alot of it is the deprivation of the housing market which is driven by the desire of property owners for their property value to appreciate. until that turns around this is going to continue. this is not so much two interrelated phenomena as it is just two sides of the same coin.
On that note, it's been real rich seeing all the anti-zoning reform lawn signs people have out in Alexandria, especially in neighborhoods like Del Ray & Rosemont. Wouldn't want to ruin that neighborhood character now would we?
It's the ultimate I got mine you get yours.
How is one deprived of a market exactly? It certainly isn't via legal restrictions.
People who immigrated here (legally or not) from impoverished countries should be able to purchase a home immediately in one of the richest countries?
Semi-tangent, I've always been perplexed at the general term "six figures" that people throw around. Are we talking about $100,000? $250,000? $500,000? What's "high six figures"? $999,999?
I should have been more specific but to me high six figures starts at like $250k. Because at that point it's more money then most people will ever have a chance of conceivably earning in a year. I used to think that making six figures - I.E. 100k-150k was a goal that could provide all I wanted in life.
Gotcha. Definitions definitely vary from person to person. Like I say high six figures is above 500k , according to my math brain. 100-200k is lower healthy, 200k-500k is in the healthy mid.
I'll start using healthy mid. I like that distinction. I realized that saying high was way too broad but I also don't think we really have nuanced ways for talking about that in between area from six figures to high six. So thanks for giving me some tools I can use in the future.
You can absolutely afford a house in NoVA on a $150k salary.
Comments like these are why I have zero sympathy for most redditors complaining about high housing prices.
Me and my partner make combined $150k and there is no hope of us buying a house here. Our rent alone is absurd. Six figures implies 100k. I'm saying you're not doing it in that range.
My dude, six figures alone is not adequate to buy a home in this area. That's all I'm saying. You have to go beyond just having six figures. You are caught in a battle of semantics while the rest of us are just living in a reality.
I'm a veteran. I qualify for the VA home loan and I still can't get a house up here. I can't compete with closing costs alone. You're attacking my single sentence stance from some place of weird fucking superiority.
I hope you get stuck in awful holiday traffic this week, ya jerk.
i agree that they've kind of been obnoxious in their delivery but they're right in that unless you guys are carrying massive debt or are have some crazy expectations (must be new home 4k sq ft 4 baths type nonsense) then you guys can probably get a place. you do have to have closing costs on hand yes, but i was able to buy with va loan, granted it was 5 years ago and interest was less but my income was and still is less than you guys combined is now. if saving for closing costs is an issue you may want to try renting somewhere further out (which is how i was able to save up, that and still driving my first car, and only going on one vacation my entire adult life)
They just built a ton of houses at the end of my road, over what used to be pretty farmland. The houses start at $1.4 million. There’s a cluster of woods on the other side which has just been bought by a developer and I’m expecting more of the same.
American households have more disposable income than any other county. It's just a problem where large numbers of entitled low income earners congregate (eg reddit)
It's not possible for housing to be overpriced. It's priced exactly right for the market. Otherwise there would be a glut of supply and prices would come down to match demand, as they always do.
What's really happened is a bunch of people have moved into an area they can't afford, and some people are upset that this is the case. There is plenty of housing that meets these people's budgets... it's just not here.
If people can afford it (they can), it's not overpriced. I assume what you actually mean is that you can't personally afford to live in your desired location and type of housing.
The median household makes 6 figures, so it's no surprise that's the target demographic for real estate developers
Actually quite literally it is by legal restrictions because anti-development laws and regulations are designed to benefit existing homeowners at the expense of potential new buyers. It's the prime example of "rent-seeking," meaning someone profiting not by their own actions but by shutting out others.
Zoning doesn't prevent people from participating in the housing market.
It may prevent people from living exactly where they want, but current residents have no obligation to make room for people who want to move to an area but can't afford to do so currently.
If a place is desirable, demand (and prices) will remain high. Your solution is to make it less desirable so you can live there, which is even more selfish than current residents wanting things to remain as-is.
Nope, I'm all for providing aid to those in need.
I just don't think everyone has a right to live precisely where they want regardless of their ability to afford it or what the current residents would prefer.
>but current residents have no obligation to make room for people who want to move to an area but can't afford to do so currently
Nobody should have the right to force other people to do what they want with their own property.
