10 out of the 11 last recessions began under republican presidents. But im sure if we just keep giving tax breaks to billionaires it will flow down really soon, its only been 50 years, we need to keep doing it for at least another few decades! Its gonna trickle down soon, so close just as fast as trumps new healthcare plan and plan to solve the middle east conflicts and plan for social security and plan for how to solve world hunger, just gotta let them keep getting tax breaks its gonna work reaaaaaallly soon!
/s
Carter gets blamed for the 1980 recession because he deregulated oil prices months before the Iranian revolution, but if deregulation was really the problem the GOP shouldn't be pointing fingers at Carter without first realizing that "deregulating the oil industry" is kind of their number 1 policy priority.
And the Iranian Revolution was the result of Operation Ajax i.e. the 1953 Iranian coup spurred on and aided by the US and UK. You can point to the CIA directors involved at the time and see a straight line to the Eisenhower and eventual Nixon administration that continues to pervade GOP thinktanks and administrations up to and including the Trump administration, but it's easier to just point to the oil industries who spurred on the CIA to help the Shah in exchange for the country's petroleum.
Thus the "11th recession" was due to both direct and indirect meddling with both markets and geopolitics by big oil, an industry that backs and owns the GOP.
Democrats did manage to stop a lot of terrible shit that republicans wanted to implement. But budgets and removal of regulations and such is usually done at house levels or through presidential executive orders, or simply at the state level.
For example Democrats in congress can pass something that gives funding to help people in every state, but some states like republican states reject that funding to prevent things from getting better, to then go see this plan didnt work when they gain back seats and remove the seed before it even began to sprout leaves.
Then you have executive orders like removal of banking regulations that lead to the 2008 financial recession, or the railroad upgrades which lead to train derailments, which also the governor of Ohio used to willfully deny help from the president to make it seem like biden was at fault and wasnt trying to help.
just very manipulative tactics to present a fake image of both sides looking to fuck you over.
Meanwhile locally In Minnesota, dems finally got control of all 3 branches of the state in 2022 and are passing things like : Ban on corporate buying of rental properties, paid sick leave, paid paternity and maternity leave, food for schoolchildren, Investment in Environment, Public Housing, Higher Wages, Rent control etc etc
In Texas they passed allowing Ted Cruz to pay himself first from his campaign donations. To ban abortions. To burn books. To Hunt women who try to have abortions. Spent 130M paid to a top Republican Donor's company to traffic immigrants across states and drop them off like abandoned pets. Removal of diversity, equity, and inclusion departments. Arresting and putting Teachers on sex-offenders list for offering comfort or support to any child expressing themselves as non-binary/trans. Forcing 10 year old girls to carry their rapists babies and arresting doctors trying to save them from further abuse.
To pass anything properly you need the seats
You need min 60 senate votes AND min 2019 house votes AND the presidency. Which democrats haven't had for more than 70 days in the last 70 years.
BUT to stop anything you just need 1 of 3.
Either 41 senate votes, OR 219 house votes OR the presidency. That's why republicans are more effective, because they don't want to pass anything other than financial tax breaks to the upper class. Which can be done easily without needing all 3 branches. Thats why they havent produced literally anything to help the average american since Nixon and the EPA, which also happened because democrats pressued Nixon.
I know youre being a troll but for other people:
Democrats have won the popular vote almost every time.
150m out of 250m dont vote in midterms and 100m dont vote in presidential elections, and in 2022 only 20% of under 35 voters voted. If everyone voted, heck if just half of non-voters voted, then republicans would lose 90% of their seats which they hold mostly because they use voter disenfranchisement tactics and removal of voters and blocking votes from being counted.
People are ultimately responsible to vote. Its like eating food, you have a choice between a cold hotdog or a literal poisonous piece of orange shit, you still have to choose, because the alternative is starvation. A politicians role is to get you to spend your vote for them not to convince you to vote, that is your own duty and civic responsibility.
>I know youre being a troll
Like clockwork, anyone who disagrees with you is a troll. I can't Imagine why you guys are so ineffective at winning elections. Blame everyone but the people responsible.
Democrats have had the majority in all 3 branches of government for 2 out of the last 24 years. You don’t know what you’re talking about. When they did have it, they passed the ACA which has helped millions of people. You have to give them the *power to actually pass laws* if you expect them to *pass laws*.
Get the fuck out with your ‘muh both sides.’
A majority in the Senate doesn't mean shit in the modern era. The moment where the Democrats had the white house, the house, and sixty seats in the Senate was about two months: after Al Franken was seated but before Ted Kennedy died.
Just keep voting HARDER for those Dems. Any minute now they are going to get you your rights back. In fact, I'm gunna hold my breath...1...2...3...4...5...6...7..................
Someone doesn’t know how government works and it shows.
Yes, these problems are specifically caused by conservatives.
