well affordable housing in most countries with Anglo-rooted property systems generally requires public subsidy. Actually probably in most industrialized economic systems. I can't think of one that doesn't require it.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @pt
The US, Canadian and British governments used to fund low-income housing at a federal level at a wholly different scale a generation ago, but then they wound down their programs or literally sold off public housing onto the private market. And then they altered their
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler @pt
property taxation systems and zoning laws to make real estate a much more reliably higher returning asset class after the 1970s. And so it's the combination of the two... property as more of a speculative asset and lack of financial support for low-income housing together.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler @pt
these 95/6,000 odds are also a reflection of software technology too. There's now a single uniform online application for multiple properties at a single portal, which makes the odds look different than they would've been reported before.
0 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @pt @kimmaicutler
Yeah, I'm not really sure what you're arguing here.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
depends on which income segment in which specific part of the Bay Area you are concerned about. If your goal is purely minimum wage workers in SF proper, then this is what you've got to use basically.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
if you are concerned about the middle class is a more holistic, mega-regional context, then more market-rate housing regionally is better. But of course, people don't vote as a mega-regional electoral body.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.