Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 46 to 56 of 56

Thread: Can someone define what "affordable" housing is supposed to be?

  1. #46
    Member nogods's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    9,330
    Quote Originally Posted by leftWNYbecauseofBS View Post
    Generalizations are the tool of a lazy mind.
    logic and math are not your strong points.

  2. #47
    Tony Fracasso - Admin
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Buffalo, New York, United States
    Posts
    64,947
    Quote Originally Posted by nogods View Post
    logic and math are not your strong points.
    But common sense is.

  3. #48
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    7,769
    Quote Originally Posted by nogods View Post
    logic and math are not your strong points.
    Says the guy that thinks "Number 1" subsidizes everyone below him...

  4. #49
    Member nogods's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    9,330
    Quote Originally Posted by WNYresident View Post
    But common sense is.
    That "Moody’s Analytics Chief Economist Mark Zandi" article kinda went right over your head didn't it.

  5. #50
    Member 300miles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Buffalo
    Posts
    9,612
    Quote Originally Posted by nogods View Post
    The point is that the people objecting to subsidize housing are usually saying "I object to subsidized housing for them. My subsidized housing is perfectly OK because I don't realize I'm living in subsidize housing, or my subsidized housing is disguised through the tax system, or my subsidized housing is not as great as their subsidized housing."
    But that's not true. Nobody is saying that they shouldn't receive the same tax breaks that everyone else receives. People are complaining because they are receiving extra subsidies, and those subsidies far exceed anything given to 'regular' folk.

    We are spending $400,000 to build a $150,000 house and charge the owner $50,000 (numbers are just an example). That is in addition to any normal tax breaks they would receive on interest payments.

  6. #51
    Member nogods's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    9,330
    Quote Originally Posted by 300miles View Post
    But that's not true. Nobody is saying that they shouldn't receive the same tax breaks that everyone else receives. People are complaining because they are receiving extra subsidies, and those subsidies far exceed anything given to 'regular' folk.

    We are spending $400,000 to build a $150,000 house and charge the owner $50,000 (numbers are just an example). That is in addition to any normal tax breaks they would receive on interest payments.
    Subsidized housing that result from "tax breaks" is nevertheless subsidized housing.

    People who don't benefit from the itemized deductions for mortgage insurance and real property taxes are subsidizing the housing of those who do benefit from those deductions.

    Calling that method of subsidizing housing a "tax break" doesn't change what it is - subsidized housing.

  7. #52
    Tony Fracasso - Admin
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Buffalo, New York, United States
    Posts
    64,947
    Quote Originally Posted by nogods View Post
    Subsidized housing that result from "tax breaks" is nevertheless subsidized housing.

    People who don't benefit from the itemized deductions for mortgage insurance and real property taxes are subsidizing the housing of those who do benefit from those deductions.

    Calling that method of subsidizing housing a "tax break" doesn't change what it is - subsidized housing.
    What ever.

    Building apartments/homes for 400,000 per family is basically crapping on the rest of the community specially since it's "moderate" income...

  8. #53
    Member leftWNYbecauseofBS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    10,873
    Quote Originally Posted by nogods View Post
    Subsidized housing that result from "tax breaks" is nevertheless subsidized housing.

    People who don't benefit from the itemized deductions for mortgage insurance and real property taxes are subsidizing the housing of those who do benefit from those deductions.

    Calling that method of subsidizing housing a "tax break" doesn't change what it is - subsidized housing.
    OK. So to get you to STFU, we should use different terms.

    Government Subsidized Housing & Taxpayer Subsidized Housing. Does that work for you?


    Now go back to the basement....

  9. #54
    Member nogods's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    9,330
    Quote Originally Posted by leftWNYbecauseofBS View Post
    OK. So to get you to STFU, we should use different terms.

    Government Subsidized Housing & Taxpayer Subsidized Housing. Does that work for you?


    Now go back to the basement....
    There is a difference between government expenditures and expenditures funded by taxpayers?

    You really don't have a clue about financial matters do you?

    Where do you think "the goberment" gets the funds it uses to subsidize housing? From non-taxpayers?

    BTW - you and i are the "government" - and as long as you keep thinking you are not, you'll be ruled by those of us who know we are.

  10. #55
    Member Eat My Gun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    The Socialist States of Amerika
    Posts
    1,641
    Quote Originally Posted by nogods View Post
    BTW - you and i are the "government" - and as long as you keep thinking you are not, you'll be ruled by those of us who know we are.
    Now that's funny...

    As if you and I rule anything....


    "I won't live by rules that make no sense to me." - Evan Tanner 1971-2008

    Transfixus sed non Mortuus

  11. #56
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    250
    Definition of affordable housing should simply be what YOU can afford. [It used to be between 25-30% of NET income by the banks when we got a mortgage and you used to have to have a stable job and no outstanding debt; that was 40 years ago]. Now, very simply, although we surely can afford a much larger and expensive home, we are still living in the less than 900 sq. ft. home we bought in the early 1970s. At that time, it was outrageously priced (under $24K) and was more than 2.5X the household income. It was paid off and we have no mortgage. Taxes and utilities are low. It doesn't cost 30% of what we have in income to live each month. That is affordable.

    OTOH, when I see people moving into rather expensive brand new homes and apts using "low income" vouchers and section 8, I do get a bit peeved. We worked for this place. We paid it off. We don't qualify for the "subsidized" -- nor ever will -- simply as we spent our entire life saving all we could. Time for "affordable" to go back to the criteria that was around when we bought this place: a job, no outstanding debt, 25% of net monthly income for a mortgage.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. More $180K subsidies per Eastside house?
    By kernwatch in forum Buffalo NY Politics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: July 11th, 2008, 02:27 PM
  2. Special Report: Abandoned Homes
    By kernwatch in forum Buffalo NY Politics
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: July 9th, 2008, 12:58 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •