My parents, 35000 dollars for a two bedroom, 1 bath house 3 acres of land in the middle of BFE back in the 80’s
Today, 3 bed, 1 bath house with less than .25 acres, 200k same BFE area.
With inflation something comparable to my parents house in BFE, because it’s not changed all that much, should only be 100k.
And the recent minimum wage increase to 13.75 an hour passed by the people is in process of being revoked by Republicans.
And I do get tired of visiting home and taking to people that spout off the ‘back in my day’ bs.
BFE?
Acronym for being in the middle of nowhere.
“Bum Fuck Egypt” or some odd variant of that.
I’ve heard of “Butt Fuck Nowhere.” But never BFE or Egypt.
It’s been around a long time, at least since the ‘80s. You can now add it to your vocabulary.
Or not if noone knows what it means and it makes no sense.
It means out in the middle of nowhere. Most people know what it means, looks like it is just you here who doesn’t.
And you know the person that literally asked. And all the people that upvoted him. And if you look the comment saying he’s never heard of it has more upvotes than the comment saying it’s common. Brilliant analysis that it’s only me lol.
deleted by creator
I don’t care, you do you. Nobody’s making you do anything. Plenty of people do know, so not like your lack of knowledge limits anyone else’s usage.
Sounds like “I enjoy being indecipherable, not my problem!”
Everybody I know knows what BFE is. Ask around.
It does make sense. It’s hyperbolically saying it’s so far away it might as well be in Egypt.
A lot of us in the Midwest say BFI, with I being Iowa. Think it has more to do with none of us wanting to be in Iowa.
the recent minimum wage increase to 13.75 an hour
Have higher standards
Seriously. I’m sick of this let’s-beg-for-an-itty-bitty-change nonsense. If rent near me is $2000/month, and that’s supposed to be 1/3 of my pay, then I should be making $6000 per month ($72k per year!)
Assuming I worked a full 40 hours every week, with 4 full weeks in a month, that means I’d need to make $1,500 per week, which breaks down to $37.50 per hour (before taxes, as well as before payments for employee benefits, garnishments, etc.)
I don’t live anywhere fancy. This place is an average apartment with too little parking and too many centipedes. Thankfully, I am not paying the entire rent by myself at this time, because I don’t make anywhere near $37.50/hour.
If $13.75 was the wage of somebody who worked a full 40 hours/week, for 4 weeks, they’d only make $2,200. Total. That’s it. For the entire month.
If your fight for a new minimum wage is starting with a number less than 30, you’ve already lost.
I see a lot of folks here saying “based on inflation since X, item Y SHOULD only cost Z.” I want to point out those inflation numbers the government gives out every year are complete bullshit. Inflation has been WAY more than 30% over the last decade and a half or so (not you but someone above mentioned 30% as the inflation number since the aughts)
They change their basket of goods to artificially deflate inflation numbers, it is way way way higher than the 2% a year that they claim is the average. Add greed on top and you get the crazy insane prices we see today. For a 2% inflation to really work for everyone and not just the rich assholes then minimum wage needs to increase proportionately. Should force minimum wage up the stated inflation rate once a year. So every year min wage increases by 2% (or more depending on the actual inflation rate).
If I’m not mistaken Liz Ryan is a former fortune 500, has been a consultant to several multibillion dollar companies like IBM, and at one point might have been appointed by the Biden Admin to run Youth Counseling services?
IDK, but I’m not convinced she’s struggling with rent or groceries and she doesn’t seem to pick the correct side in US Politics.
She doesn’t have to be struggling herself to see other people’s struggles and try to amplify their voice.
Even when people are millionaires, it’s a reality that they likely can’t just turn over their whole fortune at once to fix things. I’d generally guess people like this donate a lot to programs trying to fix these issues.
So because she’s not personally struggling, she can’t analyze the situation?
Whenever you see a message promoted and shared at large scale you have to try to analyze what it is they have to gain and what steps they’ve taken to achieve it.
They’re not promoting the obvious solution. They make massive amounts of money just by maintaining this image as a megacorp consultant and an author. Smells like grift, that’s all I’m saying.
Except she is identifying the problem and kinda the solution. You are just complaining because… you don’t like her. Her analysis was fine, your “analysis” was “idk” and ‘but but but she must be bad’. It’s kinda weird. Something tells me I just should peace out of this conversation.
You sound like a Maga right now.
Said the person complaining that someone pointed out that its getting to expensive to live and that avocado toast isnt the issue
Are you implying that the CEO of a company that consults for IBM is struggling to get by?
She never said she struggled
Shes likely not renting as the CEO
She also says it in past tense
I dont know what her life was like before hand
Dude. Your entire “analysis” was : this person might possibly have a bias so what they’re saying must be wrong. Which is an idiotic conclusion. Bring skeptical is fine. But assuming everyone who could have a motive must therefore be lying is a good way to never gain any information at all because literally everyone who says something online has a motive to do so
I never claimed they were wrong in any way, shape, or form. I said it smells like a grift and we should be aware of their position.
You just called someone maga because they said she was right regardless of what her personal situation was…
It’s right there. You’re not going to trick people in forgetting what was already said.
My first apartment (without roommates) was $600/month I think. I just check the present day at it rents for $1400! The mortgage cost on my first house (small/low cost of living area) was only $1000/month.
