This is how the media spins cost of living - it's always political

[liberal N proud]

Why Americans Can't Afford to Live in Liberal Cities

On April 2, 2014, a protester in Oakland, Ca., mounted a Yahoo bus, climbed to the front of the roof, and vomited onto the top the windshield.

If not the year's most persuasive act of dissent, it was certainly one of the most memorable demonstrations in the Bay Area, where residents have marched, blockaded, and retched in protest of San Francisco's economic inequality and unaffordable housing. The city's gaps—between rich and poor, between housing need and housing supply—have been duly catalogued. Even among American tech hubs, San Francisco stands alone with both the most expensive real estate and the fewest new construction permits per unit since 1990.

But San Francisco's problem is bigger than San Francisco. Across the country, rich dense cities are struggling with affordable housing, to the considerable anguish of their middle class families.

Among the 100 largest U.S. metros, 63 percent of homes are "within reach" for a middle-class family, according to Trulia. But among the 20 richest U.S. metros, just 47 percent of homes are affordable, including a national low of 14 percent in San Francisco. The firm defined "within reach" as a for-sale home with a total monthly payment (including mortgage and taxes) less than 31 percent of the metro's median household income.

If you line up the country's 100 richest metros from 1 to 100, household affordability falls as household income rises, even after you consider that middle class families in richer cities have more income. [The graph below considers only the 25 richest US metros to keep city names moderately legible within the computer screen.]

Rich Households = Unaffordable Houses?
http://img.s-msn.com/tenant/amp/entityid/BBbSpKn.img?h=177&w=270&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f

Super-Liberal Cities, Super-Unaffordable Houses
http://img.s-msn.com/tenant/amp/entityid/BBbSUFf.img?h=179&w=270&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/why-americans-cant-afford-to-live-in-liberal-cities/ar-BBbSFaW



It's all because the people living in these cities are lubrul?

[arcane1]

1. Home ownership is too fetishized anyway. I think rentals should get more attention and focus.

Most of us will either never afford a home, or will choose to forgo owning one.

[daleanime]

2. Making both affordable....

is a necessity.

[arcane1]

3. Agreed!

[Warpy]

5. America needs a RAISE

Unaffordability of everything from home ownership to health care to educating one's children is a function of wage depression over the last 40 years. So is a lack of tax revenue and Social Security support.

The PTB thought inflation came from greedy unions driving wages up. They were wrong.

[daleanime]

8. Amen....

[upaloopa]

4. I think you are right and I think it is a sad fact.

If we had a thriving middle class we would have more home ownership. At least there would be more people paying on a mortgage. You get to keep the increase in value a home generates and you can deduct taxes and interest from your taxable income. I think we need to bring back home ownership as a goal if someone wants it by growing the middle class again.

[arcane1]

6. Sometimes that increasing value can be part of the problem

I read somewhere recently, regarding San Francisco and London, that a large number of condos are owned by out-of-staters, even business/mafia people in China and Russia, who buy the unit and never live there. Instead, it's used as a sort of investment that cannot be seized by the authorities back home.

[upaloopa]

7. I guess there is some good and bad in everything.

That is the way of life as I see it. Good exists along with bad. You can't have one without the other I think.