>>59980599 >Washington Rent in the Seattle area is more expensive than it shows, but people who work in Seattle make a lot more. Rent in the Spokane area (or eastern Washington in general) is much much cheaper.
>30% of their income Seems kind of arbitrary, but whatever. That leaves a bunch for other necessities and entertainment.
Since it's a two bedroom apartment, you only need to make half of that. Minimum wage can support that in nearly all of the states. Don't fucking live in San Francisco if you can't afford it, and there won't be a problem.
>>59980599 Golly, if only there were some way more than one person could occupy a two-bedroom apartment. Perhaps have a second person, a 'mate' if you will who is willing to split the expenses with you for those rooms, thus requiring a smaller income. We could call this a 'room mate'.
All this says is what the average wage in each state should be. AFAIK the average wage in Texas is roughly $16/hr so we're doing pretty well. If you make below average income, perhaps you should have below average cost housing.
>>59982788 I don't blame you. I am just riding out the stock options for now. If this goes public I am by default a multi millionare and can go retire to live in some dirt poor asian country where I can fuck asian bitches daily while living on $1000 a month.
>>59982600 we do they're called 'public housing units' aka projects ever watched The Wire? First season's 'pit' are public housing units, I grew up in one. It's the most accurate depiction I've ever seen because they used a real housing unit to film it.
You need 2 wage earners to support a full family, especially if you live in an ultra left wing state like California where you pay at least twice as much for the same shit thanks to excessive regulation
>tfw live in midwest and can get a nice 3 bedroom apt for 450
>>59983431 shut da hell up, kid, you have no idea what you;re talking about. maybe 1 home in 10-15 years of painful torturous labor... "at least 10" ...just shut da fuck up you kid, gosh this triggered me so much..fuck dumb uneducated fools on pol.
>>59983652 If you make $50,000 or more you can follow this plan. Invest in the midwest where you can buy homes for $50,000 or less. Try to invest in 3 bedroom homes over 2 bedroom homes as they rent for more and you will get more stable tenants.
>>59983652 depends on property you're investing in can be relatively cheap all things considered (ie comparable to buying a mcdonalds), but you do need to have a really good eye into investment properties - it's so easy to get fucked, and when you're fucked, you're fucked for g o o d
>WITHOUT SPENDING MORE THAN 30% OF THEIR INCOME So you're telling me two people can live together in New York City in a two bedroom apartment as long as they each make $12.50 an hour and still save 70% of their respective incomes?
>>59982003 >Guys usually waited until they have a good job before having a wife and kids >Guys usually started working at 15-16 so they had years of experience by the time they're out of school >Guys usually stayed in one job for 10-30 years >Blue collar jobs weren't a stigma
>Average home in the non ghetto will be somewhere between $200,000-$300,00 >20% is going to be $30k to $40k >Able to save that much in a year, while also living your own life on anything less than a 200k income. >The risks are not insignificant as a landlord. You are responsible for the damages accrued by renters as well as upkeep on all the shit, sewage, heat, etc etc. >Utterly fucked in a down market, such as when the property value drops and your mortgage is underwater. Or if your renters go away and you're left holding the mortgage. >Real Estate is incredibly illiquid, good luck finding buyers when YOU need to sell in a hurry.
If you're able to save $30k a year, why not just invest in the stock market? Or if you're so set on real estate, invest in a REIT which is functionally the same (real estate and stocks have similiar returns with much less work on your part).
>>59981984 No one wants to live in those states senpai and they have some of the poorest people in the country.
If you're a lower income white in a red state and you vote republican, you're pants on heads retarded. Nothing wrong with right wing politics as an idea, but the republican states continuously fuck their states and noone notices
If only that were so, but the government is stealing roughly 30% of your income in taxes. 30% spending on just living space is the ideal number because you're spending something like 20% on all the other basic amenities like food, internet and things that make life slightly tolerable. You're amazingly well off if you can keep even 10% or 15% of your income after everything. Especially if you can save it.
>>59980599 THE MISLEADING CLAIM: US Uncut shows a map spotted with numbers like 73, 59, 64, etc, and claims "here's how many hours a week you need to work just to pay rent."
WHY IT'S MISLEADING: This would be an alarming claim if it weren't so distorted. For one, in the article they cite, the actual claim is a bit more precise, claiming that there is not a single state in the U.S. where a minimum wage employee can afford a one-bedroom apartment. [a] While this conclusion makes a bit more sense, it's still potentially misleading if you aren't aware of the definitions being used to render it.
For instance, here are some pertinent notes from the ACTUAL 257 paged study:
>>59984625 • The word "afford" is quite subjective, and this report defines "affordability" as "no more than 30% of a household’s gross income." [b] In other words, if rent cost more than that, this report simply concluded that people "couldn't afford rent," whether that be true or not.
• How it determined local rent costs was ALSO important to note. It used something called "Fair Market Rent." FMR is defined as "the 40th percentile of gross rents for typical, non-substandard rental units." [b] Understanding that "median rent" would have meant "rent in the 50th percentile," what this is really counting is the cost of apartments that are slightly cheaper than the median. It does NOT count apartments even cheaper than that, however, or apartments defined as sub-standard. Per the HUD, who develops this definition, the following units are excluded: public housing units, rental units considered substandard in quality, seasonal rentals, rental units on 10 or more acres, and section 8 housing units. [c] This is potentially misleading, since despite there being numerous affordable options for rent, the report simply didn't acknowledge them because they're deemed "low income housing" or "sub-standard." They're essentially concluding that low-income earners can't afford to be anything other than low-income spenders. Should that really shock anyone? It doesn't mean they're destitute.
