Why no affordable housing?

Still dreaming of that Socialist eutopia aren't you?
What socialist utopia? Personally, I am a capitalist business major, that used the capitalist system to retire debt free at 60 with multiple retirement income streams and IRA investment, after working and paying taxes since the age of 16. It is people like me, that prove capitalism and all that business school study works.
 
What socialist utopia? Personally, I am a capitalist business major, that used the capitalist system to retire debt free at 60 with multiple retirement income streams and IRA investment, after working and paying taxes since the age of 16. It is people like me, that prove capitalism and all that business school study works.
Yet, like a true Socialist ****, you believe that the ladder to that success, if what you say is even accurate, should be pulled up after you.

You are a vile little man that shouldn’t be entrusted with power of any kind, here, or in RL.
 
And you should see what has happened to the middle and elementary schools in that area - they’ve dropped to a 2 in the Great Schools rating (1 - 10).

Before the illegals invaded, that area was a working class area of modest apartments and small ranch houses. Couples sent their kids to the schools, where they got a somewhat decent education. Now the schools are a joke, where most of the kids are ESL, performing well below grade level, and on free lunches.
Link?
 
In my opinion this is because cities don't want poor people around so while they talk about affordable housing, they find ways to thwart any serious effort at providing such.
It is about economics.
If you are a land developer. You bought this 50 acre plot.
Choice 1 - build affordable housing.
100 homes selling at $150,000. ($15 million)
50 homes selling for $600,000 ($30 million)
Cost of building 100 homes with utilities etc. - $9 million
Cost of building half as many homes, but larger and with better materials - $11 million

Affordable housing profit - $6 million
Upper middle class profit - $19 million.

Hmm... why did they build so many McMansions in the 90s - 2000s???
I wonder why...
 
You can add, "Why are we, the largest economy in the world, unable to afford healthcare for all Americans" when all the other major industrial countries with much lower GDP can and do? It is all economics and what the ruling political class, wants to address and pay for, out of this country's resources.
We vote not to do that by majority because the majority of us simply don't want to live in that type of system. I have health insurance through my employer which has worked fine for me for years. I don't make a lot of money. Under $50k as a matter of fact. My insurance used to work even better before Obamacare was passed.
 
It is about economics.
If you are a land developer. You bought this 50 acre plot.
Choice 1 - build affordable housing.
100 homes selling at $150,000. ($15 million)
50 homes selling for $600,000 ($30 million)
Cost of building 100 homes with utilities etc. - $9 million
Cost of building half as many homes, but larger and with better materials - $11 million

Affordable housing profit - $6 million
Upper middle class profit - $19 million.

Hmm... why did they build so many McMansions in the 90s - 2000s???
I wonder why...
City planners are usually the culprits. They want more property taxes to fund their failed policies.
 
City planners are usually the culprits. They want more property taxes to fund their failed policies.
That may play some, but it is inevitably about profit potential.
In the 1950s-1960s - small sq foot ranch homes were the thing. Modest, in no way fancy or excessive. That is what people wanted.
So the builders had no choice but to make less profits building them - because that is what sold at the time.
 
That may play some, but it is inevitably about profit potential.
In the 1950s-1960s - small sq foot ranch homes were the thing. Modest, in no way fancy or excessive. That is what people wanted.
So the builders had no choice but to make less profits building them - because that is what sold at the time.
Those 'cracker boxes' are selling for $300,000 today.
 
We vote not to do that by majority because the majority of us simply don't want to live in that type of system. I have health insurance through my employer which has worked fine for me for years. I don't make a lot of money. Under $50k as a matter of fact. My insurance used to work even better before Obamacare was passed.
I submit to a great extent, we have been sold a bill of goods, that this is the way it should be. Yet, like anything else our tax dollars are directed to, we could have much better healthcare for a greater number, and probably have the same longevity as most other developed countries. Living longer (if healthy) is a good thing. Such as Hong Kong, which became what it is as a primarily democratic capitalist country, along with attaining a life expectancy of 85.51 years, guaranteed healthcare. Or, consider Japan, ad democratic, decidedly capitalist country, life expectancy of 84.71 years, again with guaranteed universal healthcare. The lists of countries benefitting by choice toward universal healthcare for it's people goes on and on, right along the lines of life expectancy, not just for the rich, or people like you and I, that have chosen to only work for businesses, corporations or the government. Obviously, the wealthy have no need to favor universal healthcare. They can and always will be able to afford excellent healthcare, but the wealthy, the corporations owned and run by the wealthy, are also the ones that have paid lobbyists in our legislative bodies and politics to convince congress, and people like you, that it is not necessary and that most people that simply cannot afford it, are somehow unworthy of it. We rank 55th in the entire world on longevity and the 9th highest infant mortality rate, yet somebody has convince people like yourself that we mistakenly have the best healthcare system in the world. Obviously, it just is not so. And, we do not even do it efficiently, as we spend about 30% to 80% more per capita on healthcare, than any of the next 9 countries below us, yet we cannot match their outcome and benefit to their people, as all of 9 of them do have universal healthcare from the poorest to the richest.

The mindset is somewhat akin to education, as it it treated the same here. Important and beneficial to the financially secure, but not something to be extended to the masses, hence the move toward private school education, with it high tuitions, benefitting the exclusivity of those that can afford the benefit. Strangely, we rank 12th in the world on education, and all the countries above us educationally, also have universal healthcare and of course, have consistently higher longevity.

Countries are like families, in that what the people in leadership position prioritize and choose, affects health, longevity and success in life and in relation to the world, in this generation as well as generations to come. It is a matter of economics, and priorities.
So what do we presently prioritize? What are we #1 in the world in? Well, we do not have universal healthcare, but we do spend more on our military than the next 9 or 10 countries combined. So, there is that. We also have the highest incarceration rate of any country on earth. And, of course we have the highest number of Billionaires (902) of any other country, and actually twice that of any other single country on the planet, China coming in next at 450.
 
Back
Top Bottom