have to provide for your own food. Because there is no Medicaid, you have to provide for your own medical care. There are no benefits for having children either.

This would bring working parents together. 36K combined can give you these things and you don't even have to work. If you have kids, that could be a problem, so then you would have to get a job if you wanted kids too. Working people could no longer complain about what the non-working are getting because working couples get this 36K just like the non-working.

If a working couple continues to work, that 36K could buy them great health insurance if they don't have any. It could pay for the cost of college for their kids. It could encourage investments and spending. A lot of problems solved with Universal Income.

1. Government doesn't make money. It would have to take it from individuals who do, to give it to individuals who do nothing worthwhile.

As more folks in a poor neighborhood languish with little or no work, entire local culture begins to change: daily work is no longer the expected social norm. Extended periods of hanging around the neighborhood, neither working nor going to school becoming more and more socially acceptable.

Since productive activity not making any economic sense because of the work disincentives of the welfare plantation, other kinds of activities proliferate: drug and alcohol abuse, crime, recreational sex, illegitimacy, and family breakup are the new social norms, as does the culture of violence.
Peter Ferrara


"The lessons of history … show conclusively that continued dependence upon relief induces a spiritual and moral disintegration fundamentally destructive to the national fiber. To dole out relief in this way is to administer a narcotic, a subtle destroyer of the human spirit." These searing words about Depression-era welfare are from Franklin Roosevelt's 1935 State of the Union Address.




2. The greatest flaw in the plan is not an economic one....it is based on human nature.

“Earned success is the secret to meaningful happiness. The government can improve your net worth with a check, but it cannot improve your self-worth.”
Jonah Goldberg

Yes, these payments would come from tax dollars, but with our social programs, they are paid for with tax dollars anyway, and only those who don't try receive them. In other words, you are taking away from the workers and giving their money to the non-workers.

Universal income would incentivize people to work--not the opposite. Our social programs teach people never to be anything in life if you want to stay on the dole. With UI, you will be on the dole and able to breakout of sleeping on the couch all day long. You can make as much money as you want with UI.

What a gross misunderstanding of the political and social milieu.

Of course social programs wouldn't cease......they're there to buy votes.

I'm surprised as your naivete.

I'm not. UI would replace all social programs is what Switzerland proposed, and I'm saying if that was the offer here, I'm all for it, because what they found is that UI would save the country money in the long run. It would probably be even cheaper here.

Perhaps in a small population as in Switzerland which has 8.4 million, it might work, we don't know. But, the US has 330 million, that's an entirely different animal.
Also, do you think our politicians would turn their backs to the people who blew through their UI. Not going to happen, and when the crack in the dam appears, you know what happens next.

How do people, "blow through their UI"?

 

[Dschrute3]

 

[danielpalos]

Yes, these payments would come from tax dollars, but with our social programs, they are paid for with tax dollars anyway, and only those who don't try receive them. In other words, you are taking away from the workers and giving their money to the non-workers.

Universal income would incentivize people to work--not the opposite. Our social programs teach people never to be anything in life if you want to stay on the dole. With UI, you will be on the dole and able to breakout of sleeping on the couch all day long. You can make as much money as you want with UI.

What a gross misunderstanding of the political and social milieu.

Of course social programs wouldn't cease......they're there to buy votes.

I'm surprised as your naivete.

I'm not. UI would replace all social programs is what Switzerland proposed, and I'm saying if that was the offer here, I'm all for it, because what they found is that UI would save the country money in the long run. It would probably be even cheaper here.

Nonsense.

Two rules apply:

Rule #1: Whatever Liberal government promises you is a lie.

Rule #2: See Rule #1



Welfare is simply a vote-buying scam.

In the 50-plus years of 'the War on Poverty," some $22 trillion has been thrown down that abyss and the 'poverty rate' is almost the same as when started.

It's all fake, Ray, ....when poverty is correctly defined....no food, no home, no heat.....it is non-existent in America.


Wise up.

I agree with everything you said, but what does that have to do with Universal Income?

