Bob

Oh you have, they're every where here...they tend to fence them in and put up a nice little sign on the entrance if the entrance isn't tucked away.

Then again, a couple towns over and the reserved, low cost housing for an apartment is $1600 a month and to qualify you had to have a household of $33K.

Every town in MA has a spot for low income housing, they're required to provide 10% of the housing at a reduced rate for low income families.

Section 8 picks up the tab for a lot of large families if they're eligible and not all section 8 housing is minging.

Pulaski

When we lived in Westchester County, just north of Manhattan I noticed an ugly barracks-like apartment building in an otherwise exclusive area, somewhere near Chappaqua IIRC (which has a fairly high-profile, well heeled couple living there). In the evening the parking spaces would fill up with ratty old Civics, Corollas, and Eclipses, often with over-sized exhausts.

hungryhorace

The worst place I've been here is Lawrence. What a complete shit hole. Though, I didn't see any trailer parks?

I was aware of the ridiculous cost for 'low cost' housing. How that is figured to be 'low cost' is beyond me!

What irritated me was the compulsion for luxury apartments to provide a set percentage of rooms to 'low income' homes at a generous discount. Why should they get to live in the same quality of housing as us, just because they don't earn as much? That's incredibly unfair.

Mrs Danvers

Trying to work out if you really can't see the reason or if you are simply a wind up merchant.

Pulaski

Are there two Horaces? One complains that the US doesn't have universal healthcare, the other complains that the poor can get subsidized housing. Which way do you want it?

scrubbedexpat091

You can't really live on those wages, and in some city's it requires living in sub-par housing with multiple people such as I did in Vancouver since rent for an apartment was nearly my entire income so obviously not doable.

But something is better then nothing, it's either work for those wages, or off to the streets, and those wages are better then the streets any day.

I like many in that wage category don't have any negotiating room, it's a take it or leave it option as the employers have the upper hand, and if you won't work for what's offered other people will.

You can literally have hundreds of resumes for 1 position at this level of pay.

We have a low income rent geared to income apartment, its a new build 4 years old, not bad, but of course we don't get things like dishwasher or ensuite laundry or anything luxury wise, but that is fine by me. We pay 570, and if we had to pay market rent would be paying at least 900 and that building is a run down, drug and crime infested hole, your looking at 1,100+ now for anything halfway decent.

You can buy a mobile home though for as low as 20,000 but they are rusted buckets of junk. Although the mobile home park next to us is all brand new, they are starting in the mid 150's but unlike most mobile home parks, this place is also selling the land the home sit's on, so inflates the price, but in a town where the cheapest house currently listed is 498,000 its a pretty good deal if you need housing. Rental market is very tight right now, hovering around a 0% vacancy rate as they haven't approved or built any rental housing in 5 years or so now.

hungryhorace

The poor should absolutely have assisted housing (council houses). What they should NOT have, however, is housing costs discounted for living in a luxury apartment. Why do they get the privilege of living in an apartment that others need 6 figure incomes to be able to afford? That's just ridiculous.

Pulaski

Shouldn't they also get cut rate, bargain basement healthcare as well then?

Pulaski

Oh, they're there, they're everywhere, not just in Oklahoma and Mississippi.

There's one at 1515 VFW Parkway, West Roxbury, MA and another at 735 Broadway, Malden, MA, both within 5 miles of downtown Boston. .... Even on Google satellite view they are quite an eye-opener, with trailers jammed in side by side.

Mrs Danvers

Ah I see what you're getting at. The U.S. simply doesn't build much in the way of public housing. Therefore when developers build luxury apartments in high end or more sought after areas the municipality often decrees that 10% be for affordable housing or low income residents. I'm not quite sure where you live or what the property prices are. Some places are impossible to buy or rent at market rates for people with low paying but essential jobs. For example, firefighter teacher, pharmacy tech etc. the city has to have people doing these jobs within the city limits and they have to live somewhere.

hungryhorace

Everyone should receive healthcare, regardless of ability to pay.

hungryhorace

Good point. I have noticed that. There doesn't seem to be much in the way of 'council house' style housing. Instead there are private complexes that offer either 'affordable' housing (the place down the road from where we were was $1k a month for a one bedroom, hardly 'affordable' IMO.

A 4 bedroom house is here $650-800k when we were looking.

There's a similar scheme in England I believe - 'priority workers'. I'm fine with that concept. What I'm not fine with is people who also happen to be scumbags moving into an apartment complex that I'm paying a high amount of rent for to be away from their type.

Mrs Danvers

I remember visiting the UK sometime when Brown or Blair had the UK in their clutches and saw an gloomy block of flats being built in Finsbury Park with a cheery "Key Workers" banner on it. If you'd swung a tea towel out of the window I swear it could hit passing trains. I was recently divorced and wondering if I should go back to the UK. I thought of my modest ranch style house in Colorado and it was somehow a defining moment that I should stay in Colorado.

It is however a problem that property prices in many areas are completely out of reach to even middle class people. 800k for a single family home is too much.

I wonder if the USA lets private property developers take the hit for affordable housing because they do think the market solves everything? Surely if the markets did solve everything then housing would be more affordable for the average wage earner anyway?

Then of course there is that saying "different country, same shit". The problems appear to be the same regardless

scrubbedexpat091

That experiment kind of failed in the past putting all the low income folks into segregated areas and creating projects, the new system many systems use works better and integrates people into the community better.

Developers can live with a small % of their units being low income.

The issue at least where I am is an average income earner can't even buy a home let alone anyone who is actually low income.

Median income is only 71,000 for a family ( around 35,000 for a single/lone parent family) and you can't buy at 71,000 a year, let alone buy anything as a single person.

Wages just have not kept pace with housing costs.


This is what 650,000 buys you in Vancouver, suppose if you were handy you could fix it up.

http://www.realtor.ca/propertyDetail...rtyId=14651797

That is the cheapest single family home listed currently.

I imagine there are some major US city's in a similar situation.

Pulaski

Round here a house like that, same age, same size, can be had for about $30k, ..... except it would be on a lot about twice the size.