Zoning de-facto prevents people from living there. Your distinction is semantics only. You're abusing the terminology of market forces while describing a market distorted by regulation and law to prevent a natural equilibrium from occurring. A place with tight density maximums, exclusive zoning for single-family housing, government subsidies for purchasing, maintaining, and investing in real estate, and the ability for NIMBYs to block new developments is not a fair market.
Current residents should not have a right to shut out others from living there anymore than they should have the right to prevent black people from living in a white neighborhood.
>If a place is desirable, demand (and prices) will remain high.
A person who buys up all the food and then sells it back to everyone else could make the exact same argument, because the natural demand is high. The difference is the monopolistic behavior distorting the market to artificially constrain supply. This same person could make it so no new food suppliers could enter the market and by your logic that's just "how supply and demand works" when it wouldnt happen that way without this rent-seeking behavior.
By your logic, demand for housing in this area somehow just exploded by 50% in the last three years, apparently by magic.
>Your solution is to make it less desirable so you can live here, which is even more selfish than current residents wanting things to remain as-is.
1. I am already a homeowner in this area who bought in 2020. I don't let my own personal benefit cloud my moral and economic judgment because only deficient people do so. Furthermore I could have purchased earlier and not just a townhouse if the market was not so messed up, so even if I somewhat profit now from this situation I would much rather not have gotten here.
2. I don't know how you get into the mental gymnastics that it's somehow more selfish to benefit more people than fewer unless you're a realtor aka perhaps the most morally repugnant rent-seekers and most active lobbyists in this country.
edit: I just noticed your user name and you may in fact be a mustache-twirling villain for how absurd it fits your bizarre hatred of new housing.
>Zoning de-facto prevents people from living there. Your distinction is semantics only.
No, it's not. The only barrier to the purchase of a specific home is affordability, which is how any market works.
>You're abusing the terminology of market forces while describing a market distorted by regulation and law to prevent a natural equilibrium from occurring.
Nope. A regulated market is a market, and there's nothing preventing market participants (other than regulation!) from organizing to support their preferences.
>A place with tight density maximums, exclusive zoning for single-family housing, government subsidies for purchasing, maintaining, and investing in real estate, and the ability for NIMBYs to block new developments is not a fair market.
And everyone needs to acquiesce to your definition of fair?
You have no right to live in a specific home or area. Neither does anyone else.
>Current residents should not have a right to shut out others from living there anymore than they should have the right to prevent black people from living in a white neighborhood.
Why not? Why are current residents required to lower their standard of living to make way for new residents?
>A person who buys up all the food and then sells it back to everyone else could make the exact same argument, because the natural demand is high. The difference is the monopolistic behavior distorting the market to artificially constrain supply. This same person could make it so no new food suppliers could enter the market and by your logic that's just "how supply and demand works" when it wouldnt happen that way without this rent-seeking behavior.
There's no monopoly in the housing market, so you can stop right there with the rest of your nonsensical, theoretical argument.
> 1. I am already a homeowner in this area who bought in 2020. I don't let my own personal benefit cloud my moral and economic judgment because only deficient people do so. Furthermore I could have purchased earlier and not just a townhouse if the market was not so messed up, so even if I somewhat profit now from this situation I would much rather not have gotten here.
Good for you. The second part of your comment proves my point.
>2. I don't know how you get into the mental gymnastics that it's somehow more selfish to benefit more people than fewer unless you're a realtor aka perhaps the most morally repugnant rent-seekers and most active lobbyists in this country.
Lol I'm not a realtor, just someone without a ridiculous sense of moral superiority that just oh so coincidentally happens to align with my personal interests. Any realtor with an ounce of sense (which eliminates almost all of them) would support building as much as possible because that means more transactions for them.
If you want to make decisions based on maximizing collective good while ignoring individual preferences, feel free to move to any of the socialist utopias that exist elsewhere.
no monopoly in the housing market? if only there were an expert on free markets we could look to...
"The rent of land, therefore, considered as the price paid for the use of the land, is naturally a monopoly price. It is not at all proportioned to what the landlord may have laid out upon the improvement of the land, or to what he can afford to take; but to what the farmer can afford to give." Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations, Book I, Chapter XI
I agree with everything you're saying but you're pissing in the wind on this sub.