• As shown on pages 9, 15, and elsewhere in the 257 paged report (if willing to do the math yourself), the researchers also didn't look at TOTAL compensation (including benefits and overtime, etc). They merely took an estimated hourly rate, multiplied it by 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year, and acted as though that was all the money people were bringing in. As many hard workers know, this is often not the case, as many individuals work more than 40 hours in a week.
>>59984694 So now that we know this report has the potential to be thoroughly misleading, let's pick a state and do a little fact checking. Take Washington state, for example. On the graphic, they indicate one needs to work 73 hours to afford rent in Washington. Per RentJungle.com, rent for a one-bedroom in Seattle, WA is around $1,634. [d] However. Per NUMBEO.com, rent OUTSIDE the city is around $1,261. [e]
Washington state's Office of Financial Management projected that median household income in 2014 was around 58,686. [f] According to the Census ACS 1-year survey, however, the median household income for Washington was actually $61,366 in 2014. [g] Understanding that income estimates are subject to varying collection methods and therefore often a bit inaccurate, we can average these estimates and get $60,026. Now, if we subtract federal income tax, social security tax, medicare tax, and standard deductions, (Washington doesn't have a state income tax) we're left with an estimated monthly disposable income of $3,606. [h] That's more than enough to afford to live outside the city and pay around $1,261 for a one bedroom apartment.
Next, if we looked at the hourly wage of an "average renter" in Washington, which according to this report was $16.30 [b], and again subtracted taxes/deductions, we'd be left with a monthly disposable income of around $1,931. [i] After paying rent for a one bedroom apartment, such an individual would have $670 leftover to pay for other expenses (remember, this is after taxes). Now that IS difficult, but it's still doable. It's also not the cheapest apartment, however.
>>59984757 Lastly, if we looked at the state's minimum wage, which is $9.47 an hour [j], we can see that a post-tax monthly income of $981 certainly wouldn't be enough to afford a $1261 apartment, and we acknowledge that. However, as alluded to above, there are numerous less expensive options available that simply were overlooked. As of 1/3/16, here's a list of apartments for less than $500 a month in Washington State:
And here's a list for ones less than $550: •http://portland.craigslist.org/clk/apa/5363219653.html •http://portland.craigslist.org/clk/apa/5354675069.html •http://portland.craigslist.org/clk/apa/5358260160.html •http://portland.craigslist.org/clk/apa/5375786893.html •http://portland.craigslist.org/clk/apa/5380043714.html
It took LESS THAN 1 MINUTE to find those. Surely people in need can find some of these lower priced apartments.
>>59984822 CONCLUSION: The standards used in this report are entirely arbitrary and amount to nothing more than an exercise in mental gymnastics. The definitions used, by design, exclude the very real examples of low income individuals able to pay rent, as to paint a dire picture. OF COURSE lower income individuals might have to pay a larger share of their incomes towards rent. And OF COURSE low-income individuals may have to live in low-income housing. That doesn't mean they're destitute, however. It also doesn't mean they're prevented from living with a working spouse, as to have a two-income household, or living with a relative / roommate until their career has improved. Essentially, all this report does is confirm that those with low incomes can't afford non-low prices. How is that even remotely surprising?
>>59980704 You forgot rising interest rates, foreign land banking, unrestrained immigration, but sure all those things are true, especially regulations.
Melbournian here, rising land values are just a way of life to me, it started around when I was born and I watched my parents frantically buy as many as possible. Now that we own enough, it's almost like we're part of a hidden noble community in Australia.
>>59983066 There are software engineering jobs elsewhere, in places that don't cost as much. Granted, you're probably not going to make $160k/yr, but you won't be spending $2000/mo to rent in a shitty neighborhood either.
>>59984982 >Melbournian here, rising land values are just a way of life to me, it started around when I was born and I watched my parents frantically buy as many as possible. Now that we own enough, it's almost like we're part of a hidden noble community in Australia. Perthfag here. That's all and well unless your parents are cunts that keep it for themselves.
Literally millions worth in property and its all for "retirement". Forget that you got free uni education and a strong economy to get your first job in though...
>>59985774 Not even, the issue with gen X is that their advanced diplomas are equivalent to a modern day masters, as in just a little more than a bachelor degree. Youth unemployment/underemployment (if you have a degree, what are you doing flipping burgers?) is a serious and hidden problem all across the world and there isn't a single politician in the west willing to address that problem.
It's interesting how many different ways the "developing nations" meme can fuck young people.
>retirement Thankfully, they enjoy owning houses too much to sell and the house prices are about to go down because interest rates, so their instincts is not to sell. They get easily 1000$ a week in rent and don't have expensive past times, so they don't care.
>>59980599 As a renter in VT, who has rented multiple houses, not apartments, I can assure you that I would be living like a king if I made the wage that the charts suggests. Maybe if I wanted to live as close as possible to UVM or somewhere similar that might be the case, but for most of the state it's ridiculous. This image is horseshit.
Actually, I'm a renter and recent college grad in Texas. If I made the amount on for Texas ($16.62), I'd be able to pay all my bills, my student loan note that's going to come into effect in June, and then have money leftover for savings, assuming I living in my current apartment with my current roommates.
>>59983471 >shitholes like Los Angeles, New York, and Chiraq are desirable HAHAHHAHHAHAHA They're only desirable to gullible millenial retards who will actually pay that much for shitty studio aparments >>59981270 This >>59981118 THIS
Thread replies: 146 Thread images: 22
Thread DB ID: 389986
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.