Now, Ray.....focus like a laser: where is that 'income' coming from???

It is stolen from producers and given to those who will vote for the Leftists.


The single greatest bar to accruing wealth is taxation.....and the reason for that taxation is to buy the votes of those with their hand out.


There has never been starvation in this country.....so, what is your argument for coercion, confiscation, and vote-buying?


Americans have always taken care of their own.

"We usually hear about charity in the media when there is a terrible disaster. For example, after Hurricane Katrina, we heard about the incredible outpouring of private generosity that amounted to $6 billion. What gets less attention is that Americans routinely give that much to charity every week.

Last year Americans gave $300 billion to charity. To put this into perspective, that is almost twice what we spent on consumer electronics equipment—equipment including cell phones, iPods and DVD players. Americans gave three times as much to charity last year as we spent on gambling and ten times as much as we spent on professional sports. America is by far the most charitable country in the world. There is no other country that comes close."
404 Not Found
The Generosity of America




BTW......

Do you recall this Obama response at one of the debates: “I think America's greatest moral failure in my lifetime has been that we still don't abide by that basic precept in Matthew that whatever you do for the least of my brothers, you do for me.”


Perhaps this is the biggest hypocrisy and the greatest look into his character: “The average American household gives about two percent of adjusted gross income,” …Obama…less than 1%





And he wouldn’t help the ‘least of his own brothers’ out of poverty:

"Barack Obama's half brother, George Onyango Obama, was found living in a 6 by 10 foot slum hut in Huruma estate just outside of Nairobi. According to reports George Obama survives on $12 a year in the slums of Kenya."
Barack's Half Brother: George Obama's Hut Is In The Slums Of Kenya





Stop the 'giving' ....there is no real poverty in America.

Let's end corporate welfare then.

 

[Dschrute3]

Life is real good for Communist/Democrat hucksters. Ask Bernie Sanders.

 

[danielpalos]

Why would the bills cost you 800 bucks a month? Especially if I am paying my own utilities, using my own money to replace the fridge, hot water heater, plants in the landscaping I did myself, supplying a stove when the one you furnished bonks out?
No..you would not make a profit with someone like me...but....and this is an important but.....I would not cost you in renting your property whereas if you rented it for 1500 bucks a month...perhaps the tenants will find a cheaper place within a year and then you have normal wear and tear you have to pay to fix for the new tenants. THAT will cost you. Wouldn't you rather have someone taking care of what you own and stay for a long period of time instead of constantly placing ads for new tenants, or tenants who don't stay, or tenants who are pissed they pay that much rent and not take care of "home"?

Let's just say what you think has any truth to it and I don't make a profit. Do you think I do all this work around here for free? Do you think I spend all that time screwing around with categorizing expenditures, spend two days before taxes preparing, assuming the responsibilities of major repairs or replacements like roofs, furnaces, driveways is something I do for a hobby?

I didn't do this as a social obligation. I don't have those resources. Like everybody else, when I take huge responsibilities and have major bills to pay, I need a sufficient income to take care of it. If I was going to do something for charity, it certainly wouldn't be this. It takes up any and all of my free time. I would have put my hard earned money in the market or commodities.

I didn't say you should...or have insulted you in any manner for what you choose to do or whether you make a profit or not, etc. This is just two different sides of the subject we are discussing. Or...I thought it was.

There is, but you seem to be ignoring the other side of the argument and only focusing on yours.

My side is this: most of us landlords don't make much money on rental income. Much of what you pay is what you would otherwise pay if you owned a house: taxes, insurance, utilities, repairs, updates, mortgage.........

In some cases (like mine) when I had to take a loan out for major repairs, those loans have to be repaid.

This year I was lucky, I actually made a little profit. My tax preparer has a lot of landlords, and she told me I was the only one last year that showed a profit. All her other landlord clients were in the red as they are most every other year.

Big companies probably make out, but rental property is just part of their portfolio. They are very diverse in their investments. When one investment isn't working out, then they dump that investment and put their money elsewhere.

