wnyc.org / 93.9fm / am 820

Comments

• [1] Peter Tillers from Jersey City September 03, 2007 - 09:02AM

  Commentators should not forget that occasional projects for the construction of affordable housing will not make housing generally affordable in places such as Manhattan. (Such projects mainly have only the advantage of advancing the interests -- e.g., the popularity -- of political actors such as mayors.) To make housing generally more affordable two things must happen: (i) the overall supply of housing must increase and (ii) the cost of housing must decrease. Hence, large-scale commercial housing projects should not be discouraged. Furthermore, careful attention must be paid to the effect of government regulation (e.g., anti-density regulations) on the cost of housing construction.

  
  
• [2] Miles Hunter from Newark, N.J. September 03, 2007 - 09:59AM

  Cities it seems, even a city like Newark (NJ) appear destined to be havens for the rich and the poor, with little or no room for the middle-class. For a so-called middle-class family to live in cities, they must be willing to expend an inordinate amount on housing, plus additional sums for primary/secondary education, which sums are in addition to the school taxes paid by the household.

  The rich can easily afford the housing and private school cost. The poor, generally have access to subsidized or public housing (though the section 8 vouchers are decreasing and it is unlikely that new public housing will be developed) and send their children to public schools. The middle-class have the option of city living or moving to the suburbs, where the public schools are better. The only middle-class people likely to remain in the cities are those who are childless, like me.

  Miles

  
  
• [3] Phil Henshaw from NYC September 03, 2007 - 10:36AM

  We need to look at real causes for economic distortion in the independent behaviors of the economic system that are largely not in anyone's control. Before 1970 the incomes of all sectors grew at roughly the same rate, and afterward the median income stopped growing while the upper incomes have grown rapidly.

  Economic activity has physical impacts on the earth, at a real 8000btu/$ rate. It's the middle income people that are effectively doing the right thing with regard to the earth, accepting the restraints, and the wealthy who are pushing way beyond sustainable limits, aiming at creating a maximum overshoot for someone else to deal with as collapse...

  It's physical.

  
  
• [4] john from upper west side September 03, 2007 - 11:00AM

  In the 80's an ecconomist Scott Turro (spelling) wrote a book called the Zero Sum Society. Writen on a level that anyone with a reasonable high school education could understand. A time when a college bound high school student had to take ecconomics, math including plane geometry and algebra, chemistry and or phiysics or biology and a second language. There was something called a vocational track where you could learn skills that paid well without going to a commuynity college. The vocational path grew many millionaires.

  This book told it all but must liberals didn't like what it said.

  
  
• [5] john from upper west side September 03, 2007 - 11:16AM

  if you haven't read the book or Montaine:

  Population is fluid

  Ecconomics drives politics

  Intellegence counts in high level learning

  A city or village require the skills that support its needs.

  There will always be the poor, the sick and homeless

  To many laws is a sign of a poorly functioning society and pepuate complacency

  Ignorance is our worst enemy

  
  
• [6] TM from Brooklyn September 03, 2007 - 11:18AM

  I have a problem many people would envy. I have a house. It's way too big for me, in a neighborhood that seems like it's declining, and I would love to move to something smaller and more convenient. But I am effectively trapped in this house and neighborhood because that *smaller* apartment in the *marginally* nicer neighborhood is not affordable for me.

  
  
• [7] john from upper west side September 03, 2007 - 11:30AM

  TM

  This is a familiar problem.

  My son loves vintage cars old and very old and has owened many. He recently swapped a Mint 1974 BMW 3.0 SC for a mint 1971 BMW 2002. The price of these cars can vary between $4000 for a fixerupper upper and $20000 for a restored car.

  You may find the same situation for your housing needs if you know how and where to look. Remember be prepared to make an even swapp. Good Luck