We need homes. A lot of homes. Not just affordable, but also middle-income homes.

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Folks making 90-120k a year just adjust if they want anything resembling schools that aren't 90%+ FARMS.

If they're Black they live in the nicer parts of Prince George's. If they're Hispanic, they live in parts of Northern VA or Silver Spring. If they're White, they live in Frederick or Winchester.

Or they accept living in a TH in Loudoun or Montgomery is their lot in life.

This is very true. At some point, everyone needs to make concessions.


Yes, everyone. Popular neighborhoods need to accept upzoning. That is their lot in life. You need to live out to the exurbs if you want want to guarantee your neighborhood will remain all SFHs.



upzoning makes cities more expensive not less. this idea that if we just build more, then there will be lower housing prices is just a bunch of hokum. it has never been true in dc. navy yard is the latest in a long list of examples. way more housing there now, and it's exponentially more expensive than it was 10 years ago.


Upzoning makes housing more desirable as it's increases customer density which attracts more retail/restaurant/entertainment venues.

The landowners make out. The people who move in, do so willingly, meaning they're happier there than whatever alternatives were available.

The landowners didn't make the land. The builders make money, but have to compete with other builders, and can't charge too much.

Tax the land. Untax labor, sales, wages, buildings, etc.


No, upzoning destroys neighborhoods that want to remain neighborhoods of SFHs. Rather than destroy SFH neighborhoods, spend money upgrading poorer areas.

Yup. These are all just people who don't want to move to poorer areas but cannot afford to live in more affluent areas. At some point people need to come to terms with their class status. You may have grown up in an UMC suburb and think you have a "good" job, but that is not enough to maintain the class status that you were born into. I am really sorry that these people are learning of their own downward mobility the hard way.


No, these are literally just people trying to find a place to live. The way you talk about who you imagine is demanding more affordable housing is very telling. You think people are just jealous of you. But it’s actually people need a place to live within a reasonable distance of their job. The end.

The most common way someone “tries to find a place to live” is to evaluate their budget and then look at the market to identify areas that meet their budget.

The old saw in real estate is that you have location, quality and price - pick two. You cannot have it all. The people who are advocating policy change are doing it out of spite because it will not result in them being able to benefit (they will still not be able to afford it) but they will harm others.

“Affordable housing” only works with low input costs - cheap land and cheap materials. Cheap land does not exist in dense urban areas and the more density that is brought the more expensive the land becomes. If you want affordable housing, the only way it has ever been delivered in the history of this country is in new build suburbs. You may not like it, but it’s facts.

If you like living in the city and you want it to more affordable, the only way that has ever been accomplished in this country is through massive construction of SFH in the suburbs.

That’s it folks. Live in reality and make your choices.


I'd argue that the problem is that many, many people in this area can no longer afford 2 out of the 3. We could (location and price, although the location is really only favorable for one of our commutes) but have two stable, decent paying jobs. Anything affordable for a family making the median HHI in this area is going to be crappy and far away, more often they end up spending more on housing that is advised by economists and end up living paycheck to paycheck.

That’s just not true. There are plenty of quality homes at good prices. They are just in locations that you don’t want.


We have a house, I'm all good. Can you provide some examples of quality houses at good prices for a family with a median HHI of $85k, which is approximately the median HHI for DC?


Are you familiar with PG county? It's right across the border from DC and you can buy a three-bedroom house for $350,000.


Too high for a family with that salary, unless they have savings for a good down payment.


Maybe too high for you but apparently not too high for all the people in PG county with average incomes who own homes.


Are you aware of the foreclosure rate in PG county during the 2008 financial crisis? Plenty of people on homes they could not afford.


There was a *massive* number of foreclosures nationwide during the 2008 financial crisis -- that's, uh, what made it a crisis. It was hardly limited to PG county.
Anonymous
Why does it have to be “white entitlement?” We are pretty multicultural when it comes
To entitlement in the DMV.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Why does it have to be “white entitlement?” We are pretty multicultural when it comes
To entitlement in the DMV.

Because middle class Black people, like me, have spent our entire lives doing what we can to be successful because that is what has been demanded of us. Michelle Obama once called Barak a "hustler" and all Black people need to hustle somewhat to get ahead because, and the data is clear, Black people born into wealthy families are less likely to maintain their economic status into adulthood than equivalent whites.

Black people in this city have spent decades begging this city to help them more, only to be told that nothing can be done. In the meantime, a whole generation of entitled white brats comes along and decides that they don't need to work for anything. They can just have whatever they want and it is disturbing to me that in some ways they are getting it. Who do you think is benefitting from these "inclusive" development units?