So if the government made regulation that stopped their profit, they would be selling out probably to somebody that would charge even more for rent.

A fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage and unemployment compensation simply for being unemployed, means more people can pay more rent and help cover upgrade costs.

You do know the apartment staff payroll will also go up don't you?


So will the rents ...once again you don't do anything productive


.

Yes, I understand economics. It won't go up as much as the benefit. Inflation is less than five percent in the restaurant industry with a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage.

The point you all always seem to miss, is that higher paid labor pays more in taxes and creates more in demand.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Precisely.
The Obama Admin bailed out the mortgage lenders.... 100 cents on the dollar including their profits.
But the homeowners were kicked out of the homes.
This left millions of homes across the country empty. Many of them having no single owners, the mortgages were pieced out along numerous investment packages. And the investors all made their profits with the bailouts.
They became "Lost homes".
And they are everywhere.

They're all over the place here. One guy lost his house because the county doubled taxes. It nauseates me the way things happened. That guy's house is still empty.

I talk to a lot of people, and it just pains me to hear their stories. Bush and Obama were both a couple of real assholes.

Aboslutely.
I use to flip houses with a group of guys back in the late 90's.
At that time you never stopped looking for houses. It took a while to find one, there just wasn't a lot of empty houses out there.
Today, good God.... they are everywhere. Cheap...crappy little 2 brdm homes to 4-5 bdrm homes in good neighborhoods.
It is unbelievable.

The truth is nobody wants to own a home anymore. Rental is a big thing today. People don't want the hassle of repairs, government, increasing costs. Working couples just want to come home and relax after a hard days work.

I use Craigs List for my tenants and have had reasonably good luck. I used to put out an ad and get one or two replies in the first couple of days. Now if I put out an ad, I get over a dozen on day one.

I think the problem is too much personal debt and bad credit ratings

Kids used to come out of college, work a couple of years and then look for a starter home

Now they are stuck with ten or more years of student loan payments and high credit card debt

That's part of it, but it seems to extend beyond those with college loans. My bosses son works with us and one day while on dead time, he told me of how his piers thought, and said he was embarrassed of his generation.

He said they want no responsibility whatsoever. They don't want to own a home, a car, appliances, none of that. Some don't even own their television set. They rent everything and just pay the bills at the end of the month.

Some of it has to do with government. Nobody wants do deal with those assholes anymore, and I can't blame them; I'm sick of dealing with them too.

My cousin was cited for having some cracks in her driveway, so when she went to get an estimate on a new one, they wanted over 10K. She was living check to check as it was. How could she afford that and what business is it of the cities how many Fn cracks she has?

Her kids were grown and gone, so she just left the house and rented one from somebody else. She said she's never been happier. She doesn't have to worry about major repairs, she doesn't have to worry about government, she doesn't have to worry what she will do if HUD moves in their lowlifes and the neighborhood goes to hell. She can just pack up and leave.

Some of that is true. They don't wanna mow the grass, or do anything, really. I don't understand it.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Now, Ray.....focus like a laser: where is that 'income' coming from???

It is stolen from producers and given to those who will vote for the Leftists.


The single greatest bar to accruing wealth is taxation.....and the reason for that taxation is to buy the votes of those with their hand out.


There has never been starvation in this country.....so, what is your argument for coercion, confiscation, and vote-buying?


Americans have always taken care of their own.

I agree 100%, but with the system we have today, we are taxed to fund these programs so Democrats can buy votes. The only control we have over our money is who we elect to spend it.

Take Commie Care for example. Is anybody stupid enough to believe that DumBama and the other Democrats gave a shit about whether we had heath insurance of not? It's silly. All they really wanted to do is create more government dependents and buy votes. So if you worked at Walmart sweeping floors, you could get a great policy for next to nothing, but floor sweepers generally vote Democrat. If you are a middle income earner, Commie Care is unaffordable, but it's likely you vote Republican.

With Universal Income, that would all end. People who work will contribute tax dollars and get something in return, and people who don't will starve or find themselves in a precarious situation. Either that or they will find a way to live dirt cheap which would preserve our remaining good neighborhoods. It would mean less poverty babies, less people to support, and the working could actually start having larger families.

I hate to make people sound like breeding dogs or something, but it isn't that much different. After all, how successful of a breeder could you be if you mostly bred dogs with genetic flaws vs prize animals that everybody would want to buy?

 

[Marion Morrison]

Life is real good for Communist/Democrat hucksters. Ask Bernie Sanders.

That looks like 4 little houses stuck together, ick.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

They're all over the place here. One guy lost his house because the county doubled taxes. It nauseates me the way things happened. That guy's house is still empty.

I talk to a lot of people, and it just pains me to hear their stories. Bush and Obama were both a couple of real assholes.

Aboslutely.
I use to flip houses with a group of guys back in the late 90's.
At that time you never stopped looking for houses. It took a while to find one, there just wasn't a lot of empty houses out there.
Today, good God.... they are everywhere. Cheap...crappy little 2 brdm homes to 4-5 bdrm homes in good neighborhoods.
It is unbelievable.

The truth is nobody wants to own a home anymore. Rental is a big thing today. People don't want the hassle of repairs, government, increasing costs. Working couples just want to come home and relax after a hard days work.

I use Craigs List for my tenants and have had reasonably good luck. I used to put out an ad and get one or two replies in the first couple of days. Now if I put out an ad, I get over a dozen on day one.

I think the problem is too much personal debt and bad credit ratings

Kids used to come out of college, work a couple of years and then look for a starter home

Now they are stuck with ten or more years of student loan payments and high credit card debt

That's part of it, but it seems to extend beyond those with college loans. My bosses son works with us and one day while on dead time, he told me of how his piers thought, and said he was embarrassed of his generation.

He said they want no responsibility whatsoever. They don't want to own a home, a car, appliances, none of that. Some don't even own their television set. They rent everything and just pay the bills at the end of the month.

Some of it has to do with government. Nobody wants do deal with those assholes anymore, and I can't blame them; I'm sick of dealing with them too.

My cousin was cited for having some cracks in her driveway, so when she went to get an estimate on a new one, they wanted over 10K. She was living check to check as it was. How could she afford that and what business is it of the cities how many Fn cracks she has?

Her kids were grown and gone, so she just left the house and rented one from somebody else. She said she's never been happier. She doesn't have to worry about major repairs, she doesn't have to worry about government, she doesn't have to worry what she will do if HUD moves in their lowlifes and the neighborhood goes to hell. She can just pack up and leave.

Some of that is true. They don't wanna mow the grass, or do anything, really. I don't understand it.

At times I can't blame them, LOL. In the winter I have to wake up at 4:00am just to clear the parking lot and driveway with my snowblower while my tenants only inconvenience is the noise. They are nice and warm in their beds, and when they get up, the drive will be nice and clear for them. However I do enjoy cutting the grass. Of course I have a lawn tractor for that and it's nice outside so I enjoy the weather.

 

[danielpalos]

No, I actually have arguments not just fake news and fallacy. Of course I believe my arguments; I resort to the fewest fallacy just for that reason; unlike the fake news, right wing.

Say the minimum wage today in City A is $7.50 per hour and your fantasy wish for $15.00 an hour is adopted. That's a 100% increase, right?

What happens to the worker earning $15.00 per hour after your wish is adopted? What happens then?

Social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour by comparison.

We want to lose, low wage jobs that have to be subsidized, anyway.

 

[danielpalos]

No, it doesn't. The right wing simply has lousy reading comprehension.

I'm not. UI would replace all social programs is what Switzerland proposed, and I'm saying if that was the offer here, I'm all for it, because what they found is that UI would save the country money in the long run. It would probably be even cheaper here.

Perhaps in a small population as in Switzerland which has 8.4 million, it might work, we don't know. But, the US has 330 million, that's an entirely different animal.
Also, do you think our politicians would turn their backs to the people who blew through their UI. Not going to happen, and when the crack in the dam appears, you know what happens next.

