Reconsidering the wisdom of home ownership

[gone-ot]

...SIMPLE answer: MOVE down here to one of the "SNOW BIRD" retiree communitees that are comprised 101% of 55+ white-haired (hence the "snow bird" reference) golden oldies:

SUN CITY...near Phoenix
GREEN VALLEY...south of Tucson
SADDLE BROOK...north of Tucson
FOOTHILLS...west of Yuma.

[Frank Lee]

I may have to check that out!

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by Thymeclock

The dirty little secret is that the "the total annual income of a minimum wage worker"...

Furthermore, who exactly are those minimum wage workers? I'd bet that a lot of them are high school kids working at the local fast food joints, housewives & retired folks seeking something that will get them out of the house for a few hours, and similar. People with low skills, in other words.

The corrolary should be obvious: if you want to earn more than minimum wage, learn a skill (or a collection of them) that people are willing to pay more than minimum wage for.

Oh, and there's a second corrolary: not many people stay in that minimum wage group for long. It's a population in constant flux, people starting out move into it, and (with some effort & planning on their part) eventually move out. It may be trite to claim that "the poor are always with us", but they don't stamp the label "poor" on your forehead at birth.

[Thymeclock]

Originally Posted by Old Tele man

...SIMPLE answer: MOVE down here to one of the "SNOW BIRD" retiree communitees that are comprised 101% of 55+ white-haired (hence the "snow bird" reference) golden oldies:

SUN CITY...near Phoenix
GREEN VALLEY...south of Tucson
SADDLE BROOK...north of Tucson
FOOTHILLS...west of Yuma.

I'm wondering what these communities you describe will look like in 20-30 years when their predominantly now aging (then aged) population can no longer live independently on their own, due to their advanced age. I get the feeling that if they moved there from places afar, and have no family in the area to interact with, they may have willfully distanced themselves from whatever family they had before their migration.

If a community is only comprised of oldsters who can't live forever (as none of us can), there might be a lot of homes for sale and available for cheap prices in those locales in the not too distant future.

[Thymeclock]

Originally Posted by jamesqf

Furthermore, who exactly are those minimum wage workers? I'd bet that a lot of them are high school kids working at the local fast food joints, housewives & retired folks seeking something that will get them out of the house for a few hours, and similar. People with low skills, in other words.

The corrolary should be obvious: if you want to earn more than minimum wage, learn a skill (or a collection of them) that people are willing to pay more than minimum wage for.

Oh, and there's a second corrolary: not many people stay in that minimum wage group for long. It's a population in constant flux, people starting out move into it, and (with some effort & planning on their part) eventually move out. It may be trite to claim that "the poor are always with us", but they don't stamp the label "poor" on your forehead at birth.

And let's add to it: the labels "rich" and "poor" have now become relative concepts in modern America.

The poorest person in America today is well off compared to a few places on earth that still experience political chaos and a lack of basic human needs of survival (usually stemming from internal local and national political strife, blood feuds and oppression).

The poorest person in America today enjoys a level of comfort and basic standard of living that was not available even to many of the richest and most powerful people several centuries ago. Is that not progress, in terms of creature comfort and material benefit?

"Rich" and "poor" are now reduced to relative terms. Nothing more than that.

Yes, "the poor will always be with us". But "poor" compared to what? Bill Gates? Michael Bloomberg? Hell, we are ALL poor compared to those few billionaires. But the "poor" aren't starving and won't starve in a civilized world, either, WILL THEY?.

None of their improvement of quality of life was brought about through Socialism or the old Marxist playbook ideology: Blame the rich. Confiscate their wealth. Pure retribution that solves nothing, improves nothing.

Capitalism isn't perfect. Nor is democracy. It's only better than the alternatives.

