New York City is edging toward financial disaster, experts warn

South Florida real estate shows zero trends. Steady state for a while, not accounting inflation.
 
41% Of New York Residents Say They Can No Longer Afford To Live There

More than a third of all city residents say they can’t afford to live anywhere in the state — much less the Big Apple — and believe economic hardship will send them packing in five years or less, according to a dismal new poll.

That’s 41 percent of city dwellers who say they can’t cope with New York’s high cost of living, according to a Quinnipiac poll published Wednesday.

Separately, 41 percent fear they’ll be “forced” to pull up stakes and seek greener pastures where the economic climate is more welcoming.


https://www.thecoli.com/threads/41-...ey-can-no-longer-afford-to-live-there.699249/
 
ideally id want to purchase something in a few years...but the city is changing so much not even sure were id want to set up shop

Mott Haven feels like the smart move but I love Harlem

Harlem is so dope, its like Wakanda. I didn't want to tell people about it to slow down gentrification. Best secret about Harlem is the ease of finding a parking spot. It doesn't have the overcrowded density of Washington Heights. Mott Haven is getting nice. I always thought a condo in an art deco style Grand Concourse building with a sunken living room was a good buy, just wished crime wasn't an issue, always some Worldstar going on in The Bronx.
 
Man my rent $1362. As much as it pains me, maybe a wrap for Brooklyn. Take my talents to NC
 
1 1/2 bedroom. Not saying it's not a good deal, especially living in BedStuy. It's pretty great. My meaning is that $1362 would atleast give me 2-3 bedroom in the South.

You'd have to scour to find a good 1 bedroom for $1362 in LA. :smh:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ube
The Democrats’ Gentrification Problem
19edsallSub-articleLarge.jpg

The view from above in San Francisco.CreditDavid Paul Morris/Bloomberg

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/19/opinion/democrats-gentrification-cities-voters.html

essay for CityLab, Richard Florida, a professor of urban planning at the University of Toronto, described how housing costs are driving the growing division between upwardly and downwardly mobile populations within Democratic ranks:
CityLab, expands on this point:
Characteristics of Domestic Cross-Metropolitan Migrants,” Romem looked at the income and education levels of families moving in and out of 441 metropolitan areas. He found that
Clinton 84.5 percent, Trump 9.2 percent). According to Romem, between 2005 and 2016, those moving into the San Francisco area had median household incomes averaging $12,639 a year more than the households of the families moving out, $70,015 to $57,376.

Conversely, in the struggling Syracuse metropolitan area (Clinton 53.9 percent, Trump 40.1 percent), families moving in between 2005 and 2016 had median household incomes of $35,219 — $7,229 less than the median income of the families moving out of the region, $42,448.

Research that focuses on the way city neighborhoods are changing by income, race and ethnicity, while not specifically addressed to political consequences, helps us see the potential for conflict within the Democratic coalition.

Robert J. Sampson, a sociologist at Harvard, published a detailed study in 2015 for the St. Louis Federal Reserve of the economic composition of neighborhoods. Overall, he found, “middle-income neighborhoods are tenuous,” while neighborhoods at the top and bottom of the economic ladder have remained strikingly stable.

For example, as Sampson explained by email,
Accounting for Central Neighborhood Change, 1980-2010,” by Nathaniel Baum-Snow, an economist at the University of Toronto, and Daniel Hartley, an economist at the Federal Reserve in Chicago. They found that the core of the nation’s cities is being taken over by members of the affluent wing of the Democratic Party at the expense of the less affluent, disproportionately minority wing of the party:
economic and racial divisions have increased within the Democratic coalition, the political power of the well-to-do has grown at the expense of racial and ethnic minorities.

Right now, a heated conflict has erupted within Democratic ranks in California over pending legislation (SB 827) that would override local zoning laws to allow developers to exceed height and density limits in return for an agreement to include more affordable housing units near transit hubs.

In very liberal Marin County (Clinton 77.3 percent, Trump 15.5 percent, median household income $100,310), elected officials of at least seven local municipalities have voted to oppose the legislation.

Jonathan Chait, writing in New York Magazine on Wednesday, pointed out that the housing issue in California and elsewhere,
killed the bill.

The maneuvers in California are a reflection of a larger problem for Democrats: their inability to reconcile the conflicts inherent in the party’s economic and racial bifurcation.

Dani Rodrik, an economist at Harvard, addressed the Democrats’ dilemma in a recent essay for Project Syndicate:
the work of the French economist Thomas Piketty, who argues that political parties on the left have been taken over, here and in Europe, “by the well-educated elite” — what Piketty calls the “Brahmin Left.” The Brahmin Left, writes Rodrik,
The Coming Realignment: Cities, Class, and Ideology After Social Conservatism,” that “high-density downtowns and suburban villages are coming to have an hourglass-shaped social structure.”

“Wealthy individuals” are at the top, according to Lind, with a “large luxury-service proletariat at the bottom.” Democrats, in this scheme, have become the party of
an article in March 2016:
multiracial — and now multiethnic — majority. Establishing that majority in a coherent political coalition is the only way in which the economic interests of those in the bottom half of the income distribution will be effectively addressed.
 
Back
Top Bottom