Which is why the terms would have to be unconditional. UI is a leftist idea, so I say let's meet them halfway and then see how much they support it.

Our programs now take from the working and give to the non-working. UI would be taking from the working and giving to all. As a person who is the giver, I wouldn't mind being a giver and taker for a while. I get so sick of giving and watching the takers walking the streets or driving along the highways while I'm working.

If you really weigh the benefits, it makes so much more sense to replace our social programs with UI. It would inspire more people to work, it would eliminate fraud which costs us billions every year with our social programs, it would disable Democrats from telling people how the Republicans are going to take away this or take away that, it would allow people of different classes to live in peace, it could solve our never-ending problem of medical care and college tuition. It would solve most of the problems we have in this country today.

Things always look better on paper than when its applied.
Especially, when it comes to government application.

This is true, but what we're doing now certainly isn't working. We are putting our children and grandchildren in debt, creating a government dependent society, encouraging lower income people to breed at a much higher rate than the working, and the apple doesn't fall far from the tree, and turning Americans against each other socially and politically.

I would be willing to try it out. At least I could advance myself instead of advancing the users who never advance at all. As a society that rewards people for being irresponsible, IU would do the opposite which would reward people for being responsible. I can't see how it could be much worse than it is now.

Try it out. Is there any government entitlement program which has ended, cut off people receiving cash from the government?

did you know, nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics.

Tax cut economics that adds to the debt is simple Income Redistribution.

 

[danielpalos]

No, it doesn't. The right wing simply has lousy reading comprehension.

I'm not. UI would replace all social programs is what Switzerland proposed, and I'm saying if that was the offer here, I'm all for it, because what they found is that UI would save the country money in the long run. It would probably be even cheaper here.

Perhaps in a small population as in Switzerland which has 8.4 million, it might work, we don't know. But, the US has 330 million, that's an entirely different animal.
Also, do you think our politicians would turn their backs to the people who blew through their UI. Not going to happen, and when the crack in the dam appears, you know what happens next.

Which is why the terms would have to be unconditional. UI is a leftist idea, so I say let's meet them halfway and then see how much they support it.

Our programs now take from the working and give to the non-working. UI would be taking from the working and giving to all. As a person who is the giver, I wouldn't mind being a giver and taker for a while. I get so sick of giving and watching the takers walking the streets or driving along the highways while I'm working.

If you really weigh the benefits, it makes so much more sense to replace our social programs with UI. It would inspire more people to work, it would eliminate fraud which costs us billions every year with our social programs, it would disable Democrats from telling people how the Republicans are going to take away this or take away that, it would allow people of different classes to live in peace, it could solve our never-ending problem of medical care and college tuition. It would solve most of the problems we have in this country today.

Things always look better on paper than when its applied.
Especially, when it comes to government application.

This is true, but what we're doing now certainly isn't working. We are putting our children and grandchildren in debt, creating a government dependent society, encouraging lower income people to breed at a much higher rate than the working, and the apple doesn't fall far from the tree, and turning Americans against each other socially and politically.

I would be willing to try it out. At least I could advance myself instead of advancing the users who never advance at all. As a society that rewards people for being irresponsible, IU would do the opposite which would reward people for being responsible. I can't see how it could be much worse than it is now.

How would getting a check from the government, for doing nothing, make me more responsible?

Getting a multimillion dollar bonus is Only for Corporate Welfare recipients.

Where Is The Outrage Over Corporate Welfare?

 

[danielpalos]

Actually I first heard about it in Switzerland, and as conservative as I am, it didn't sound like a bad idea. The catch is everybody would get this universal income, but it would be the elimination of all social programs.

In other words you get this money and do what you want, but if you F up or don't plan for the future, too bad, starve to death.

Our current social programs come with all kinds of problems. We have lowlifes living off them when they could otherwise work, moving into fancy neighborhoods that never wanted them in the first place, theft that takes place in these programs by the billions every year, and this dichotomy between the working and the users.