Meanwhile Black people keep getting left behind but these entitled white people sure love to us as props for their games. "Upzoning" Cleveland Park is not going to do anything for any person of color in this city. In fact, it probably hurts Black people on net because it promotes private development and investment $ in already rich neighborhoods. What I have learned is that the city won't invest in your neighborhood until some white people move in. It looks like white people made it to the Anacostia River and decided that they had enough.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I don't know if this is a fair comparison. But I could not afford my house when I bought it more than 25 years ago for $350k at a 7.5 percent interest rate. It was an absolute struggle with little kids. We had to have a yard sale once to pay for groceries. We had no furniture for several years. But my salary eventually caught up with the mortgage payments. Now it's almost paid off. I don't know if people are willing to make that kind of sacrifice now. That said, when an entry level home is $900k, it completely throws off the equation that helped me enter the market. I'm glad it worked out because my house ended up being one of the best investments I ever made.


It would be extremely hard to qualify for a mortgage now if your income was that tight. It's less that people are unwilling to make the sacrifice as it's not really in their hands. Plus anyone who watched the subprime crisis knows that if the housing market takes a hit and the economy collapses, the bailout will go to the banks while any homeowners who can't make their payments get foreclosed on and their credit ruined. It makes people less willing to risk buying at the very top of their budget (at least it did in our case).

No it’s not. If anything, underwriting requirements have gotten substantially looser, although there was some pull back after the GFC. Everyone who buys a home today is equally broke for a while.

Our family had a similar experience. We slept on a mattress on the floor for a year after buying our house in 2011.

What is clear to me is that there are just a lot of people today who don’t feel that they need to sacrifice.


+1. We, an immigrant family, lived in a horrific roach-ridden rental apartment for 4 years to save up for a modest house, purchased for $150K. We ate a lot of bread and potatoes. Our furniture was made up of things other people had thrown out and we'd picked up from the curb. I used babysitting money and cash made delivering pizza flyers to pay for things like school field trips, or I just didn't go.

I'll argue 'til I'm blue in the face for the right to things like access to healthcare. But home ownership is not a right.

Great story and I fully agree with you.

Somehow these people have gone from “the rent is too high”, which I think is fair, to “I have a right to buy the home I want, where I want for the price I can afford”, which is ridiculous. These people bristle at being called entitled but honestly that’s all that I can see is white entitlement.


Some of you are incredibly out of touch.

You’re correct. I am having a really hard time sympathizing with your white entitlement.

I lived in a basement apartment that flooded regularly with a baby for 2 years to save up to buy my house.

So I may be out of touch with your entitlement, but you seem to be out of touch with the concept of sacrifice.


WTF? So because you lived in unsanitary conditions with a baby everyone else should too? You’re lucky you both didn’t get super sick from mold.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Why does it have to be “white entitlement?” We are pretty multicultural when it comes
To entitlement in the DMV.

Because middle class Black people, like me, have spent our entire lives doing what we can to be successful because that is what has been demanded of us. Michelle Obama once called Barak a "hustler" and all Black people need to hustle somewhat to get ahead because, and the data is clear, Black people born into wealthy families are less likely to maintain their economic status into adulthood than equivalent whites.

Black people in this city have spent decades begging this city to help them more, only to be told that nothing can be done. In the meantime, a whole generation of entitled white brats comes along and decides that they don't need to work for anything. They can just have whatever they want and it is disturbing to me that in some ways they are getting it. Who do you think is benefitting from these "inclusive" development units?

Meanwhile Black people keep getting left behind but these entitled white people sure love to us as props for their games. "Upzoning" Cleveland Park is not going to do anything for any person of color in this city. In fact, it probably hurts Black people on net because it promotes private development and investment $ in already rich neighborhoods. What I have learned is that the city won't invest in your neighborhood until some white people move in. It looks like white people made it to the Anacostia River and decided that they had enough.


So beyond not upzoning Cleveland Park, what should be done? Not saying I disagree, because it’s really just going to provide more options to those on the cusp of affording that area vs. those that actually need more options, but I dont know that the status quo is the answer either.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Folks making 90-120k a year just adjust if they want anything resembling schools that aren't 90%+ FARMS.

If they're Black they live in the nicer parts of Prince George's. If they're Hispanic, they live in parts of Northern VA or Silver Spring. If they're White, they live in Frederick or Winchester.

Or they accept living in a TH in Loudoun or Montgomery is their lot in life.

This is very true. At some point, everyone needs to make concessions.


Yes, everyone. Popular neighborhoods need to accept upzoning. That is their lot in life. You need to live out to the exurbs if you want want to guarantee your neighborhood will remain all SFHs.



upzoning makes cities more expensive not less. this idea that if we just build more, then there will be lower housing prices is just a bunch of hokum. it has never been true in dc. navy yard is the latest in a long list of examples. way more housing there now, and it's exponentially more expensive than it was 10 years ago.


Upzoning makes housing more desirable as it's increases customer density which attracts more retail/restaurant/entertainment venues.

The landowners make out. The people who move in, do so willingly, meaning they're happier there than whatever alternatives were available.

The landowners didn't make the land. The builders make money, but have to compete with other builders, and can't charge too much.

Tax the land. Untax labor, sales, wages, buildings, etc.


No, upzoning destroys neighborhoods that want to remain neighborhoods of SFHs. Rather than destroy SFH neighborhoods, spend money upgrading poorer areas.

Yup. These are all just people who don't want to move to poorer areas but cannot afford to live in more affluent areas. At some point people need to come to terms with their class status. You may have grown up in an UMC suburb and think you have a "good" job, but that is not enough to maintain the class status that you were born into. I am really sorry that these people are learning of their own downward mobility the hard way.


No, these are literally just people trying to find a place to live. The way you talk about who you imagine is demanding more affordable housing is very telling. You think people are just jealous of you. But it’s actually people need a place to live within a reasonable distance of their job. The end.

The most common way someone “tries to find a place to live” is to evaluate their budget and then look at the market to identify areas that meet their budget.

The old saw in real estate is that you have location, quality and price - pick two. You cannot have it all. The people who are advocating policy change are doing it out of spite because it will not result in them being able to benefit (they will still not be able to afford it) but they will harm others.

“Affordable housing” only works with low input costs - cheap land and cheap materials. Cheap land does not exist in dense urban areas and the more density that is brought the more expensive the land becomes. If you want affordable housing, the only way it has ever been delivered in the history of this country is in new build suburbs. You may not like it, but it’s facts.

If you like living in the city and you want it to more affordable, the only way that has ever been accomplished in this country is through massive construction of SFH in the suburbs.

That’s it folks. Live in reality and make your choices.


I'd argue that the problem is that many, many people in this area can no longer afford 2 out of the 3. We could (location and price, although the location is really only favorable for one of our commutes) but have two stable, decent paying jobs. Anything affordable for a family making the median HHI in this area is going to be crappy and far away, more often they end up spending more on housing that is advised by economists and end up living paycheck to paycheck.

That’s just not true. There are plenty of quality homes at good prices. They are just in locations that you don’t want.


We have a house, I'm all good. Can you provide some examples of quality houses at good prices for a family with a median HHI of $85k, which is approximately the median HHI for DC?

60% of the population of DC rents, so the median family at $85k rents and there are plenty of rental units to choose from that are affordable at that income level.


Exactly- unless they bought 20 years ago, those people are renting, not homeowners. This is essentially one of my coworkers, they are immigrants who came here with little savings. He makes about that and his wife is a SAHM because one of their kids is special needs, they rent a 2BR in a neighborhood with good public schools and have no plans to buy. The way they talk they are living the dream, owning a home is an American thing.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Folks making 90-120k a year just adjust if they want anything resembling schools that aren't 90%+ FARMS.

If they're Black they live in the nicer parts of Prince George's. If they're Hispanic, they live in parts of Northern VA or Silver Spring. If they're White, they live in Frederick or Winchester.

Or they accept living in a TH in Loudoun or Montgomery is their lot in life.

This is very true. At some point, everyone needs to make concessions.


Yes, everyone. Popular neighborhoods need to accept upzoning. That is their lot in life. You need to live out to the exurbs if you want want to guarantee your neighborhood will remain all SFHs.



upzoning makes cities more expensive not less. this idea that if we just build more, then there will be lower housing prices is just a bunch of hokum. it has never been true in dc. navy yard is the latest in a long list of examples. way more housing there now, and it's exponentially more expensive than it was 10 years ago.


Upzoning makes housing more desirable as it's increases customer density which attracts more retail/restaurant/entertainment venues.

The landowners make out. The people who move in, do so willingly, meaning they're happier there than whatever alternatives were available.

The landowners didn't make the land. The builders make money, but have to compete with other builders, and can't charge too much.

Tax the land. Untax labor, sales, wages, buildings, etc.


No, upzoning destroys neighborhoods that want to remain neighborhoods of SFHs. Rather than destroy SFH neighborhoods, spend money upgrading poorer areas.

Yup. These are all just people who don't want to move to poorer areas but cannot afford to live in more affluent areas. At some point people need to come to terms with their class status. You may have grown up in an UMC suburb and think you have a "good" job, but that is not enough to maintain the class status that you were born into. I am really sorry that these people are learning of their own downward mobility the hard way.


No, these are literally just people trying to find a place to live. The way you talk about who you imagine is demanding more affordable housing is very telling. You think people are just jealous of you. But it’s actually people need a place to live within a reasonable distance of their job. The end.

The most common way someone “tries to find a place to live” is to evaluate their budget and then look at the market to identify areas that meet their budget.

The old saw in real estate is that you have location, quality and price - pick two. You cannot have it all. The people who are advocating policy change are doing it out of spite because it will not result in them being able to benefit (they will still not be able to afford it) but they will harm others.

“Affordable housing” only works with low input costs - cheap land and cheap materials. Cheap land does not exist in dense urban areas and the more density that is brought the more expensive the land becomes. If you want affordable housing, the only way it has ever been delivered in the history of this country is in new build suburbs. You may not like it, but it’s facts.

If you like living in the city and you want it to more affordable, the only way that has ever been accomplished in this country is through massive construction of SFH in the suburbs.

That’s it folks. Live in reality and make your choices.


I'd argue that the problem is that many, many people in this area can no longer afford 2 out of the 3. We could (location and price, although the location is really only favorable for one of our commutes) but have two stable, decent paying jobs. Anything affordable for a family making the median HHI in this area is going to be crappy and far away, more often they end up spending more on housing that is advised by economists and end up living paycheck to paycheck.

That’s just not true. There are plenty of quality homes at good prices. They are just in locations that you don’t want.


We have a house, I'm all good. Can you provide some examples of quality houses at good prices for a family with a median HHI of $85k, which is approximately the median HHI for DC?


Are you familiar with PG county? It's right across the border from DC and you can buy a three-bedroom house for $350,000.


This. Also Aspen Hill.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Why does it have to be “white entitlement?” We are pretty multicultural when it comes
To entitlement in the DMV.

Because middle class Black people, like me, have spent our entire lives doing what we can to be successful because that is what has been demanded of us. Michelle Obama once called Barak a "hustler" and all Black people need to hustle somewhat to get ahead because, and the data is clear, Black people born into wealthy families are less likely to maintain their economic status into adulthood than equivalent whites.

Black people in this city have spent decades begging this city to help them more, only to be told that nothing can be done. In the meantime, a whole generation of entitled white brats comes along and decides that they don't need to work for anything. They can just have whatever they want and it is disturbing to me that in some ways they are getting it. Who do you think is benefitting from these "inclusive" development units?

Meanwhile Black people keep getting left behind but these entitled white people sure love to us as props for their games. "Upzoning" Cleveland Park is not going to do anything for any person of color in this city. In fact, it probably hurts Black people on net because it promotes private development and investment $ in already rich neighborhoods. What I have learned is that the city won't invest in your neighborhood until some white people move in. It looks like white people made it to the Anacostia River and decided that they had enough.


So beyond not upzoning Cleveland Park, what should be done? Not saying I disagree, because it’s really just going to provide more options to those on the cusp of affording that area vs. those that actually need more options, but I dont know that the status quo is the answer either.


Upzoning in Ward 3 will do nothing more than drive those people out of the city. The better approach is to make the less desirable areas more desirable. DC Govt certainly can fund infrastructure, public parks, rec centers, bridges, libraries, schools in other parts of DC that would those parts more attractive. DC has done some of this, particularly with some libraries, schools, and Frederick Douglas Memorial Bridge. But much more can be done of course. Find commercial property that can be converted to residential, whether condos or townhouses. This entire discussion seems to focus on what happens in Ward 3. The parts of the City that have natural beauty care not in Ward 3. Look at the River. Plenty of opportunity to turn DC into a River city.

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Why does it have to be “white entitlement?” We are pretty multicultural when it comes
To entitlement in the DMV.

Because middle class Black people, like me, have spent our entire lives doing what we can to be successful because that is what has been demanded of us. Michelle Obama once called Barak a "hustler" and all Black people need to hustle somewhat to get ahead because, and the data is clear, Black people born into wealthy families are less likely to maintain their economic status into adulthood than equivalent whites.

Black people in this city have spent decades begging this city to help them more, only to be told that nothing can be done. In the meantime, a whole generation of entitled white brats comes along and decides that they don't need to work for anything. They can just have whatever they want and it is disturbing to me that in some ways they are getting it. Who do you think is benefitting from these "inclusive" development units?