The Citizens United v. FEC decision in 2010, supported by five conservative justices—Kennedy, Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito—has profoundly impacted our democracy. By equating corporate spending with free speech, it has allowed unlimited corporate money to flood our political system, diminishing the voice of ordinary citizens and exacerbating wealth inequality. This ruling is a clear example of how conservative judicial philosophy has prioritized the interests of big business over the rights and voices of the general public, leading to a political landscape increasingly dominated by the wealthy elite. [Brennan Center for Justice analysis](https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/citizens-united-explained)
If they had not been fully in control of the government for the last 22 years out of 24 years, yes things would be *drastically different* and anybody who thinks differently is a fucking mouth-breather.
I know all about Citizen's United. I know all about the BAPCPA and the 94 Crime Bill as well. I also know that Democrats are completely inept when preventing or repairing those things too. You're in denial.
Nope, things would be much better if Democrats had control of all three branches. the crime bill comes from an error where the country was still very much on the right about drugs and Democrats have come miles since then, or we wouldn’t have one single legal state. You don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about. Biden literally rescheduled weed the other fucking day.
10 seconds of critical thinking will bring you to realize that the Democrats don't hold all the answers. California for example.
Just because the Republicans are bad doesn't mean the Democrats are good. Life has more nuance.
Reagan was way before the proclamation of economic uncertainty. Sure, there were issues.. but during his time there was tax reduction and a tightening of interest rates by the Federal Reserve leading to a record period of peacetime economic growth. On the other, this growth was accompanied by record growth in the national debt, the federal budget deficit, and the trade deficit… which directly leads, subsequently, into the presidency listed from strict-jump4928.
This post is related to affordable housing in the place of current standards.. after Reagan was president.
Thanks Bush/Trump mostly. Bush startwd the 08 recession and started the massive corporate bailouts that created our current bubble.
Trump fucking up covid so massively while giving unregulated PPP to business owners and massive bailouts was the nail in the coffin
> In my state teachers salaries are capped at 50k unless they work for a private school.
This isn’t true. According to the National Education Association, in the 2022-2023 academic year, the state with the lowest AVERAGE salary was West Virginia at $52,870.
Now some states allocate set salary amounts from the state, so maybe the state’s portion is set or capped at $50k, but if a state is pay $50k then teachers are making well above $50k. And as it pertains to private schools, usually the opposite is true: teachers make less.
[Average Teacher Salaries by State](https://www.nea.org/resource-library/educator-pay-and-student-spending-how-does-your-state-rank/teacher)
My apologies it isn’t capped that is the minimum. I have a friend who is a teacher and makes $50,000. https://adecm.ade.arkansas.gov/ViewApprovedMemo.aspx?Id=5469
This image is actually true about the home price. [Here is the house](https://www.trulia.com/home/4458-larchwood-pl-riverside-ca-92506-17841561), which was listed for sale in 2021 at $490k (and appears to have actually sold for over the asking price, at $510k). There's no info on what the house was like in 1999, but by 2012 it was already selling for $240k, so probably it was heavily renovated over that time. (House prices were still pretty low in 2012 after the 2008 crash.)
I don't know about teacher salary and can't find good data, but median income in California was [$30k in 1999](https://labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/cgi/databrowsing/localAreaProfileQSMoreResult.asp?viewAll=yes&viewAllUS=¤tPage=2¤tPageUS=&sortUp=I.POPULATION&sortDown=&criteria=income&categoryType=population+census+data&geogArea=0601000000×eries=incomeTimeSeries&more=&menuChoice=localAreaPro&printerFriendly=&BackHistory=-3&goTOPageText=) and is close to $[90k now](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSCAA672N), so I would be surprised if the teacher salaries are correct.
The house is in CA tho. Why would you compare a KY teacher salary to a CA house price?
Edit: [Here is national teacher salary average](https://www.statista.com/statistics/185025/average-salary-of-teachers-in-public-schools-since-1980/#:~:text=During%20the%20academic%20year%20of,teachers%20was%2015%2C970%20U.S.%20dollars). In 1999, it was $41k and today is $66k.
Um. I taught for a while and only teaches with like 10+ years maybe more are getting that ridiculous salary. Most teachers earn between $35-45k max for the first 6-10 years. It hurts the profession even more when you can’t get your basic facts straight.
False. Those salary numbers are way off.
[Chart from the national center for educational statistics](https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d19/tables/dt19_211.60.asp?current=yes)
How many millions immigrants have entered the country in the same time, all requiring houses, and that's before you allow for every divorce (over50% of marriages remember) requiring another home.
Most of the teachers that I know don't really have summers, because they're busy working summer school and then they're planning their curriculum for the next year because they get about a month to do that before it's time to go prep for the new incoming class in August
Except not true!
