The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: SSG Snuggle Bunny on December 24, 2015, 05:11:33 AM
-
Is it just me but does the map suggest that the "bluer" a state becomes the harder it is to survive there?
Uncle Joe (35,596 posts)
THIS MAP SHOWS THE HOURLY WAGE YOU’D NEED TO AFFORD A 2-BEDROOM RENTAL IN EVERY STATE
(https://images.playboy.com/playboy-digital/image/fetch/s--CTB5vZOG--/c_fit%2Ch_1280%2Cq_80%2Cw_720%2Fhttp%3A%2F%2Fimages-origin.playboy.com%2Fogz4nxetbde6%2F63dxYFaqhU0WcUUuMa4Yo0%2Fcff9c0bc28a2894b964c80b82f1acdc3%2F1fe005e3c-O2ZD.png)
The government calculates poverty, inflation, and benefits on the assumption that renters spend 30 percent of their income on housing. If you rent in America, there’s a good chance you’re spending much more than 30 percent of your income on rent.
The map above shows the hourly wage a full-time worker would need to make in order to afford to rent a 2-bedroom unit in every state.
Hawaii tops the list for the most expensive place to rent a 2-bedroom apartment. To make rent in Hawaii, your hourly wages would have to be $31.61. Washington D.C. came in a close second at $28.04 an hour. Surprisingly, a 2-bedroom in California is now more expensive to rent than one in New York.
(snip)
These numbers come from Out Of Reach, a program from the National Low-Income Housing Coalition that has focused on the problem of rent affordability since 1989. If you want to look at it another way, the map below shows how many hours you’d need to work per week at the federal minimum wage to make rent in each state.
(https://images.playboy.com/playboy-digital/image/fetch/s--gyEPYKWS--/c_limit%2Cq_80%2Cw_720%2Fhttp%3A%2F%2Fimages-origin.playboy.com%2Fogz4nxetbde6%2F1Y2qjhhSUwyoC8QMSsYO88%2F2e86b2a5d502883b2eea89c658079dc3%2Fscreen-shot-2015-05-28-at-35133-pm-TRSt.png)
http://www.playboy.com/articles/hourly-wage-you-need-to-afford-a-2-bedroom-map?utm_source=fb&utm_medium=social_pd_+evoc&utm_campaign=+evoc_fb
We have finally found someone who reads Playboy for the articles and -- wouldn't you know it -- it's a Proglodyte male.
geek tragedy (52,618 posts)
1. That number gets cut in half if they get a roommate. nt
Uncle Joe (35,596 posts)
3. That might help in some cases unless you were single and had a child. n/t
Which is just another way of saying:
Conservatives are right, having a child outside of a stable, 2-parent household will always be the single most economically crippling factor in people's lives so anything you can do personally to avoid that situation is in your own personal best interest.
Except without the "Conservatives are right" and the whole personal responsibility part and substituting an implied, "Somebody else should be forced to manage this."
JackInGreen (2,065 posts)
4. Should that be our financial future?
the only housing available is rooming with others because....why?
A single person living on their own should have a 2-bedroom apartment because....why?
Proserpina (842 posts)
6. I'm not at all surprised. Thank you for the info, Uncle Joe
$12/ hour my foot!
Get off your ass and you can get on your feet.
Proserpina (842 posts)
11. But we aren't in Arkansas, not even Hillary is in Arkansas
and as for the poor souls who are, they would probably like to be somewhere else, if they could afford it.
Liberalism: Because beggars can't be choosers...they can be stuck-up elitists
longship (29,624 posts)
14. Note that no state's statistics allow a person to have a two bedroom flat working 40 hrs.
That is a huge problem. Especially since many companies get away with not paying for benefits because nobody works 40 hours a week. This is the way it is in retail.
You are basically ****ed.
Just a reminder: The ACA has an employer mandate but Princess waived (without legislative authority, BTW) that part of the law until after she leaves offices in 2017.
Maybe you should ask why.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027472030
-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2015/07/08/map-how-much-100-is-really-worth-in-every-state-2/
(https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/files/2015/07/Pasted_Image_7_8_15__12_23_PM.png&w=1484)
Yet the DUmp is thrilled about that "Blue Wall" they think guarantees them the Presidency.
I repeat...who is it that really votes against their best interests?
-
Yeah, well, if some of those deep blue states were color-coded by county or region, it would probably be even more stark. Taking CA as an example, deep blue areas like the SF Bay Area would be indigo blue, while areas like Fresno County or Colusa County would be medium-light blue. IOW, the finer the resolution, the more stark the effects of deep-blue governance.
-
Yeah, well, if some of those deep blue states were color-coded by county or region, it would probably be even more stark. Taking CA as an example, deep blue areas like the SF Bay Area would be indigo blue, while areas like Fresno County or Colusa County would be medium-light blue. IOW, the finer the resolution, the more stark the effects of deep-blue governance.
Illinois would likely be the same.