Meanwhile Black people keep getting left behind but these entitled white people sure love to us as props for their games. "Upzoning" Cleveland Park is not going to do anything for any person of color in this city. In fact, it probably hurts Black people on net because it promotes private development and investment $ in already rich neighborhoods. What I have learned is that the city won't invest in your neighborhood until some white people move in. It looks like white people made it to the Anacostia River and decided that they had enough.



Yeash. You have a lot of blah, blah, blah that I tune out when you assume that every white person who wants so to live in a decent house is entitled. And you should really learn how to spell “Barack.” Especially, since you are on a first name basis and all.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Why does it have to be “white entitlement?” We are pretty multicultural when it comes
To entitlement in the DMV.

Because middle class Black people, like me, have spent our entire lives doing what we can to be successful because that is what has been demanded of us. Michelle Obama once called Barak a "hustler" and all Black people need to hustle somewhat to get ahead because, and the data is clear, Black people born into wealthy families are less likely to maintain their economic status into adulthood than equivalent whites.

Black people in this city have spent decades begging this city to help them more, only to be told that nothing can be done. In the meantime, a whole generation of entitled white brats comes along and decides that they don't need to work for anything. They can just have whatever they want and it is disturbing to me that in some ways they are getting it. Who do you think is benefitting from these "inclusive" development units?

Meanwhile Black people keep getting left behind but these entitled white people sure love to us as props for their games. "Upzoning" Cleveland Park is not going to do anything for any person of color in this city. In fact, it probably hurts Black people on net because it promotes private development and investment $ in already rich neighborhoods. What I have learned is that the city won't invest in your neighborhood until some white people move in. It looks like white people made it to the Anacostia River and decided that they had enough.



Yeash. You have a lot of blah, blah, blah that I tune out when you assume that every white person who wants so to live in a decent house is entitled. And you should really learn how to spell “Barack.” Especially, since you are on a first name basis and all.

I imagine you to be someone that likes to use words like "exclusionary zoning" to explain why you deserve to be able to buy property in a white neighborhood. Thanks for exposing yourself and your priorities. It is clarifying to be proved right that you are using using us to promote yourselves.
Anonymous
"I imagine you to be someone that likes to use words like "exclusionary zoning" to explain why you deserve to be able to buy property in a white neighborhood. Thanks for exposing yourself and your priorities. It is clarifying to be proved right that you are using using us to promote yourselves."

You actually could not be more wrong. And your response is so immature, that I think maybe you are a teenager or younger?

I'm just asking you not to group all white people into a single category. Some of us not only support, but also are in need of progressive housing policies. But what ever, you keep judging people based on your myopic POV.
Anonymous
Adding more housing units will make housing affordable. Just look at Navy Yard.

It's probably the most densely populated neighborhood now in the city. It's almost nothing but condos.

And 600 square foot condos there cost....more than the single family homes that were knocked down to make way for them? Wait, that wasnt supposed to happen. I thought increasing density was supposed to push prices down?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Adding more housing units will make housing affordable. Just look at Navy Yard.

It's probably the most densely populated neighborhood now in the city. It's almost nothing but condos.

And 600 square foot condos there cost....more than the single family homes that were knocked down to make way for them? Wait, that wasnt supposed to happen. I thought increasing density was supposed to push prices down?


But there are houses available for them elsewhere- they won’t be competing with the condo dwellers for the SFH in PG, for instance.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Adding more housing units will make housing affordable. Just look at Navy Yard.

It's probably the most densely populated neighborhood now in the city. It's almost nothing but condos.

And 600 square foot condos there cost....more than the single family homes that were knocked down to make way for them? Wait, that wasnt supposed to happen. I thought increasing density was supposed to push prices down?


Density suppresses increases in housing prices - this has been thoroughly documented in research. It's a settled matter.

The SFHs in Near Southeast were knocked down when 395 was built, the redevelopment of Navy Yard displaced mostly warehouses and night clubs, but that's neither here nor there. You're examining this from the wrong perspective. The question you should be asking is how much more expensive SFHs in Navy Yard would be if those condos hadn't been built.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Adding more housing units will make housing affordable. Just look at Navy Yard.

It's probably the most densely populated neighborhood now in the city. It's almost nothing but condos.

And 600 square foot condos there cost....more than the single family homes that were knocked down to make way for them? Wait, that wasnt supposed to happen. I thought increasing density was supposed to push prices down?


But there are houses available for them elsewhere- they won’t be competing with the condo dwellers for the SFH in PG, for instance.



Oh i see. So the black people who were pushed out of Navy Yard to make way for white people can go live somewhere else? That's not in DC? That's what you're saying? Cool, cool. Not racist at all.
post reply Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics
Message Quick Reply
Go to: