|
Gerund posted:Apodments literally only exist because of an arbitrage where one protection counted kitchens and the other counted bedrooms. There is no market for them otherwise. If there wasn't a market for Apodments then why do people rent them? Maybe because they are meeting a need in the market.
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2018 01:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 01:21 |
|
|
KingFisher posted:If there wasn't a market for Apodments then why do people rent them? yes people have determined that mostly homeless is better than entirely homeless
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2018 01:57
|
|
|
KingFisher posted:for people dont need all of the features of a studio or 1br Wow
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2018 03:26
|
|
|
KingFisher posted:Apodments aren't supoosed to be "affordable housing" they are entry level market rate housing units for people dont need all of the features of a studio or 1br. "Living wage" specifically means positions for about 80% of the population where job creators don't have to take big risks on hiring and training. Quit conflating them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2018 03:27
|
|
|
"Minimum wage" is a public policy where we can talk about the purpose of policy. "Apodments" is a capitalist invention, because we've allowed capitalists to own housing, and the capitalists determined they could make money by renting "apodments". Their purpose has always been to enrich capitalists at the expense of renters, the same as every other time capitalists rent seek. If you dislike apodments, but you aren't fighting for public housing, you have misunderstood the problem.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2018 03:44
|
|
|
KingFisher posted:Apodments aren't supoosed to be "affordable housing" they are entry level market rate housing units for people dont need all of the features of a studio or 1br. Ah yes, such bourgeoisie features such as:
You know where else you can fit a twin bed and a toilet? A converted walk-in closet. "What's the big issue, it has a door you can close while you're inside." 
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2018 03:55
|
|
|
KingFisher posted:Apodments aren't supoosed to be "affordable housing" they are entry level market rate housing units for people dont need all of the features of a studio or 1br. They set a new price floor that adjusted everything else upwards. They are not "entry level" anything. They are the "new normal" for people that can only afford what should be a studio or better. They should have never been allowed to be built. Its pure profiteering mounted on developer/politician corruption. White-knighting the landlord class puts you in the wrong camp. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acT_PSAZ7BQ
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2018 04:01
|
|
|
This is like payday loans all over again. No one ever intended payday loans to be an affordable alternative to other types of credit, they exist for capitalists to make money. Banning payday loans or apodments doesn't actually improve anyone's life, it just reduces the options people have. The correct solution is to create a society where these things aren't necessary, and then people won't use them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2018 04:08
|
|
|
The next logical step will be having people inhabit storage units a la Snow Crash. We're getting really uncomfortably close to some let them eat cake poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2018 04:40
|
|
|
anthonypants posted:Minimum wage jobs aren't supposed to be "living wage" they are entry level market rate employment opportunities for people who only need their foot in the door and are living with their parents. Don't disparage the creators they make take umbrage on our hubris to question them and banish us to the camps in the jungle. Also I don't think anyone noticed Kingfishers red text.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2018 04:43
|
|
|
Jack2142 posted:Don't disparage the creators they make take umbrage on our hubris to question them and banish us to the camps in the jungle. I keep my red text because a EU goon wrongly thought me a german overlord chasitizing the profligate greeks for borrowing and spending thier way into oblivion. They made that bed and deserved what they got. I wasnt the one complaining that apodments are conflated with or should be any form of affordable housing. The apodment I rent had the following in the main room: Door Desk Chair Bed Sink and counter Refrigerator Microwave Closet In the bathroom: Toilet Shower Shelving For a student without much stuff this was a great option. And if i needed to use a stove/oven it was literally 20 down the hall. I only needed to use it a few times a week and that was fine. Same with the washer and dryer. Likewise I never conflated nor complained about a minimum wage vs "living wage" but since it was brought up. $15 hr x 40 hrs per week x 52 weeks =$ 31200 annual income. Per person annual income $31200 x 2 people per unit=$62400 in yearly income. .3 rent fraction of income x household income $62400 =$18720. $18720 per year rent budget / 12 months= $1560. So if rent for 2br was $1560 per month then the minimum wage wouls be enough. Unfortunately the affluebt of the city do not want apartments near them becauae then they might have to live near poor/brown people. I would prefer the city build about 100k units of housing with about half being "affordable housing" the rest being market rate to subsidize the former. The city should make it a policy to build more housing supply to force down the cost of rent to be about $500 per bedroom. Any time rents creep up, the city builds another 5,000 units to absorb the demand and keep the price down. We dont need more "affordable housing" we need so much housing it is affordable for all. I want the city to decommodify housing through abundance. KingFisher fucked around with this message at 05:21 on Jul 31, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2018 05:14
|
|
|
twodot posted:This is like payday loans all over again. No one ever intended payday loans to be an affordable alternative to other types of credit, they exist for capitalists to make money. Banning payday loans or apodments doesn't actually improve anyone's life, it just reduces the options people have. The correct solution is to create a society where these things aren't necessary, and then people won't use them. Eh, I don't know about that. Payday loan lenders are extremely predatory, and typically hurt their victims more than they are helped. Giving people just enough rope to hang themselves is not particularly beneficial for society, even if some people manage to navigate through and get to the other side. Moreover, there is a broad range of reforms available, from state and local regulation of lenders to the creation of nonprofit microlenders to having the Post Office open up a debit banking and lending program. It's not black and white. And apodments are in the same boat: there's better solutions out there - sometimes society needs a kick in the right direction to start looking for them. Kaal fucked around with this message at 05:45 on Jul 31, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2018 05:43
|
|
|
KingFisher posted:If there wasn't a market for Apodments then why do people rent them? SEDUs serve to occupy space like all landlord parcels, but also allow for the landlord to claim more tax breaks on their investment compared to expense. If SEDUs could exist outside of that, you would see them outside of the under-a-dozen Kitchens model.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2018 06:26
|
|
|
KingFisher posted:I keep my red text because a EU goon wrongly thought me a german overlord chasitizing the profligate greeks for borrowing and spending thier way into oblivion. They made that bed and deserved what they got. The problem is students who work 40 hours per week 52 weeks of the year are a very small portion of the demand. Have you ever worked a minimum wage job? If you had you'd realize most of them don't get scheduled a consistent 40 hours per week, many are closer to 30 and some as little as 20 and work second jobs. These people also have families and often only one income, these are a large part of the population who aren't being helped by apodments. Building them instead of housing that can accommodate a family but also struggling students with roommates makes more sense for our society. Building more high priced homes for single young people doesn't alleviate the demand for 2br units with an oven. Also it's funny that you count a "door" as a "feature" of your apodment, I guess a door isn't to be expected in a home these days.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2018 07:22
|
|
|
ElCondemn posted:The problem is students who work 40 hours per week 52 weeks of the year are a very small portion of the demand. Have you ever worked a minimum wage job? If you had you'd realize most of them don't get scheduled a consistent 40 hours per week, many are closer to 30 and some as little as 20 and work second jobs. These people also have families and often only one income, these are a large part of the population who aren't being helped by apodments. Building them instead of housing that can accommodate a family but also struggling students with roommates makes more sense for our society. Building more high priced homes for single young people doesn't alleviate the demand for 2br units with an oven. I have worked a minimum wage job, at a Pizza Hut during high sxhool. Minimum wage jobs aren't supposed to be "living wage" jobs that support a family, they are an entry level position that allows you to work around something else like school giving new workers the ability to learn valuable life skills. The person you are describing working a minimum wage for 20-30 hours a week with another job or school, or with a family or unemployed roomates are the population of people who earn less than 80% of AMI and who should be served by the "affordable housing" provided by the city and non-profits. SEDU/Apodments aren't being built for this population "instead" of 2br units with ovens that 1 person working 20 hours a week minimum wage with unemployed roomates can afford. In fact nobody builds housing like that for those people because they cannot possibly pay enough rent to cover the cost of the building and maintaining the housing. So please stop presenting this false choice. If large multifamily apartment developments could be placed on those sites they would be. The alternative would be 4x $1.5 million dollar luxury town homes. I say building 20 units of entry level housing is a better use of the land. ( The real solution is to eminent domain the entire block and build 2 500 foot multifamily apartment towers). Apodments are being built for people who can pay market rate rents for smaller units with less features. Not marginally employed people who need deeply subsidized rental assistance. If you want more "affordable housing" to be produced for this type of person the current process for doing that is to tax new "high priced homes for single young people". For example the proposed market rate housing tower for the showbox site. Becauase the city has no program of large scale public housing ( like Vienna or Singapore) the only way we will get more "affordable housing" is by incentivizing private developers to build a massively amount of market rate housing so it can be taxed to produce the "affordable housing" The Showbox site development would pay $10.85 per square foot producing 5ish million dollars in taxes to build "affordable housing". Unfortunately the city and the charities they work with spend 300k per unit of low income they produce. So maybe like 15 units. This is part of why the Seattle head tax was such a mistake, it wouldn't even begin to attack the problem because it only produces a handful of "affordable housing" units per year. 47 million dollars a year to build 40 something units of low income housing wont do anything to alleviate the hundreds of low income people being pushed out of the city each week. We cannot solve this problem until we decide to radcially change the cost structure of how housing is produced. KingFisher fucked around with this message at 08:00 on Jul 31, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2018 07:52
|
|
|
KingFisher posted:I have worked a minimum wage job, at a Pizza Hut during high sxhool. Minimum wage jobs aren't supposed to be "living wage" jobs that support a family, they are an entry level position that allows you to work around something else like school giving new workers the ability to learn valuable life skills. While I'm glad you immediately adopted the right lingo for SEDUs once someone with more knowledge about them informed you of it, it would really help if you also took from it that SEDUs are not serving ANY market other than arbitrage of tax incentives. SEDUs do not exist outside of the sub-dozen kitchen alignment for a reason. You constantly shift who exactly SEDUs are "for" for a reason.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2018 08:02