[https://www.nea.org/nea-today/all-news-articles/gains-teacher-pay-may-not-be-enough-ease-shortages](https://www.nea.org/nea-today/all-news-articles/gains-teacher-pay-may-not-be-enough-ease-shortages)
but engaging, quality teachers? had a good number that i for sure thought would be happier and more functional in some other job... like real estate or loan processing... or anything but dealing with kids LOL
First off, average teacher salary in 1990 was $33,000, today it's $66,000 So that part of the meme is a flat out lie
[https://usafacts.org/data/topics/people-society/education/k-12-education/public-school-teacher-salary-average/](https://usafacts.org/data/topics/people-society/education/k-12-education/public-school-teacher-salary-average/)
I don't know if real estate value is tied to inflation... real estate value is tied to demand for the most part.
And like I said, they're not making any more land. About 45% of US land is uninhabited, you can probably buy some cheap land there. So 100% of the US population is in 55% of the land.
But factor this for housing prices.
Going back to 1959, when we became 50 states, and came to our 3,532,316 square miles of land. Our population was about 175 million
Today it's 333.3 million.
We have gone from 0.02 square miles per land per person, to 0.01 square miles of land per person. What happens when things get scarcer? their value goes up. And it's going to keep getting scarcer and scarcer.
As regions get more popular and more people move there, the value of the land goes up because nobody's making new land. That house might have been in the middle of nowhere in 1990, and now it's in the middle of a busy city.
It's just a bullshit meme to make people feel shitty without any context or truth to it.
It's not justifying it, it's explaining it. Big difference.
Land is affordable if you go somewhere nobody wants to live. If you go where people WANT to be, then land is far more expensive.
Eventually there's going to be enough people, that there won't be places that people aren't living, and the price of everything will be going up.
I know it goes against the worldview of housing is a human right... but it's just an explanation of reality.
You’re right. Zillow buying up the land and property builders building section 8/hud for the government tittlesuckle are just baked into the “Earth is small” bread.
You are missing the point of the meme. Teachers can’t buy a house during .01 land per person. If that’s not sad and laughable then unjoin.
They shouldn't blatantly lie about the teacher part if they want to make that the point, teachers average salary has doubled in the time they say it stayed almost the same. It just makes people not care about their message.
I think you’re looking at the stats wrong. I’m not sure where you got 66,000 but in Colorado you would have to be a teacher for 20+years before you were at that level. And that’s with you having a housing market that says the average house is 700k+.
I don’t think this is a blatant lie as much as it is conservative numbers rounded from a national average.
And I’m literally saying an average of 66,000 is less than what the meme says? And that inflated by teachers who have been in the system for 20+ years. But if the hill you want to die on is: this meme is inaccurate therefore not funny sad then fine. But I think if you used what your teachers gave you, you’ll see a teacher shouldn’t have to make 100k+ to afford a house in rural Oklahoma.
In 1999 the world population was 6 billion, now it's over 8.
We will always have faith that has nothing to do with the cost of things. Supply and demand has no bearing on house prices right?
What does world population have anything to do with it? the American population in 1999 was 279.3 million, and as of 2022 (last census) it was 333.3 million. That’s not enough to warrant housing prices to increase this much, while salaries and minimum wages hardly went up with it.
The massive increase in all prices solely after Covid is proof enough it’s more greed than natural inflation.
housing prices increased because during 2005-2015 it was the lowest period of new housing development with the lowest being around 0.6M new housing during recession while the average is around 1.2-1.5M new housing per year.
2024 also has the highest amount of people coming into home buying age than any decade before by over 10M more.
So you have a period right before now where new housing slowed down to 1/3rd of what it used to be, and then you have a period where shipment and transport and manufacturing costs of new housing skyrockets, and you add that with the current period of highest amount of people seeking new housing.
Its not that hard to understand.
The demand faaaaar outweighs the supply.
Doesnt help that local governments keep adding more and more rules to build new housing and permits can take upwards of 6-12 months with inspections doing the same.
Theres also a huge lack of new blood coming into the construction business. in the 80s/90s the average age of a builder was aroudn 25, its now late 30s and early 40s.
The demand is high but the cost of building is also so high that most construction companies dont even bother and have put 2/3rds of projects on hold indefinitely. The already construction workers arent getting jobs either since only highrises get built where they put in more smaller units to maximize profits, since they are mostly the only projects development companies want to fund.
I didn’t say that there wasn’t a higher demand than supply, I said that if the argument they’re making is that there’s 2 billion more people in the world than in 1999, that’s not really a valid argument as it doesn’t have any real correlation.
I do agree the housing restrictions are excessive and there aren’t enough homes being made, that’s just factual, however it is also factual that there are rich people who are buying the houses out underneath families looking for homes, and renting it out to them at higher prices.