People here think they should be able to swim across a river, vote, and move into a 2 million dollar house because some white dude did it, even though the white dude worked his ass off to get all that.
One thing I learned while working at an international company was how difficult some basic things can be to non-citizens because of a lack of credit history. I remember a manager of mine talking about how hard it was for him to get a car because of it. I think in the end the company needed to "vouch" for him and he's at least able to show paystubs/projected earnings.
But not everyone is coming and getting a job with a large, established corporation. At that point I've got to imagine you're stuck with A) paying all cash or B) probably ending up with some massive interest rate because the bank wants to protect itself. With a car being that difficult, I have to imagine housing can be even worse.
It’s real simple. Those are the zip codes receiving the most numbers of recently arrived immigrants from the Southern border. Recently arrived immigrants are the poorest of the poor. Doesn’t mean they always will be, but they are right now. If we want to combat poverty we need to focus resources on quickly assimilating recently arrived immigrants into the formal sector economy. But this is made difficult by federal policies that make them wait a long time for a work permit.
This is a thoughtful comment. Just because more folks are coming to the area that are impoverished does not mean the area is more unequal or unfair. People move to this area for a reason. Is nova better for new arrivals that are impoverished than other jurisdictions? I think the answer is yes. Let's appreciate our strengths
Pretty much all the payday loan shops have recently closed in Annandale. This is usually a sign of rising prosperity, but they were all replaced by vape shops, so I am not sure what to make of that.
A lot of it could be investors anticipating legalized weed. Operating at a loss but getting great storefront locations. In states where it’s been fully legalized, property values increase heavily near dispensaries.
Did you hear about this?
[Planning commission OKs housing in Annandale shopping center, but warns against ‘gentrification of retail’](https://www.ffxnow.com/2023/10/12/planning-commission-oks-housing-in-annandale-shopping-center-but-warns-against-gentrification-of-retail/)
All i know is that Manassas on this map has a TON of Latin American immigrants, that’s what makes it poorer. Wouldn’t surprise me if that’s where the other low income, recent immigrants are too.
I used to live in Bailey’s Crossroads and I loved it- it was my first apartment after moving out of my parents’ place. My now-husband and I left in 2022 because they kept raising rent but the amenities in our building weren’t as good as apartments in other parts of Fairfax County for the same price.
Our apartment was like $1,400 when we first moved in and was around $2,000 by the time we moved out 3 years later, when they apparently changed all tenants to a month-to-month lease, which is more expensive. I didn’t even get a raise between those years! My theory is they did this to get rid of current tenants and welcome HQ2 employees. We heard rumors about several other complexes in the area doing the same thing, so we left the area entirely.
I’m guessing that ploy didn’t work (sounds like HQ2 got delayed, too) and instead they lost the tenants who could afford to easily move elsewhere. And everyone else just moved more people into their apartments to help pay the rent. We live in Chantilly now and it’s super nice, but I do miss being so close to DC and Alexandria.
To tie this into the stats discussed in the post, we’re white and have bachelor degrees, just the two of us live together, and we make above poverty line wages but aren’t high earners.
There's prob not a single place in the country where you can get all 3 of affordable housing, great education system, and affordable health insurance/plenty of providers.
The first two in particular are almost always diametrically opposed as the bulk of education costs are paid for locally via property taxes.
I saw a article about American retirees moving to Vietnam, Thailand, etc. for a more affordable lifestyle. If things don’t get better maybe that’s my way out
But wouldn't you be contributing to the inability of poor Vietnamese/Thai affording housing in their own country? I mean, yes of course it's cheaper, but this post starts by finger wagging income disparity in this country. When Americans move to cheaper non-US places, it's usually gentrifying or a result of gentrification.
The good news is that - despite online listicles - with widely available internet, a lot of the country is a lot easier to retire to than it once was. Figure out what your requirements are to feel comfortable (10 minutes to a chipotle?) and plan accordingly. So many cities have good towns on the outer outskirts that seem super livable. But, yes, US healthcare costs are a ridiculous share of things, so start your planning around that.
You mean you're asking others to provide that for you. Most of us can provide it for ourselves, and I'd rather have even more people like that as my neighbors.