Universal income as a replacement to our social programs brings a solution to a lot of long standing problems. I believe the equivalent of their money equaled about 18K of US dollars.

So okay, you are a lowlife that doesn't want to work, so you take your 18K and do as you like. But because there is no HUD, you have to provide housing for yourself. Because there are no food stamps, you have to provide for your own food. Because there is no Medicaid, you have to provide for your own medical care. There are no benefits for having children either.

This would bring working parents together. 36K combined can give you these things and you don't even have to work. If you have kids, that could be a problem, so then you would have to get a job if you wanted kids too. Working people could no longer complain about what the non-working are getting because working couples get this 36K just like the non-working.

If a working couple continues to work, that 36K could buy them great health insurance if they don't have any. It could pay for the cost of college for their kids. It could encourage investments and spending. A lot of problems solved with Universal Income.

1. Government doesn't make money. It would have to take it from individuals who do, to give it to individuals who do nothing worthwhile.

As more folks in a poor neighborhood languish with little or no work, entire local culture begins to change: daily work is no longer the expected social norm. Extended periods of hanging around the neighborhood, neither working nor going to school becoming more and more socially acceptable.

Since productive activity not making any economic sense because of the work disincentives of the welfare plantation, other kinds of activities proliferate: drug and alcohol abuse, crime, recreational sex, illegitimacy, and family breakup are the new social norms, as does the culture of violence.
Peter Ferrara


"The lessons of history … show conclusively that continued dependence upon relief induces a spiritual and moral disintegration fundamentally destructive to the national fiber. To dole out relief in this way is to administer a narcotic, a subtle destroyer of the human spirit." These searing words about Depression-era welfare are from Franklin Roosevelt's 1935 State of the Union Address.




2. The greatest flaw in the plan is not an economic one....it is based on human nature.

“Earned success is the secret to meaningful happiness. The government can improve your net worth with a check, but it cannot improve your self-worth.”
Jonah Goldberg

Yes, these payments would come from tax dollars, but with our social programs, they are paid for with tax dollars anyway, and only those who don't try receive them. In other words, you are taking away from the workers and giving their money to the non-workers.

Universal income would incentivize people to work--not the opposite. Our social programs teach people never to be anything in life if you want to stay on the dole. With UI, you will be on the dole and able to breakout of sleeping on the couch all day long. You can make as much money as you want with UI.

What a gross misunderstanding of the political and social milieu.

Of course social programs wouldn't cease......they're there to buy votes.

I'm surprised as your naivete.

I'm not. UI would replace all social programs is what Switzerland proposed, and I'm saying if that was the offer here, I'm all for it, because what they found is that UI would save the country money in the long run. It would probably be even cheaper here.

Nonsense.

Two rules apply:

Rule #1: Whatever Liberal government promises you is a lie.

Rule #2: See Rule #1



Welfare is simply a vote-buying scam.

In the 50-plus years of 'the War on Poverty," some $22 trillion has been thrown down that abyss and the 'poverty rate' is almost the same as when started.

It's all fake, Ray, ....when poverty is correctly defined....no food, no home, no heat.....it is non-existent in America.


Wise up.

lol. The right wing alleges, tax cut economics works. lol.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Aboslutely.
I use to flip houses with a group of guys back in the late 90's.
At that time you never stopped looking for houses. It took a while to find one, there just wasn't a lot of empty houses out there.
Today, good God.... they are everywhere. Cheap...crappy little 2 brdm homes to 4-5 bdrm homes in good neighborhoods.
It is unbelievable.

The truth is nobody wants to own a home anymore. Rental is a big thing today. People don't want the hassle of repairs, government, increasing costs. Working couples just want to come home and relax after a hard days work.

I use Craigs List for my tenants and have had reasonably good luck. I used to put out an ad and get one or two replies in the first couple of days. Now if I put out an ad, I get over a dozen on day one.

I think the problem is too much personal debt and bad credit ratings

Kids used to come out of college, work a couple of years and then look for a starter home

Now they are stuck with ten or more years of student loan payments and high credit card debt

That's part of it, but it seems to extend beyond those with college loans. My bosses son works with us and one day while on dead time, he told me of how his piers thought, and said he was embarrassed of his generation.

He said they want no responsibility whatsoever. They don't want to own a home, a car, appliances, none of that. Some don't even own their television set. They rent everything and just pay the bills at the end of the month.

Some of it has to do with government. Nobody wants do deal with those assholes anymore, and I can't blame them; I'm sick of dealing with them too.

My cousin was cited for having some cracks in her driveway, so when she went to get an estimate on a new one, they wanted over 10K. She was living check to check as it was. How could she afford that and what business is it of the cities how many Fn cracks she has?

Her kids were grown and gone, so she just left the house and rented one from somebody else. She said she's never been happier. She doesn't have to worry about major repairs, she doesn't have to worry about government, she doesn't have to worry what she will do if HUD moves in their lowlifes and the neighborhood goes to hell. She can just pack up and leave.

Some of that is true. They don't wanna mow the grass, or do anything, really. I don't understand it.

At times I can't blame them, LOL. In the winter I have to wake up at 4:00am just to clear the parking lot and driveway with my snowblower while my tenants only inconvenience is the noise. They are nice and warm in their beds, and when they get up, the drive will be nice and clear for them. However I do enjoy cutting the grass. Of course I have a lawn tractor for that and it's nice outside so I enjoy the weather.

I know guys that do it with just a shovel. I don't have those problems, but I do have a big yard and a push mower with 1 bad wheel

and a failing engine. That engine's spun around a lotta times. It's done its duty. It couldn't handle the weeds around the firepit..yadda yadda yadda..so I ended up spraying them.

 

[danielpalos]

Yeah, we're only $22 Trillion in Debt. Let's spend more money we don't have.

funny, right wingers. tax cut economics is money we don't have.

nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Yeah, we're only $22 Trillion in Debt. Let's spend more money we don't have.

funny, right wingers. tax cut economics is money we don't have.

nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics.

Nobody takes you seriously ever! Especially the "free chicks".

 

[eagle1462010]

Perhaps in a small population as in Switzerland which has 8.4 million, it might work, we don't know. But, the US has 330 million, that's an entirely different animal.
Also, do you think our politicians would turn their backs to the people who blew through their UI. Not going to happen, and when the crack in the dam appears, you know what happens next.

Which is why the terms would have to be unconditional. UI is a leftist idea, so I say let's meet them halfway and then see how much they support it.

Our programs now take from the working and give to the non-working. UI would be taking from the working and giving to all. As a person who is the giver, I wouldn't mind being a giver and taker for a while. I get so sick of giving and watching the takers walking the streets or driving along the highways while I'm working.

If you really weigh the benefits, it makes so much more sense to replace our social programs with UI. It would inspire more people to work, it would eliminate fraud which costs us billions every year with our social programs, it would disable Democrats from telling people how the Republicans are going to take away this or take away that, it would allow people of different classes to live in peace, it could solve our never-ending problem of medical care and college tuition. It would solve most of the problems we have in this country today.

Things always look better on paper than when its applied.
Especially, when it comes to government application.

This is true, but what we're doing now certainly isn't working. We are putting our children and grandchildren in debt, creating a government dependent society, encouraging lower income people to breed at a much higher rate than the working, and the apple doesn't fall far from the tree, and turning Americans against each other socially and politically.

I would be willing to try it out. At least I could advance myself instead of advancing the users who never advance at all. As a society that rewards people for being irresponsible, IU would do the opposite which would reward people for being responsible. I can't see how it could be much worse than it is now.

Try it out. Is there any government entitlement program which has ended, cut off people receiving cash from the government?

did you know, nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics.

Tax cut economics that adds to the debt is simple Income Redistribution.

History doesn't agree with you............the equation is jobs gained and revenue...........and your side is WRONG like always..........

Your side taxes people to death and then wonders why they are living in tents and companies are leaving.................

Because you are idiots.