|
|
|
Wow it's almost like they're arguing in bad faith
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2018 08:05
|
|
|
KingFisher posted:I have worked a minimum wage job, at a Pizza Hut during high sxhool. Minimum wage jobs aren't supposed to be "living wage" jobs that support a family, they are an entry level position that allows you to work around something else like school giving new workers the ability to learn valuable life skills. Except they aren't. There's never been enough 'good' jobs for everyone. It's easier to make lovely jobs livable. How to do that has already been figured out. No one has ever figured out how to create enough 'good' jobs for all the adults. Never. It has never happened. So why keep rationalizing their poverty this way?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2018 08:21
|
|
|
Accretionist posted:Except they aren't. There's never been enough 'good' jobs for everyone. It's easier to make lovely jobs livable. How to do that has already been figured out. No one has ever figured out how to create enough 'good' jobs for all the adults. Never. It has never happened. So why keep rationalizing their poverty this way? Someone already mockingly turned that particular argument around on him because of his view on closet living and then he just went ahead and embraced it anyway. I'm going to guess the red text is at least broad strokes accurate in this case, despite my typical inclination to give people the benefit of the doubt.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2018 08:49
|
|
|
Accretionist posted:Except they aren't. There's never been enough 'good' jobs for everyone. It's easier to make lovely jobs livable. How to do that has already been figured out. No one has ever figured out how to create enough 'good' jobs for all the adults. Never. It has never happened. So why keep rationalizing their poverty this way? I'm fine if you think the correct public policy is to raise the minimum wage to be a "living wage". I'm pretty sure MMM theoryists actually do think we could create enough "good" jobs for all adults using a job garuantee, and the fedeal govt's ability to print money to pay people. That is a perfectly legitimate policy question to consider and argue about. People are in poverty because thier labor is not valuable enough to demand a wage to support our socially costructed concepts of an acceptable life. If we want to dramatically increase the minimum wage I would expect a significant portion of the population would become unemployable due to thier low labor value. So long as we have a govt. job garuantee to keep these non viable workers employed then the effects of this shift would not be too traumatic. Though it would probably produce a much more stratified economy and people wpuld be loathe to avoid a garuanteed job due to stigma. I imagine the amount of social change might be similar to my desire to de-commodify housing through a massive increase in government supplied housing. I'd like a land value tax as well, but you know: We can't have noce things due to Rich White Seattle Liberals deseperate to keep anyone different from them away. KingFisher fucked around with this message at 09:14 on Jul 31, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2018 09:07
|
|
|
DrNutt posted:Someone already mockingly turned that particular argument around on him because of his view on closet living and then he just went ahead and embraced it anyway. I'm going to guess the red text is at least broad strokes accurate in this case, despite my typical inclination to give people the benefit of the doubt. I got thier point, and apodments are better than the alternative which would be McMansions. Our segregationist zoning prevent anything else. I will always support the option which produces a greater supply of housing units. I am housing supply maximalist, I want so much housing supply boomer land lords are desperate to attracter renters. Even the poor or brown ones. KingFisher fucked around with this message at 09:15 on Jul 31, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2018 09:09
|
|
|
KingFisher posted:I got thier point, and apodments are better than the alternative which would be McMansions. Even if you aren't lying and saying what you think sounds good to the thread, it's not like you have to force everyone to live like college freshman to maximize the housing supply.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2018 14:49
|
|
|
DrNutt posted:Even if you aren't lying and saying what you think sounds good to the thread, it's not like you have to force everyone to live like college freshman to maximize the housing supply. College freshman that, strangely, only live in places that have under a dozen kitchens per building
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2018 15:47
|
|
|
KingFisher posted:I have worked a minimum wage job, at a Pizza Hut during high sxhool. Minimum wage jobs aren't supposed to be "living wage" jobs that support a family, they are an entry level position that allows you to work around something else like school giving new workers the ability to learn valuable life skills. You’re misunderstanding my point. I’m not saying these buildings are for poor people earning min wage and working 20 hours a week. I’m saying in 10-20 years when rich young people don’t want to live there anymore the buildings will not be useful to any other demographic. You’re creating a class of housing that only a specific type of person can use, it will never be able to house people who have kids or even spouses. Also pretending like grown adults don’t make up the majority of low wage workers is stupid as gently caress. Frankly your “can’t do anything about it unless you radically change society” attitude is the reason his poo poo keeps being perpetuated.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2018 16:06
|
|
|
ElCondemn posted:You’re misunderstanding my point. I’m not saying these buildings are for poor people earning min wage and working 20 hours a week. I’m saying in 10-20 years when rich young people don’t want to live there anymore the buildings will not be useful to any other demographic. You’re creating a class of housing that only a specific type of person can use, it will never be able to house people who have kids or even spouses. You're arguing with Roger Valdez. He isn't misunderstanding anything.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2018 17:13
|
|
|
lol https://twitter.com/AaronMesh/status/1023978071991312385
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2018 20:17
|
|
|
good
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2018 20:24
|
|
|
KingFisher posted:I have worked a minimum wage job, at a Pizza Hut during high sxhool. Minimum wage jobs aren't supposed to be "living wage" jobs that support a family, they are an entry level position that allows you to work around something else like school giving new workers the ability to learn valuable life skills. Surprise! There's not enough jobs for everyone and you can't pay for college with a summer job anymore. It's time for a basic income and also abolish apodments forever because they suck.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2018 02:35
|
|
|
KingFisher posted:People are in poverty because thier labor is not valuable enough to demand a wage to support our socially costructed concepts of an acceptable life. Or because they're weak and we can screw them on compensation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2018 02:51
|
|
|
KingFisher posted:Minimum wage jobs aren't supposed to be "living wage" jobs that support a family, they are an entry level position that allows you to work around something else like school giving new workers the ability to learn valuable life skills.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2018 02:54
|
|
|
Oh boy, look who's coming to dinner this weekend. https://twitter.com/Hatewatch/status/1024020815052861441
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2018 03:25
|
|
|
inkblot posted:Oh boy, look who's coming to dinner this weekend.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2018 03:31
|
|
|
DrNutt posted:Even if you aren't lying and saying what you think sounds good to the thread, it's not like you have to force everyone to live like college freshman to maximize the housing supply. Nobody forces you to live an apodment friend, its a type of housing some people choose in a market with a variety of choices. There are lots of places to live in the city, most of the market rate housing being more expensive than an apodment. And like I said above the alternative is not normal multifamily housing. The alternative would be townhouse mansions. More housing is better.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2018 03:37
|
|
|
Since minimum wage jobs are only for kids or young adults I think implementing the plan in Logans Run to handle people 30 + still working for minimum wage will solve poverty.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2018 03:48
|
|
|
people with fewer responsibilities getting fewer resources isn't like a terrible state of affairs but lol at thinking that the current system is even remotely distributing salaries in that manner
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2018 03:53
|
|
|
KingFisher posted:Nobody forces you to live an apodment friend, its a type of housing some people choose in a market with a variety of choices. Repeating the same dumbass reductive sources needed arguments over and over again won't make them right, friend. There's a multitude of housing possibilities between "literally a closet" and "obscene McMansion." The people you think would solve housing by building more housing would be happy for units to sit vacant instead of lowering prices into the affordable range. There is no market solution here, the solution is wresting housing out of the hands of rentier class parasites and nationalizing it. And the more I think about what you're saying the dumber I realize it is. The places where McMansions are built are not the places that developers are clambering to end zoning laws so they can build apodments. Unless you think developers are trying to build apodments in suburban sprawl or McMansions in cities with limited development space. e: well I wouldn't put the 2nd past most developers I guess but luckily there's only so much space left in urban areas. Professor Beetus fucked around with this message at 04:05 on Aug 1, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2018 04:00
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:They set a new price floor that adjusted everything else upwards. They are not "entry level" anything. They are the "new normal" for people that can only afford what should be a studio or better. They should have never been allowed to be built. Its pure profiteering mounted on developer/politician corruption. Its basically this. It allowed landlords a lovely rear end excuse to raise the rent on EVERYONE else. It allowed developers to claim the bottom rung of housing and its destroying the secondary student/shared housing market right NOW. The fix is increased min wage, unless you want to go mandate affordable housing (...lol).
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2018 04:11
|
|
|
Apodments are just a rebranding of old school flophouses, except they are priced like a studio or 1 br used to be 6-7 years ago.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2018 04:14
|
|
|
Capitalists have never needed any sort of excuse to extract rents. Talking about anything other than this:DrNutt posted:There is no market solution here, the solution is wresting housing out of the hands of rentier class parasites and nationalizing it. edit: I guess the excuse of "single family home owners vote for zoning that prevents us from building more units" is a rather convenient excuse for capitalists, but I'll maintain they don't actually need it. twodot fucked around with this message at 04:52 on Aug 1, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2018 04:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 01:21 |
|
|
twodot posted:Capitalists have never needed any sort of excuse to extract rents. Talking about anything other than this: On the other hand, reasonable regulations on capitalists can bring up the quality of life for renters before we have full Star Trek Utopia, so no it's not a total waste of time to legislate certain rights and standard. Until the glorious revolution comes we are still toiling under capital after all.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2018 04:52
|
|