CNN: (Not exactly MAGA types) "Half of US tenants can’t afford to pay their rent."

In recent years rents went up 15% per year. (Much faster than wages)
Now that rents are rising an additional 3-4% per year some are calling victory and saying the economy is great.

This CNN article, citing a recent Harvard study indicates otherwise.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/30/economy/rent-prices-dropping-2024-apartments/index.html

In November, Alignable a small-business association that claims 7 million members calcuated that 41% of small businesses were delinquent on their rent (a new record.)

I don’t know much about Alignable, but their report is regularly carried by Bloomberg, WSJ etc., so I guess they’re legit.
.
.

Just raise the minimum wage. That’ll fix, ever-ay-thang! :rofl:

2 Likes

Would you rent a $1,000,000 building for $10 a month?
Of course not.

How about a $200,000 home for $20 (same ratio, only smaller on both sides)?
Of course not. Not that either.

So here’s the thing, after the government (specifically its agent, the Fed) caused home prices to sky rocket, either home prices will come down, or rents will also rise. Home prices exist in an historic ratio to rents and vice versa., when that ratio breaks down, if rents don’t rise, owners start to sell and buyers refuse to buy and prices will drop.

Our government (especially the Fed) seems determined to make sure home prices don’t drop so . . . .

1 Like

Bidenomics baby! The greatest economy ever!

Nah, according to these libs the migrants crossing the border are all going to get good paying jobs and live the American Dream! So if every American could just have the same qualities and qualifications as these migrants then maybe we could all live the dream. :man_shrugging:

2 Likes

That median rent is 300 dollars more than the 15 year mortgage I got back in 2003. I’m glad I never took the rent route.

2 Likes

We have been living under Reaganomics (Neoliberal) for 40+ years…

3 years of Bidenomics did not create this mess.

We went from Keynesian Economics to Friedman economics, and this is the result.

From tax cuts, deregulation, the constant attack on government entities, SCOTUS legalizing the bribing of pols in 2010, legalizing stock buy backs, and allowing mega monopolies to take over the economy…this is the result.

Yup, roughly 60% of American households own their homes. Basically they are lottery winners.

But economics is called the dismal science for a reason.
I don’t know how, and I don’t know when,
but those two lines (above) will meet again

"Investors bought nearly a quarter of U.S. single-family homes that sold last year, often driving up rents for suburban families in the process.

The issue is especially acute in some Sun Belt states amid evidence that investors often can outbid other buyers, keeping starter homes out of the hands of would-be owners, especially suburban Black and Hispanic families. Some local officials in those states are pushing for increased regulation of investor purchases, but many Republican lawmakers oppose such controls."

Could it be corporations buying everything up and jacking up the rents?

1 Like

Free Market baby! This is what cons wanted…

The influx of this institutional capital is one element driving the surge in single-family housing prices and rents across the US today, and despite negative media scrutiny, rising rents are attracting even more investors. While profit is clearly the investors’ goal, the evolving circumstances that now make single-family homes a desirable holding have implications for both the models used to make investment decisions and the way assets are allocated across their portfolios.”

1 Like

That could definitely be part of the future problem.
How much did it impact the 2022-2023 rent increases? Probably not much

18% of homes purchased in 2022 were purchased by investors (both corporations and ma & pa) A more normal rate would have been 15%. (see Redfin chart below)

Some portion of that 18%(with increase in corporate buying) minus 3% (normal) equals 3%. If corporation did all of that 3% then . . . you get the idea.

Nothing about the free market dictates that the government should lower interest rates and then buy mortgage bonds causing a huge surge in home buying.

Not long ago the
Fed owned 0% of all the mortgages, now it owns over 30%.
Math is hard, but not that hard, if the Fed went from 0% to 30% in a short time that means the Fed not the free market) was buying up waaaay ore than 30% of all the mortgages.

Free market: “We don’t want that stinking mortgage. At least not at that interest rate.”

Fed: “We have to make things better. We’ll print money and buy the things the free market won’t.”

Fed = 30%

Fed plus other government entities (Fannie and Freddie) = 62%

Care to rephrase your statement?

Moving to second world status you visit a couple of countries like that and wonder how they can afford a place with their wages and you find out 3/4’s of them don’t and have roommates forever.

  1. Under presidents Reagan, Bush 41, Clinton, Bush 43, Obama and Trump
    annual interest payments on a new home (20% down, whatever the interest rate was at the time) remained relatively steady.

  2. Then the Fed did something it had never done before.

  3. Now those interest payments are three times higher.


.
.
.
Any chance landlords are gonna charge the same rent if their interest payments are suddenly 3 times higher?

There are new apartments being built in my area…One bedroom apartments are going for $1,850. Its ridiculous. The average blue collar working guy is getting priced out. Nobody, (in my area anyway) is building affordable housing. The slap “Luxury” on everything they build. And trust me, there’s nothing thats luxurious about the area they are building them in.

I know that’s the new slogan these developers now use! Luxury Townhouses starting at $450,000! Less square footage and essentially no personal property, but want to charge as much as single family homes.

Which rents for less per unit?
10 apartments per acre or 20 apartments per acre?
(Obviously 20 apartments per acre rents for less.)

Apartments, when they are allowed at all in the US, are subject to harsh zoning laws which begin with

  • no multi-family occupancy allowed.
  • all streets must be 50’ wide
  • they must have 3’ of grass and a 3’ sidewalk on each side (62’ total)
  • all buildings must be set back at least 20’ from the property line or sidewalk
  • no buildings can be more than 3-stories high
  • all buildings must have a front entrance and a back entrance each with a walkway
  • there must be 2.5 parking spaces per unit, including street parking
  • all utilities must be underground (no utility poles)
  • at least 30% of all units must be handicapped accessible
  • all party-walls between units must be built like the rock of Gibraltar.

The reason towns enact these expense-raising laws is because if investors were allowed to do what investors want, they would build cheaper more-affordable housing.

Cheaper more-affordable housing is literally against the law in the US.

1 Like

Prices have skyrocketed here in NJ. Back in 1993 I almost rented a condo in Watchung. The development was called Stonegate. It was 850 a month for a 2 bedroom. That was less than two weeks net pay. The place is beautiful. Now they are going for 500k to 700k to buy one. I don’t even want to know what it is to rent one.