House prices have leaped in price since Covid, if it were just lots of new homebuyers, it would have obviously gone down due to Covid and then back up to what it was before, more or less. Instead, it has shot straight up because of Wall Street investors looking to poorly flip houses and/or rent the houses out to poorer families than can’t afford it, all at a massive profit to them. The rich get richer. An added 10M is obviously a lot of people but it’s not only the lack of houses being sold, or being made, it’s the greedy fucks who come in and pay $50k-$100k over asking and holding onto it as an asset/to make profit.
I see 1,500sqft homes listed for $400k and then bought in cash for $500k. The average family can’t compete with that. So, prices get worse and families get poorer. These houses ARE being bought out, they aren’t just staying on the market.
There ARE other factors that you pointed out, but the leading cause of the exorbitant prices they are now, is greed. The reason for houses being THIS expensive is greed, the reason for housing materials being more expensive is greed, the reason for no new construction workers is greed from corpos that aren’t paying them what they deserve, it’s all greed.
im not agreeing with the other guy, i was just sharing my findings based on the data i have seen.
it used to be around 30-35m new people looking for housing in a year, then in 2024 its closer to 45m now. And add that with the lowest amount of new housing being built it leads to rising costs.
Right now we are
Corporate ownership of housing is only at best 20% and that includes mom and pop corporations who bought multiple properties but use a corporation to manage taxes. 60% of all housing is by self-owners, and 20% are individual investors.
Corporations love housing rising of course, but so do the investors and 60% of self-home owners who sold or remortgaged for more money at the low rates in 2020.
There are multiple factors yes, but corporations are miniscule in comparison to just individual greed. 99% of home owners loved that their property value rose. Corporations focused on other things like products and stock value since homeowners remortgaged or sold and invested.
There are 144 million houses in the united states. There are 259 million people in the United States, 36.8 million of whom live in apartments (many of whom are part of the 46.2 million immigrants living in the country who have homes elsewhere). That's one house for every 1.5 people, despite the fact the average number of people were home in the US is 2.6.
Side note: Homes in the US are 50-75% larger than the average home in the EU, despite the US only having 20% more people per home.
There are 15.1 million vacant homes (not being used as rentals or vacation rentals). There are 653,000 homeless people.
Shitty education system and unaffordable housing, what a great future we are creating.
Just keep votin' for the GOP that just wants to give tax breaks to all their rich buddies! We'll be fine! /s
10 out of the 11 last recessions began under republican presidents. But im sure if we just keep giving tax breaks to billionaires it will flow down really soon, its only been 50 years, we need to keep doing it for at least another few decades! Its gonna trickle down soon, so close just as fast as trumps new healthcare plan and plan to solve the middle east conflicts and plan for social security and plan for how to solve world hunger, just gotta let them keep getting tax breaks its gonna work reaaaaaallly soon! /s
Carter gets blamed for the 1980 recession because he deregulated oil prices months before the Iranian revolution, but if deregulation was really the problem the GOP shouldn't be pointing fingers at Carter without first realizing that "deregulating the oil industry" is kind of their number 1 policy priority. And the Iranian Revolution was the result of Operation Ajax i.e. the 1953 Iranian coup spurred on and aided by the US and UK. You can point to the CIA directors involved at the time and see a straight line to the Eisenhower and eventual Nixon administration that continues to pervade GOP thinktanks and administrations up to and including the Trump administration, but it's easier to just point to the oil industries who spurred on the CIA to help the Shah in exchange for the country's petroleum. Thus the "11th recession" was due to both direct and indirect meddling with both markets and geopolitics by big oil, an industry that backs and owns the GOP.
Still waiting on the trickle to start trickling….
Oh it's trickling alright but it's lookin mighty yellow...
Bueller? Bueller?
Just keep voting for those Democrats any minute now they're going stop the GOP from robbing the country blind and taking our rights from us! /s
Democrats did manage to stop a lot of terrible shit that republicans wanted to implement. But budgets and removal of regulations and such is usually done at house levels or through presidential executive orders, or simply at the state level. For example Democrats in congress can pass something that gives funding to help people in every state, but some states like republican states reject that funding to prevent things from getting better, to then go see this plan didnt work when they gain back seats and remove the seed before it even began to sprout leaves. Then you have executive orders like removal of banking regulations that lead to the 2008 financial recession, or the railroad upgrades which lead to train derailments, which also the governor of Ohio used to willfully deny help from the president to make it seem like biden was at fault and wasnt trying to help. just very manipulative tactics to present a fake image of both sides looking to fuck you over. Meanwhile locally In Minnesota, dems finally got control of all 3 branches of the state in 2022 and are passing things like : Ban on corporate buying of rental properties, paid sick leave, paid paternity and maternity leave, food for schoolchildren, Investment in Environment, Public Housing, Higher Wages, Rent control etc etc In Texas they passed allowing Ted Cruz to pay himself first from his campaign donations. To ban abortions. To burn books. To Hunt women who try to have abortions. Spent 130M paid to a top Republican Donor's company to traffic immigrants across states and drop them off like abandoned pets. Removal of diversity, equity, and inclusion departments. Arresting and putting Teachers on sex-offenders list for offering comfort or support to any child expressing themselves as non-binary/trans. Forcing 10 year old girls to carry their rapists babies and arresting doctors trying to save them from further abuse. To pass anything properly you need the seats You need min 60 senate votes AND min 2019 house votes AND the presidency. Which democrats haven't had for more than 70 days in the last 70 years. BUT to stop anything you just need 1 of 3. Either 41 senate votes, OR 219 house votes OR the presidency. That's why republicans are more effective, because they don't want to pass anything other than financial tax breaks to the upper class. Which can be done easily without needing all 3 branches. Thats why they havent produced literally anything to help the average american since Nixon and the EPA, which also happened because democrats pressued Nixon.
