The city of Portland is considering new rules that will limit the size of new homes. This will supposedly make housing more affordable, but all it will do is limit the supply of homes that people want and make them less affordable.
The city of Denver is about to adopt new rules charging developers fees that will be used to build affordable housing. As if making new developments more expensive will make housing more affordable.
Voters in San Francisco just adopted a new ordinance allowing the city to require builders of 25 homes or more to dedicate a fourth of those homes to low-income renters or buyers. In the past, such “inclusionary zoning” rules only required that 15 to 20 percent of new homes be affordable. But if rules like this really worked, why not just require that all new homes be affordable?
Such band-aid solutions confuse affordable housing with housing affordability. If the problem is that a few families have such low incomes that they can’t afford housing, then government-supported housing might be the solution. But if the problem is that all housing has become vastly more expensive than almost anyone can afford, then a few units of subsidized affordable housing isn’t going to help–especially if it comes at the expense of making all the other housing in the city or region even more expensive.
It is also known as a reason of erectile dysfunction; however it is not related to some specific male personalities. buying viagra in india Gupta and get the treatment of penis related problems. levitra on sale This can seem complicated, but when you hire online cialis in the uk doctors, It should be important to check for allergy to this drug before taking it. generic cialis sales It’s not only enriched with the powerful ingredients, but also available at the affordable prices.
Table B25077 of the American Community Survey says that a median home in the city of Houston cost about $134,500 in 2013, or 2.65 times median family incomes in that city (according to table B19113). Still, some people in Houston may have incomes so low that they could benefit from public assistance for housing.
The median home in Denver was $283,100, or 4.0 times median family incomes. In Portland, it was $311,800, or 4.4 times median family incomes. In San Francisco, it was $846,000, or 8.4 times median family incomes. In these places, the problem is not a lack of affordable housing; it is a lack of housing affordability.
Since 2013, the prices in these three cities have all gone up faster than incomes, so they are even less affordable today. According to Zillow, the median home in Denver is now $345,000 (using Zillow’s numbers, up 41 percent since July 2013); in Portland it is $371,000 (up 32 percent); and in San Francisco it is $1.14 million (up 34 percent). Nationally, the median home price is just $187,000 (up 14 percent), and in Houston it is $145,000 (up just 7 percent). By comparison, according to the Department of Housing and Urban Development, median family incomes in these communities grew by 3 to 7 percent between 2013 and 2016.
Clearly, Houston is doing something right and these other cities are doing something wrong. Political leaders and voters need to learn that affordable housing tools aimed at very low-income families won’t make housing more affordable for anyone else (including many low-income families), and will often make it less affordable.
Historically the standard housing stock in cities is the townhome or rowhouse. Save’s space, still offers a back and front yard.
Oh well it’s not like China where they’re building the largest city in the world.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjoJ8Tr6o1A
“Table B25077 of the American Community Survey says that a median home in the city of Houston cost about $134,500 in 2013, or 2.65 times median family incomes in that city (according to table B19113).”
First, those are housing values, not sale prices. Second, why use 2013 numbers and not 2014 numbers?
But using those numbers, KC had a slightly lower median home value in 2013 of $126,900. Median family income in 2013 was $57,686. That’s 2.2 times median income, or lower than Houston’s 2.65.
This begs the question: what is KC doing better than Houston? Is it lower population density (KC is about 1000 people per square mile less dense than Houston) or better traffic and highway system (KC ranks #1 for best big US city for traffic and Houston #12 for worst big US city for traffic)?
Socialism always, always, ends up attacking and tearing down the higher parts of human achievement and driving everything towards the lowest common denominator. It is so much harder to lift the unsuccessful than it is to punish the successful.
If you want “equality” then you have to kill, rape, and steal from the successful and give it out for free to the unsuccessful, which then suddenly results in the unsuccessful doing less and being less successful.
It is as predictable as gravity.
“This begs the question: what is KC doing better than Houston?” ~Frank
Maybe the question is what are they not doing that Houston is?
Houston has annexed many burbs , that is why it has so much land. On the other hand, has also built over natural defenses against flooding. It will eventually not be able to pay for the cost of upkeeping this suburban development pattern.
Keep in mind aging boomers and new poor majority of retired boomers and majority of poor kids in public school tsunami soon to come.
Property owners will never be able to pay this much in tax back, so will keep on raising debt until they can’t.
http://www.houstonpress.com/news/how-a-few-rent-a-voters-in-a-vacant-lot-lead-to-millions-in-bonds-for-taxpayers-8223400
How a Few Rent-A-Voters in a Vacant Lot Lead to Millions in Bonds for Taxpayers.
Please keep in mind that the moment boomers cannot drive they will end up being marooned in the burbs.
http://t4america.org/docs/SeniorsMobilityCrisis.pdf
Aging in Place, Stuck without Options:
Fixing the Mobility Crisis Threatening the Baby Boom Generation
Florida’s aging population,- a rather scary report . The problems identified will show up elsewhere as boomers continue to age. Keep in mind 401(k) generation has inadequate savings.:
http://pepperinstitute.fsu.edu/content/download/215348/1843848
“…which then suddenly results in the unsuccessful doing less and being less successful.
It doesn’t exactly encourage the successful to endeavor to increase their successfulness, either.
Frank,
I used 2013 numbers because the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey reports the value from the previous year. The latest data is the 2014 survey, so it reports home values and family incomes from 2013.
As for why KC is lower-priced than Houston, the fact is that a lot of places are lower-priced than Houston. In the absence of restrictions, prices are a reflection of incomes. Houston incomes have been rising due to the oil boom, so its prices have been rising as well without increasing the value-to-income ratios. The higher price in Houston probably means the median home is bigger than in KC.
At this point, for someone living in Portland or San Francisco who is looking for something affordable, the best option is to rent a u-haul.
You could instead move to Twin Cities Region.