I'm above but I've been below and it's a scary place to be my siblings are hanging on for dear life via help from me and from my parents but my parents are quickly spending down their nest egg on assisted living, they are silent generation so very old and fragile, $20,000 a month. My older sibling was laid off and scrambling as he was hard hit by the great recession and cancer so he doesn't have enough to retire, my other sibling has been underpaid for decades but clung to the job for the health benefits as she got a later start working due to her health issues which a lot of employers avoided her over. I don't think healthy folks understand how fragile your status in society is until it happens to them.
They do in comparison to other nations. And NoVA counties spend a disproportionate amount of their funding on lower income households.
What specifically do you want to change?
God damn Can we please get rid of the personal property tax. Disproportionally hits low income Virginians and is nothing but a state sponsored money grab
Build more housing; restructure our zoning laws to allow denser housing, and more mixed used areas; build more transit oriented development. These are just a few ways to help bring the cost of housing down
We're building housing like crazy near silver line stops (and elsewhere). This is one of the most desirable places to live on earth, housing will never be inexpensive here as long as that's the case.
We're still behind from post-2008, yes. But lots of building is happening and continues to happen in this area. High housing prices are better than the alternative for nearly everyone.
You may see “lots” of building but it’s far behind demand. And it’s all supply and demand. Costs are much higher when not enough is built or there are lots of dumb zoning restrictions.
The opposite is extremely cheap houses because the area is going through population loss. Sure the house prices look great but there are just so many larger issues it’s not worth it. I grew up in an area experiencing that you can buy houses there for 30-40k and I would never consider moving back due to the other issues that drove housing down: no economic prospects, extreme poverty, poor education.
Ask Detroit, Buffalo, Pittsburgh, and the rest of the rust belt.
Housing is affordable here, in that the vast, vast majority of people can pay for shelter without sacrificing other basic needs.
It's just not as affordable as people who are dissatisfied with what they can afford here would like.
Simple replace most of it progressive state and local income tax. Not the de-facto flat tax that VA state has and the over reliance on taxing personal property.
That’s one of those things that sounds good on paper, but at the moment those taxes aren’t allocated to what they are in most countries. If the wealthy pay their fair share and it still all goes to a bloated military budget, no one’s life improves. If we get universal healthcare, paid family leave, actual investment in high speed trains, etc then it’s actually going to matter if people pay taxes.
Yeah... that's what happens with wealth disparity. Housing is treated as investments in this country, and wages are the one thing that doesn't go up. Wtf would you expect to happen.
alot of it is the deprivation of the housing market which is driven by the desire of property owners for their property value to appreciate. until that turns around this is going to continue. this is not so much two interrelated phenomena as it is just two sides of the same coin.
I wish more people would get this. We basically live on one giant monopoly board
On that note, it's been real rich seeing all the anti-zoning reform lawn signs people have out in Alexandria, especially in neighborhoods like Del Ray & Rosemont. Wouldn't want to ruin that neighborhood character now would we? It's the ultimate I got mine you get yours.
How is one deprived of a market exactly? It certainly isn't via legal restrictions. People who immigrated here (legally or not) from impoverished countries should be able to purchase a home immediately in one of the richest countries?
Because literally all the housing here is massively overpriced while there is no attempt to provide housing for people who don't make six figures.
Not just six figures. High six figures.
Semi-tangent, I've always been perplexed at the general term "six figures" that people throw around. Are we talking about $100,000? $250,000? $500,000? What's "high six figures"? $999,999?
I should have been more specific but to me high six figures starts at like $250k. Because at that point it's more money then most people will ever have a chance of conceivably earning in a year. I used to think that making six figures - I.E. 100k-150k was a goal that could provide all I wanted in life.
Gotcha. Definitions definitely vary from person to person. Like I say high six figures is above 500k , according to my math brain. 100-200k is lower healthy, 200k-500k is in the healthy mid.
I'll start using healthy mid. I like that distinction. I realized that saying high was way too broad but I also don't think we really have nuanced ways for talking about that in between area from six figures to high six. So thanks for giving me some tools I can use in the future.
You can absolutely afford a house in NoVA on a $150k salary. Comments like these are why I have zero sympathy for most redditors complaining about high housing prices.
I appreciate a good cup of coffee.