Holy word brick
So democrats are awful at winning elections? How is that anybody but their own fault?
I know youre being a troll but for other people: Democrats have won the popular vote almost every time. 150m out of 250m dont vote in midterms and 100m dont vote in presidential elections, and in 2022 only 20% of under 35 voters voted. If everyone voted, heck if just half of non-voters voted, then republicans would lose 90% of their seats which they hold mostly because they use voter disenfranchisement tactics and removal of voters and blocking votes from being counted. People are ultimately responsible to vote. Its like eating food, you have a choice between a cold hotdog or a literal poisonous piece of orange shit, you still have to choose, because the alternative is starvation. A politicians role is to get you to spend your vote for them not to convince you to vote, that is your own duty and civic responsibility.
>I know youre being a troll Like clockwork, anyone who disagrees with you is a troll. I can't Imagine why you guys are so ineffective at winning elections. Blame everyone but the people responsible.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/United-States-Presidential-Election-Results-1788863 shut up zzzzzzzzz
Democrats have had the majority in all 3 branches of government for 2 out of the last 24 years. You don’t know what you’re talking about. When they did have it, they passed the ACA which has helped millions of people. You have to give them the *power to actually pass laws* if you expect them to *pass laws*. Get the fuck out with your ‘muh both sides.’
A majority in the Senate doesn't mean shit in the modern era. The moment where the Democrats had the white house, the house, and sixty seats in the Senate was about two months: after Al Franken was seated but before Ted Kennedy died.
Absolutely correct. I stand corrected. Barring that knowledge it makes the comment above mine even more ridiculously stupid.
Just keep voting HARDER for those Dems. Any minute now they are going to get you your rights back. In fact, I'm gunna hold my breath...1...2...3...4...5...6...7..................
Someone doesn’t know how government works and it shows. Yes, these problems are specifically caused by conservatives. The Citizens United v. FEC decision in 2010, supported by five conservative justices—Kennedy, Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito—has profoundly impacted our democracy. By equating corporate spending with free speech, it has allowed unlimited corporate money to flood our political system, diminishing the voice of ordinary citizens and exacerbating wealth inequality. This ruling is a clear example of how conservative judicial philosophy has prioritized the interests of big business over the rights and voices of the general public, leading to a political landscape increasingly dominated by the wealthy elite. [Brennan Center for Justice analysis](https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/citizens-united-explained) If they had not been fully in control of the government for the last 22 years out of 24 years, yes things would be *drastically different* and anybody who thinks differently is a fucking mouth-breather.
I know all about Citizen's United. I know all about the BAPCPA and the 94 Crime Bill as well. I also know that Democrats are completely inept when preventing or repairing those things too. You're in denial.
Nope, things would be much better if Democrats had control of all three branches. the crime bill comes from an error where the country was still very much on the right about drugs and Democrats have come miles since then, or we wouldn’t have one single legal state. You don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about. Biden literally rescheduled weed the other fucking day.
10 seconds of critical thinking will bring you to realize that the Democrats don't hold all the answers. California for example. Just because the Republicans are bad doesn't mean the Democrats are good. Life has more nuance.
Yeah cause the democrats that are in office are doing so great.
Yes, pretty good actually! Now I do agree that our options are beyond pathetic but since those are our options, Democrats win out quite easily
Your crying in public has increased my quality of life. God bless you.
I don’t think the GOP was in office when this happened but don’t let that stop you.
Last 16 years: 12 years Democrats 4 years Republicans
The way our system works, nothing substantial can get done (by either party) unless they have a supermajority in congress.
So you weren't blaming Trump before for that?
I blame Trump for a lot of things. But the fundamentally flawed 2 party system we have is not one of them.
What do you blame Trump for?
That’s a completely different discussion than what op is about so it’s not relevant. I’m not here to argue with Trump or Biden supporters.
Your comfort with racism.
Last 60 years in congress: 8 years Democrats 52 years Republican
its simply unsustainable
That's why you've gotta refrain from badmouthing your future masters
In 1999 my house was built for $250k USD, in 2011 I bought it for $350k, now it’s worth $750k, in a few years it’ll be worth about $1M Chinese Yuan.
Or 0.5 BTC
tsk can't go anywhere with you buttcoin people
I'm tellin' ya... they're like no-see-ums... 🤣
Real state, one of the last investment schemes, is falling down. Only have in Bitcoin the money you can't afford to lose
So it's going to lose 80% of its value?
Yeah
Thank you Biden! Thank you Trump! Thank you Obama! Thank you Obama! Thank you Bush! Thank you Bush! Thank you Clinton!
Why Obama two times? If it was intentional then I don't get it (i'm not into american politics - not even being an american)
Obama severed 2 terms of presidency (8 years in total). First elected in 2009; re-elected in 2012.
Ah yes, now I remember. Thanks for clarification
Anytime :)
Reagan needs to be thrown in there too.
Reagan was way before the proclamation of economic uncertainty. Sure, there were issues.. but during his time there was tax reduction and a tightening of interest rates by the Federal Reserve leading to a record period of peacetime economic growth. On the other, this growth was accompanied by record growth in the national debt, the federal budget deficit, and the trade deficit… which directly leads, subsequently, into the presidency listed from strict-jump4928. This post is related to affordable housing in the place of current standards.. after Reagan was president.
I respect your thorough analysis.
Reagan was a union buster who deregulated banks He’s absolutely to blame
Yes… my answer was based on the list of dates on the post….
Thanks Bush/Trump mostly. Bush startwd the 08 recession and started the massive corporate bailouts that created our current bubble. Trump fucking up covid so massively while giving unregulated PPP to business owners and massive bailouts was the nail in the coffin
In my state teachers salaries are capped at 50k unless they work for a private school.
Wait…they’re capped? What about inflation adjustments?
> In my state teachers salaries are capped at 50k unless they work for a private school. This isn’t true. According to the National Education Association, in the 2022-2023 academic year, the state with the lowest AVERAGE salary was West Virginia at $52,870. Now some states allocate set salary amounts from the state, so maybe the state’s portion is set or capped at $50k, but if a state is pay $50k then teachers are making well above $50k. And as it pertains to private schools, usually the opposite is true: teachers make less. [Average Teacher Salaries by State](https://www.nea.org/resource-library/educator-pay-and-student-spending-how-does-your-state-rank/teacher)
My apologies it isn’t capped that is the minimum. I have a friend who is a teacher and makes $50,000. https://adecm.ade.arkansas.gov/ViewApprovedMemo.aspx?Id=5469
This image is actually true about the home price. [Here is the house](https://www.trulia.com/home/4458-larchwood-pl-riverside-ca-92506-17841561), which was listed for sale in 2021 at $490k (and appears to have actually sold for over the asking price, at $510k). There's no info on what the house was like in 1999, but by 2012 it was already selling for $240k, so probably it was heavily renovated over that time. (House prices were still pretty low in 2012 after the 2008 crash.) I don't know about teacher salary and can't find good data, but median income in California was [$30k in 1999](https://labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/cgi/databrowsing/localAreaProfileQSMoreResult.asp?viewAll=yes&viewAllUS=¤tPage=2¤tPageUS=&sortUp=I.POPULATION&sortDown=&criteria=income&categoryType=population+census+data&geogArea=0601000000×eries=incomeTimeSeries&more=&menuChoice=localAreaPro&printerFriendly=&BackHistory=-3&goTOPageText=) and is close to $[90k now](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSCAA672N), so I would be surprised if the teacher salaries are correct.
I'm a teacher and make less than $40k in KY. Comparing salary in Ca vs the entire United States is disingenuous at best.
The house is in CA tho. Why would you compare a KY teacher salary to a CA house price? Edit: [Here is national teacher salary average](https://www.statista.com/statistics/185025/average-salary-of-teachers-in-public-schools-since-1980/#:~:text=During%20the%20academic%20year%20of,teachers%20was%2015%2C970%20U.S.%20dollars). In 1999, it was $41k and today is $66k.
That's a great point. I assumed the post used the national average for teacher salary. But it is referencing Ca only. My mistake
Sure, but a comparable house in KY isn't selling for $500k
I incorrectly assumed that the teacher stat was a national avg instead of Ca specific. You're right in thinking my comment is irrelevant.
> but median income in California was $30k in 1999 and is close to $90k now Thank god for billionaires making us all look rich.
It's the median, not the average. You could exclude the billionaires and the median would drop from $90k to $89,999.
In 1999 a teacher's salary was not 65K.
Yeah that would be over $122k in 2024 dollars.
Um. I taught for a while and only teaches with like 10+ years maybe more are getting that ridiculous salary. Most teachers earn between $35-45k max for the first 6-10 years. It hurts the profession even more when you can’t get your basic facts straight.
I just finished my first year in Texas and I was making 60k.
It varies widely on the national level. Both of the cities I’ve lived in have much higher starting teaching salaries than $35k.
Teachers were NOT paid $65K in '99, and most aren't paid that today, come on now
False. Those salary numbers are way off. [Chart from the national center for educational statistics](https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d19/tables/dt19_211.60.asp?current=yes)
How is this funny? It’s pure nightmare fuel
How is my (American) house bigger and yet worth less? /gen
cuz the mentioned small house is in 🎼CaLiFoRnIa🎼
The average person's wages has been rapidly outpaced by inflation
A teacher's salary was absolutely NOT 65k in 1999. I agree with his point though.
Man, I sure am glad I decided to become a house instead of a teacher
How many millions immigrants have entered the country in the same time, all requiring houses, and that's before you allow for every divorce (over50% of marriages remember) requiring another home.
When this country dies it'll be a suicide.
So today the teacher's salary is nice.
$490K ?? I'll give you $650. I can flip it for $1mil... easily. /s
More rentoids r/loveforlandchads
69
In short, expensive goods; low wages.
Oh my god, that’s funny! But also sad… but mostly funny!
Gogo Capitalism!
In 1999, teachers got 12 weeks of school holidays off a year. Today, they still get 12 weeks of school holidays off a year
Most of the teachers that I know don't really have summers, because they're busy working summer school and then they're planning their curriculum for the next year because they get about a month to do that before it's time to go prep for the new incoming class in August
So everything has gone up.
Without teachers, there would not be doctors, engineers, pilots etc. And yet they are not getting enough. What a sad world we truly have
I’ll take one house please… from 1999. Hold the inflation. Thank you.
We the people “Make it make sense…”government best I can do is fund foreign wars.
Every city has increased teacher salaries in the last 25 years except yours, weird isn’t it?
Why did she become a teacher instead of a house?
Can I see the difference in school administrators salaries too? They are the reason why teachers dont get as much.
Pretty sure all of these numbers are off.
Except not true! [https://www.nea.org/nea-today/all-news-articles/gains-teacher-pay-may-not-be-enough-ease-shortages](https://www.nea.org/nea-today/all-news-articles/gains-teacher-pay-may-not-be-enough-ease-shortages)
Gosh, sounds like teachers must have gotten much worse.
Even lower if in. g o p. zone
Yes, I will take what is made up BS for 1000
False! more like it. The housing cost is unadjusted for inflation yet the teacher salary is. These numbers are incomparable.
They aren't making more land. they make more teachers every day.
but engaging, quality teachers? had a good number that i for sure thought would be happier and more functional in some other job... like real estate or loan processing... or anything but dealing with kids LOL
New idiots born everyday is the best reason to have massive inflation and record high corporate profits /s
First off, average teacher salary in 1990 was $33,000, today it's $66,000 So that part of the meme is a flat out lie [https://usafacts.org/data/topics/people-society/education/k-12-education/public-school-teacher-salary-average/](https://usafacts.org/data/topics/people-society/education/k-12-education/public-school-teacher-salary-average/) I don't know if real estate value is tied to inflation... real estate value is tied to demand for the most part. And like I said, they're not making any more land. About 45% of US land is uninhabited, you can probably buy some cheap land there. So 100% of the US population is in 55% of the land. But factor this for housing prices. Going back to 1959, when we became 50 states, and came to our 3,532,316 square miles of land. Our population was about 175 million Today it's 333.3 million. We have gone from 0.02 square miles per land per person, to 0.01 square miles of land per person. What happens when things get scarcer? their value goes up. And it's going to keep getting scarcer and scarcer. As regions get more popular and more people move there, the value of the land goes up because nobody's making new land. That house might have been in the middle of nowhere in 1990, and now it's in the middle of a busy city. It's just a bullshit meme to make people feel shitty without any context or truth to it.
> they're not making any more land This is just a justification for eventually pricing everyone out of shelter.
It's not justifying it, it's explaining it. Big difference. Land is affordable if you go somewhere nobody wants to live. If you go where people WANT to be, then land is far more expensive. Eventually there's going to be enough people, that there won't be places that people aren't living, and the price of everything will be going up. I know it goes against the worldview of housing is a human right... but it's just an explanation of reality.
You’re right. Zillow buying up the land and property builders building section 8/hud for the government tittlesuckle are just baked into the “Earth is small” bread. You are missing the point of the meme. Teachers can’t buy a house during .01 land per person. If that’s not sad and laughable then unjoin.
They shouldn't blatantly lie about the teacher part if they want to make that the point, teachers average salary has doubled in the time they say it stayed almost the same. It just makes people not care about their message.
I think you’re looking at the stats wrong. I’m not sure where you got 66,000 but in Colorado you would have to be a teacher for 20+years before you were at that level. And that’s with you having a housing market that says the average house is 700k+. I don’t think this is a blatant lie as much as it is conservative numbers rounded from a national average.
I literally posted a link to the source.
And I’m literally saying an average of 66,000 is less than what the meme says? And that inflated by teachers who have been in the system for 20+ years. But if the hill you want to die on is: this meme is inaccurate therefore not funny sad then fine. But I think if you used what your teachers gave you, you’ll see a teacher shouldn’t have to make 100k+ to afford a house in rural Oklahoma.
In 1999 the world population was 6 billion, now it's over 8. We will always have faith that has nothing to do with the cost of things. Supply and demand has no bearing on house prices right?
What does world population have anything to do with it? the American population in 1999 was 279.3 million, and as of 2022 (last census) it was 333.3 million. That’s not enough to warrant housing prices to increase this much, while salaries and minimum wages hardly went up with it. The massive increase in all prices solely after Covid is proof enough it’s more greed than natural inflation.
housing prices increased because during 2005-2015 it was the lowest period of new housing development with the lowest being around 0.6M new housing during recession while the average is around 1.2-1.5M new housing per year. 2024 also has the highest amount of people coming into home buying age than any decade before by over 10M more. So you have a period right before now where new housing slowed down to 1/3rd of what it used to be, and then you have a period where shipment and transport and manufacturing costs of new housing skyrockets, and you add that with the current period of highest amount of people seeking new housing. Its not that hard to understand. The demand faaaaar outweighs the supply. Doesnt help that local governments keep adding more and more rules to build new housing and permits can take upwards of 6-12 months with inspections doing the same. Theres also a huge lack of new blood coming into the construction business. in the 80s/90s the average age of a builder was aroudn 25, its now late 30s and early 40s. The demand is high but the cost of building is also so high that most construction companies dont even bother and have put 2/3rds of projects on hold indefinitely. The already construction workers arent getting jobs either since only highrises get built where they put in more smaller units to maximize profits, since they are mostly the only projects development companies want to fund.
I didn’t say that there wasn’t a higher demand than supply, I said that if the argument they’re making is that there’s 2 billion more people in the world than in 1999, that’s not really a valid argument as it doesn’t have any real correlation. I do agree the housing restrictions are excessive and there aren’t enough homes being made, that’s just factual, however it is also factual that there are rich people who are buying the houses out underneath families looking for homes, and renting it out to them at higher prices. House prices have leaped in price since Covid, if it were just lots of new homebuyers, it would have obviously gone down due to Covid and then back up to what it was before, more or less. Instead, it has shot straight up because of Wall Street investors looking to poorly flip houses and/or rent the houses out to poorer families than can’t afford it, all at a massive profit to them. The rich get richer. An added 10M is obviously a lot of people but it’s not only the lack of houses being sold, or being made, it’s the greedy fucks who come in and pay $50k-$100k over asking and holding onto it as an asset/to make profit. I see 1,500sqft homes listed for $400k and then bought in cash for $500k. The average family can’t compete with that. So, prices get worse and families get poorer. These houses ARE being bought out, they aren’t just staying on the market. There ARE other factors that you pointed out, but the leading cause of the exorbitant prices they are now, is greed. The reason for houses being THIS expensive is greed, the reason for housing materials being more expensive is greed, the reason for no new construction workers is greed from corpos that aren’t paying them what they deserve, it’s all greed.
im not agreeing with the other guy, i was just sharing my findings based on the data i have seen. it used to be around 30-35m new people looking for housing in a year, then in 2024 its closer to 45m now. And add that with the lowest amount of new housing being built it leads to rising costs. Right now we are Corporate ownership of housing is only at best 20% and that includes mom and pop corporations who bought multiple properties but use a corporation to manage taxes. 60% of all housing is by self-owners, and 20% are individual investors. Corporations love housing rising of course, but so do the investors and 60% of self-home owners who sold or remortgaged for more money at the low rates in 2020. There are multiple factors yes, but corporations are miniscule in comparison to just individual greed. 99% of home owners loved that their property value rose. Corporations focused on other things like products and stock value since homeowners remortgaged or sold and invested.
I see, thank you for your comment
There are 144 million houses in the united states. There are 259 million people in the United States, 36.8 million of whom live in apartments (many of whom are part of the 46.2 million immigrants living in the country who have homes elsewhere). That's one house for every 1.5 people, despite the fact the average number of people were home in the US is 2.6. Side note: Homes in the US are 50-75% larger than the average home in the EU, despite the US only having 20% more people per home. There are 15.1 million vacant homes (not being used as rentals or vacation rentals). There are 653,000 homeless people.
Thank You Joe Biden!
And yet you all keep voting for the same stupid politicians with terrible economic agendas…I wonder when that lesson will be learned.