[gone-ot]

Originally Posted by Thymeclock

I'm wondering what these communities you describe will look like in 20-30 years when their predominantly now aging (then aged) population can no longer live independently on their own, due to their advanced age. I get the feeling that if they moved there from places afar, and have no family in the area to interact with, they may have willfully distanced themselves from whatever family they had before their migration.

If a community is only comprised of oldsters who can't live forever (as none of us can), there might be a lot of homes for sale and available for cheap prices in those locales in the not too distant future.

...short answer: Yes, there's a lot of turn-over, but only 55+ people can purchase (HOA) so there's a "filter" on the input as well as on the output (death).

[Varn]

I'm in general agreement with thyme on this one. I have been fortunate to give volunteer vision and medical care to people in rural areas of south and central america. These people didn't have money enough for shoes or a floor in their house. Their children studied by the light of a single lightbulb in the mud (adobe) one room house.

People would walk and ride in buses for care in our clinic. Sometimes traveling 6 hours.

I don't see one patient in my office who doesn't have a pair of shoes. Or who doesn't go to bed hungry. My practice sees all patients in our area. If you have public aid then ok If you don't have money then ok. I see illegals.

I hear that there is larger difference than ever between the richest and the poorest. I call the statistics bogus. How do you get below zero income? These statistics don't count government aid. The studies are flawed. They never include the free money that us worker bees give these drones.

I have heard that the poor are generally poor because they can not find a job. Bogus, most of the chronically poor are that way because they are comfortable living on the dole. An unmarried mother makes about 1500 a month per child in ADC. A man in the household puts the kabash on the money.

The mothers mentioned all have 3-5 children by different fathers usually. It is a lifestyle choice. 50 of babies born now days are to mothers who get government aid.

My friends you working stiffs You are doomed. You are going to be paying for the group that I just mentioned and for your elders who after putting in the same money as you will want their share back in their retirement years.

If you think that I want to starve the children you didn't read the first part of my post. I give humanitarian services away all the time. You need to quit paying mothers to have children who will follow in their parents footsteps. There are choices. We have too many freeloaders. Welfare is not a lifestyle choice!

One more thing then I will shut up. I have heard that the people with food stamps will buy cases of water. Might cost 6 dollars. They turn around and pour the water out and turn the empty bottles back in for 2.40. That buys a 40 oz container of beer. A nice buzz for their 6 dollars of free money.
= = = = = = = = = = =

[Frank Lee]

In addition to paying low income single women to replicate, all breeders get subsidized via income tax deductions (among other things) for having dependents. It is high time to stop that since there is no human shortage that requires government intervention to stimulate population growth, but I now know better than to ever think that benny will go away because far too many agree with it.

Although... I strongly suspect the divide between rich and poor IS growing bigger, at the expense of the middle class (a few more added to the rich, lots more added to the poor, both having been middle class before).

P.S. I know for a fact there was (is?) lots of food stamp fraud going on. Back in the day I knew a grocery store cashier so I heard many stories like the one about the guy who became infuriated with her when she said he couldn't buy dog food with food stamps. After a major meltdown he picked out a bunch of steaks and said they were for the dog. And how many times have I stood in line behind people paying with stamps... observing that they had more expensive clothes than me, and trotted their groceries out to a newer car than mine.

[gone-ot]

Frank, can you say "...gamesmanship..." or "...skirting the rules..."?

...that's how 'poor' people become 'prosperous paupers'!

...of course, the same "...gamesmanship..." and "...skirting the rules..." are equally 'at home' in big business and government(s).

[jamesqf]

You ever notice that there's a common thread between obesity & poverty? Not just that a lot of "poor" people are also fat (only in America!), but in the attitude that leads to the result.

Almost anyone (barring a few medical conditions, etc) can, by putting a reasonable effort into diet and exercise, maintain a healthy weight and decent physical condition. But a lot of people just aren't willing to do this: they look for diets & pills that will magically take the weight off without them having to exert any long-term effort. And they look for ways to get money without going to the long-term effort of learning the skills & attitudes that would let them earn it.