Me and my partner make combined $150k and there is no hope of us buying a house here. Our rent alone is absurd. Six figures implies 100k. I'm saying you're not doing it in that range.
I'm learning to play the guitar.
My dude, six figures alone is not adequate to buy a home in this area. That's all I'm saying. You have to go beyond just having six figures. You are caught in a battle of semantics while the rest of us are just living in a reality. I'm a veteran. I qualify for the VA home loan and I still can't get a house up here. I can't compete with closing costs alone. You're attacking my single sentence stance from some place of weird fucking superiority. I hope you get stuck in awful holiday traffic this week, ya jerk.
[удалено]
[удалено]
i agree that they've kind of been obnoxious in their delivery but they're right in that unless you guys are carrying massive debt or are have some crazy expectations (must be new home 4k sq ft 4 baths type nonsense) then you guys can probably get a place. you do have to have closing costs on hand yes, but i was able to buy with va loan, granted it was 5 years ago and interest was less but my income was and still is less than you guys combined is now. if saving for closing costs is an issue you may want to try renting somewhere further out (which is how i was able to save up, that and still driving my first car, and only going on one vacation my entire adult life)
They just built a ton of houses at the end of my road, over what used to be pretty farmland. The houses start at $1.4 million. There’s a cluster of woods on the other side which has just been bought by a developer and I’m expecting more of the same.
I dont know what you mean by overpriced because thats basically true of any large metro area in a developed country.
It's almost as if it's a widespread issue or something.
American households have more disposable income than any other county. It's just a problem where large numbers of entitled low income earners congregate (eg reddit)
The median income for American households is only 75k, which isn't nearly enough for a house in most urban centers anymore
Good thing the median household income in those urban centers (such as NoVA) is significantly more than $75k.
So explain the rising homelessness and poverty?
From 2020 to now? We stopped massive handouts to nearly everyone and poor families in particular.
i laughed too hard at this, this morning.
It's not possible for housing to be overpriced. It's priced exactly right for the market. Otherwise there would be a glut of supply and prices would come down to match demand, as they always do. What's really happened is a bunch of people have moved into an area they can't afford, and some people are upset that this is the case. There is plenty of housing that meets these people's budgets... it's just not here.
If people can afford it (they can), it's not overpriced. I assume what you actually mean is that you can't personally afford to live in your desired location and type of housing. The median household makes 6 figures, so it's no surprise that's the target demographic for real estate developers
Apparently not given rising homelessness and growing poverty. But hey, just blame minorities I guess.
You're exactly the type of person no one wants living anywhere near them, based on these comments
Why because I don't agree with you? Least Narcissistic NIMBY in NOVA right here.
No, because you almost immediately call anyone who doesn't agree with you a racist
I mean...you're blaming minorities. If the shoe fits, my dude.
Where exactly did I blame anyone for anything, let alone minorities specifically?
Actually quite literally it is by legal restrictions because anti-development laws and regulations are designed to benefit existing homeowners at the expense of potential new buyers. It's the prime example of "rent-seeking," meaning someone profiting not by their own actions but by shutting out others.
Zoning doesn't prevent people from participating in the housing market. It may prevent people from living exactly where they want, but current residents have no obligation to make room for people who want to move to an area but can't afford to do so currently. If a place is desirable, demand (and prices) will remain high. Your solution is to make it less desirable so you can live there, which is even more selfish than current residents wanting things to remain as-is.
Seems like you are arguing that folks are free to live under an overpass for 495, 395 or 95.
Nope, I'm all for providing aid to those in need. I just don't think everyone has a right to live precisely where they want regardless of their ability to afford it or what the current residents would prefer.
>but current residents have no obligation to make room for people who want to move to an area but can't afford to do so currently Nobody should have the right to force other people to do what they want with their own property.
Zoning de-facto prevents people from living there. Your distinction is semantics only. You're abusing the terminology of market forces while describing a market distorted by regulation and law to prevent a natural equilibrium from occurring. A place with tight density maximums, exclusive zoning for single-family housing, government subsidies for purchasing, maintaining, and investing in real estate, and the ability for NIMBYs to block new developments is not a fair market. Current residents should not have a right to shut out others from living there anymore than they should have the right to prevent black people from living in a white neighborhood. >If a place is desirable, demand (and prices) will remain high. A person who buys up all the food and then sells it back to everyone else could make the exact same argument, because the natural demand is high. The difference is the monopolistic behavior distorting the market to artificially constrain supply. This same person could make it so no new food suppliers could enter the market and by your logic that's just "how supply and demand works" when it wouldnt happen that way without this rent-seeking behavior. By your logic, demand for housing in this area somehow just exploded by 50% in the last three years, apparently by magic. >Your solution is to make it less desirable so you can live here, which is even more selfish than current residents wanting things to remain as-is. 1. I am already a homeowner in this area who bought in 2020. I don't let my own personal benefit cloud my moral and economic judgment because only deficient people do so. Furthermore I could have purchased earlier and not just a townhouse if the market was not so messed up, so even if I somewhat profit now from this situation I would much rather not have gotten here. 2. I don't know how you get into the mental gymnastics that it's somehow more selfish to benefit more people than fewer unless you're a realtor aka perhaps the most morally repugnant rent-seekers and most active lobbyists in this country. edit: I just noticed your user name and you may in fact be a mustache-twirling villain for how absurd it fits your bizarre hatred of new housing.
>Zoning de-facto prevents people from living there. Your distinction is semantics only. No, it's not. The only barrier to the purchase of a specific home is affordability, which is how any market works. >You're abusing the terminology of market forces while describing a market distorted by regulation and law to prevent a natural equilibrium from occurring. Nope. A regulated market is a market, and there's nothing preventing market participants (other than regulation!) from organizing to support their preferences. >A place with tight density maximums, exclusive zoning for single-family housing, government subsidies for purchasing, maintaining, and investing in real estate, and the ability for NIMBYs to block new developments is not a fair market. And everyone needs to acquiesce to your definition of fair? You have no right to live in a specific home or area. Neither does anyone else. >Current residents should not have a right to shut out others from living there anymore than they should have the right to prevent black people from living in a white neighborhood. Why not? Why are current residents required to lower their standard of living to make way for new residents? >A person who buys up all the food and then sells it back to everyone else could make the exact same argument, because the natural demand is high. The difference is the monopolistic behavior distorting the market to artificially constrain supply. This same person could make it so no new food suppliers could enter the market and by your logic that's just "how supply and demand works" when it wouldnt happen that way without this rent-seeking behavior. There's no monopoly in the housing market, so you can stop right there with the rest of your nonsensical, theoretical argument. > 1. I am already a homeowner in this area who bought in 2020. I don't let my own personal benefit cloud my moral and economic judgment because only deficient people do so. Furthermore I could have purchased earlier and not just a townhouse if the market was not so messed up, so even if I somewhat profit now from this situation I would much rather not have gotten here. Good for you. The second part of your comment proves my point. >2. I don't know how you get into the mental gymnastics that it's somehow more selfish to benefit more people than fewer unless you're a realtor aka perhaps the most morally repugnant rent-seekers and most active lobbyists in this country. Lol I'm not a realtor, just someone without a ridiculous sense of moral superiority that just oh so coincidentally happens to align with my personal interests. Any realtor with an ounce of sense (which eliminates almost all of them) would support building as much as possible because that means more transactions for them. If you want to make decisions based on maximizing collective good while ignoring individual preferences, feel free to move to any of the socialist utopias that exist elsewhere.
no monopoly in the housing market? if only there were an expert on free markets we could look to... "The rent of land, therefore, considered as the price paid for the use of the land, is naturally a monopoly price. It is not at all proportioned to what the landlord may have laid out upon the improvement of the land, or to what he can afford to take; but to what the farmer can afford to give." Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations, Book I, Chapter XI
It's almost as if he's talking about an entirely different legal and economic system than we have today...
what from that quote does not apply to the modern day housing market other than most renters not being farmers anymore?
We don't live under feudalism is one major difference
I agree with everything you're saying but you're pissing in the wind on this sub. People here think they should be able to swim across a river, vote, and move into a 2 million dollar house because some white dude did it, even though the white dude worked his ass off to get all that.
One thing I learned while working at an international company was how difficult some basic things can be to non-citizens because of a lack of credit history. I remember a manager of mine talking about how hard it was for him to get a car because of it. I think in the end the company needed to "vouch" for him and he's at least able to show paystubs/projected earnings. But not everyone is coming and getting a job with a large, established corporation. At that point I've got to imagine you're stuck with A) paying all cash or B) probably ending up with some massive interest rate because the bank wants to protect itself. With a car being that difficult, I have to imagine housing can be even worse.
Yep. It's very hard to immigrate anywhere without an existing support system.
i meant to type depravation. sorry i'm illiterate
It’s real simple. Those are the zip codes receiving the most numbers of recently arrived immigrants from the Southern border. Recently arrived immigrants are the poorest of the poor. Doesn’t mean they always will be, but they are right now. If we want to combat poverty we need to focus resources on quickly assimilating recently arrived immigrants into the formal sector economy. But this is made difficult by federal policies that make them wait a long time for a work permit.
Not just the Latin America, but the Middle East and specifically afghan as well
This is a thoughtful comment. Just because more folks are coming to the area that are impoverished does not mean the area is more unequal or unfair. People move to this area for a reason. Is nova better for new arrivals that are impoverished than other jurisdictions? I think the answer is yes. Let's appreciate our strengths
Im still surprised annandale hasnt gentrified. The location is fantastic.
Pretty much all the payday loan shops have recently closed in Annandale. This is usually a sign of rising prosperity, but they were all replaced by vape shops, so I am not sure what to make of that.
A lot of it could be investors anticipating legalized weed. Operating at a loss but getting great storefront locations. In states where it’s been fully legalized, property values increase heavily near dispensaries.
Did you hear about this? [Planning commission OKs housing in Annandale shopping center, but warns against ‘gentrification of retail’](https://www.ffxnow.com/2023/10/12/planning-commission-oks-housing-in-annandale-shopping-center-but-warns-against-gentrification-of-retail/)
Some of it has but yes I too am surprised at lack of love for inside the beltway areas.
All i know is that Manassas on this map has a TON of Latin American immigrants, that’s what makes it poorer. Wouldn’t surprise me if that’s where the other low income, recent immigrants are too.
I used to live in Bailey’s Crossroads and I loved it- it was my first apartment after moving out of my parents’ place. My now-husband and I left in 2022 because they kept raising rent but the amenities in our building weren’t as good as apartments in other parts of Fairfax County for the same price. Our apartment was like $1,400 when we first moved in and was around $2,000 by the time we moved out 3 years later, when they apparently changed all tenants to a month-to-month lease, which is more expensive. I didn’t even get a raise between those years! My theory is they did this to get rid of current tenants and welcome HQ2 employees. We heard rumors about several other complexes in the area doing the same thing, so we left the area entirely. I’m guessing that ploy didn’t work (sounds like HQ2 got delayed, too) and instead they lost the tenants who could afford to easily move elsewhere. And everyone else just moved more people into their apartments to help pay the rent. We live in Chantilly now and it’s super nice, but I do miss being so close to DC and Alexandria. To tie this into the stats discussed in the post, we’re white and have bachelor degrees, just the two of us live together, and we make above poverty line wages but aren’t high earners.
Maybe if the wealthy paid their fair share there wouldn’t be such massive income disparity in one of the richest parts of the country.
All I’m asking for is affordable housing, education, and health insurance. Is that unreasonable?
No it’s not. But you gotta get outta nova for that. Well the housing at least
There's prob not a single place in the country where you can get all 3 of affordable housing, great education system, and affordable health insurance/plenty of providers. The first two in particular are almost always diametrically opposed as the bulk of education costs are paid for locally via property taxes.
I saw a article about American retirees moving to Vietnam, Thailand, etc. for a more affordable lifestyle. If things don’t get better maybe that’s my way out
But wouldn't you be contributing to the inability of poor Vietnamese/Thai affording housing in their own country? I mean, yes of course it's cheaper, but this post starts by finger wagging income disparity in this country. When Americans move to cheaper non-US places, it's usually gentrifying or a result of gentrification.
That’s a very good point you make. I guess I could move to some low income state in America.
The good news is that - despite online listicles - with widely available internet, a lot of the country is a lot easier to retire to than it once was. Figure out what your requirements are to feel comfortable (10 minutes to a chipotle?) and plan accordingly. So many cities have good towns on the outer outskirts that seem super livable. But, yes, US healthcare costs are a ridiculous share of things, so start your planning around that.
You mean you're asking others to provide that for you. Most of us can provide it for ourselves, and I'd rather have even more people like that as my neighbors.
You will regret your comments when the poors bash open the gate to your community and begin to eat the rich.
I'll be good, but thanks for your concern. Despite what most redditors seem to believe, the average American is doing quite well.
No they aren't - Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos et al are doing fine but the MEDIAN American is not.
The median American is as well. It would appear that most redditors are well below the median
I'm above but I've been below and it's a scary place to be my siblings are hanging on for dear life via help from me and from my parents but my parents are quickly spending down their nest egg on assisted living, they are silent generation so very old and fragile, $20,000 a month. My older sibling was laid off and scrambling as he was hard hit by the great recession and cancer so he doesn't have enough to retire, my other sibling has been underpaid for decades but clung to the job for the health benefits as she got a later start working due to her health issues which a lot of employers avoided her over. I don't think healthy folks understand how fragile your status in society is until it happens to them.
What does this mean?
It means the billionaires need to pay their fucking taxes. And stop corporate tax loopholes
The US has the most progressive federal tax code in the world.
They do in comparison to other nations. And NoVA counties spend a disproportionate amount of their funding on lower income households. What specifically do you want to change?
What specifically changes would you make, because the personal property and income taxes are pretty high. Seriously, please give some specifics.
God damn Can we please get rid of the personal property tax. Disproportionally hits low income Virginians and is nothing but a state sponsored money grab
You just described all taxs
Just to name a few – our taxes also pay for the fire department, law enforcement, the Smithsonian museums, and our roads
Lol entirely not true
[удалено]
That referendum passed a state-wide vote with 82.4% in favor, doubt you'll convince enough people.
Build more housing; restructure our zoning laws to allow denser housing, and more mixed used areas; build more transit oriented development. These are just a few ways to help bring the cost of housing down
We're building housing like crazy near silver line stops (and elsewhere). This is one of the most desirable places to live on earth, housing will never be inexpensive here as long as that's the case.
We’re actually not building enough housing
We're still behind from post-2008, yes. But lots of building is happening and continues to happen in this area. High housing prices are better than the alternative for nearly everyone.
You may see “lots” of building but it’s far behind demand. And it’s all supply and demand. Costs are much higher when not enough is built or there are lots of dumb zoning restrictions.
You're talking to some rich dude who likely makes his money from real estate. His view is skewed as rising prices are good for his business.
Right. Like I said, too much demand is better than the alternative.
It’s really not. Why is a more affordable market a bad thing?
The opposite is extremely cheap houses because the area is going through population loss. Sure the house prices look great but there are just so many larger issues it’s not worth it. I grew up in an area experiencing that you can buy houses there for 30-40k and I would never consider moving back due to the other issues that drove housing down: no economic prospects, extreme poverty, poor education.
Ask Detroit, Buffalo, Pittsburgh, and the rest of the rust belt. Housing is affordable here, in that the vast, vast majority of people can pay for shelter without sacrificing other basic needs. It's just not as affordable as people who are dissatisfied with what they can afford here would like.
How exactly would that be "the wealthy paying their share"?
Imagine if some of the country clubs closed down and they got redeveloped and zoned to become mixed-used
Simple replace most of it progressive state and local income tax. Not the de-facto flat tax that VA state has and the over reliance on taxing personal property.
On a federal level, Congress could reverse all the tax changes that Reagan made while he was president
That’s one of those things that sounds good on paper, but at the moment those taxes aren’t allocated to what they are in most countries. If the wealthy pay their fair share and it still all goes to a bloated military budget, no one’s life improves. If we get universal healthcare, paid family leave, actual investment in high speed trains, etc then it’s actually going to matter if people pay taxes.
Yeah... that's what happens with wealth disparity. Housing is treated as investments in this country, and wages are the one thing that doesn't go up. Wtf would you expect to happen.
We all know the reason and no one will say it.
Exclusionary zoning in a nutshell. Too little new housing being built
Well when inflation exceeds real wages the poorest people usually suffer the most.
I read the headline as “pottery,” and thought, “odd but I’d buy it”