I just don’t know how young people are affording housing these days.
I rent my parents’ other house and just pay carrying costs. It’s still $2800/month because of location. Trust me, it’s a much better deal than it sounds…
Well, most don’t. Just let them enjoy abuse at home.
Is it greedy landlords? Or is there a bigger issue at play, and landlords are the scapegoat? I imagine not all landlords are greedy, but if market price is $1,600, why wouldn’t the landlord charge $1,600?
Are you not in America? We have whole software systems illegally manipulating the rental market prices.
This is a great example of one of those “bigger issues” I was talking about.
Even if it is a bigger issue, the landlords still hold blame for the situation. Can’t escape that
I shouldn’t have phrased it as an either or. Landlords are definitely partly to blame. Especially the ones making millions and lobbying congressmen to keep things shitty for the less wealthy.
But it’s a much bigger issue than just blaming a group of faceless people.
It’s definitely landlords. See: Rent seeking behavior.
Ok, but it’s not just landlords. It’s an entire infrastructure built on allowing this kind of thing to happen.
but if market price is $1,600, why wouldn’t the landlord charge $1,600?
Because they’re not greedy. Since they all do, they’re all greedy. No exceptions.
There’s a concept of supply and demand. There should be more supply.
Why should we have a market for housing at all? Not everything needs to be a market
Also add in: education, health care, and prisons.
It’s appalling the things people are able to make money off of and still sleep well at night.
No, not all landlords are greedy but the ones who’s decisions have a large impact on the housing market are. The elderly widow who is renting out her basement to a young professional isn’t being greedy. The CEO who said this quarter he’ll return 25 million in stock buy backs instead of the regular 15 million are the greedy motherfuckers
whose
You got 2 downvotes for saying it’s not all landlords. I think that was what I was getting at.
It’s easy to point your finger and blame an imaginary person for your problems. But it’s often much more complicated than that.
There’s an infrastructure built around benefiting people with wealth that, in turn, harms people without wealth.
Because after construction costs have already been paid off everything that exceeds maintenance costs is pure profit for landlords.
Wanting to increase profis beyond the inflation rate to cover their own costs of living is greed.
You’re just saying “capitalism is greed”. Which is fine, and not wrong, but it Isn’t all that insightful and does nothing to solve any actual problems.
Fact is, supply and demand is driving these costs, not greedy landlords. If somebody wasn’t paying that rent, they wouldn’t be charging that much.
We need to prioritize building low income/affordable homes. Flood the market with supply and the price will go down.
supply and demand is driving these costs
In an abstract economy 101 sense that is true.
In a more concrete real world sense, the price is set by the landlord. Neither the supply nor the demand curve force the landlord to increase rent.We need to prioritize building low income/affordable homes. Flood the market with supply and the price will go down.
That too is somewhat true. In a profit oriented market however the lower bound of the price of rent is dictated by the building costs, the time it takes to recuperate these costs and the expected profit margin.
Assuming building costs are more or less fixed in the short term, flooding the market and reducing the price you can charge will reduce potential profits. Thus private investors are incentivized to build only so much that it does not significantly lower prices.So, the “we” that could lower prices by building more would have to be the state or some public entity that is less profit focused, not private landlords.
In an abstract economy 101 sense that is true.
In a more concrete real world sense, the price is set by the landlord. Neither the supply nor the demand curve force the landlord to increase rent.The price is set by the landlord based on what people are willing to pay. What people are willing to pay is based on what is available in the market.
This is all just supply and demand. If a landlord has an empty home for rent, and there are no other homes for rent nearby, they can charge whatever anybody is willing to pay. If there are 3 empty homes right nearby, they will need to price it in line with the others.
So, the “we” that could lower prices by building more would have to be the state or some public entity that is less profit focused, not private landlords.
Or the local/state governments need to create zones for lower/middle income homes or apartments. Or in some way they need to encourage developers to build these homes.
Capitalism alone gives us the current situation. Having a government that can counterbalance this will make it work.
The price is set by the landlord based on what people are willing to pay.
What people are willing to pay sets the upper limit of what he can charge. He is not forced to set the price at this upper limit. No amount of demand forces him to increase the price beyond cost + enough profit to live off.
Or the local/state governments need to create zones for lower/middle income homes or apartments. Or in some way they need to encourage developers to build these homes.
I’m not sure how zoning in the US works. How exactly does this reduce construction costs or increase return on investment without high rents? What incentive does this give profit oriented investors to invest in affordable housing instead of other investment options?
He is not forced to set the price at this upper limit.
It’s no different than any other product you could buy in a store. Supply and demand ultimately determines the price. Charging what it is worth is no more greedy than any other aspect of capitalism. And as I said originally, maybe there are bigger issues than just “greedy landlords” that are causing the prices to go up so much, in this case unchecked capitalism.
Zoning is just one example. Part of the problem is that someone that just bought a million dollar home doesn’t want multi family homes built across the street. That will decrease the value of their house. Zoning plays into this. There’s plenty more state/local governments can do, but are not doing.
It’s interesting that when talking about the people building homes, you totally get the profit driven mentality. Why should we expect investors to build homes that would give them less profit? Exactly, and why would you expect landlords to charge less than what the home is worth? Why would Nike charge $50 for those shoes when they can charge $200 and still sell out immediately?
There’s lots to consider and saying “greedy landlords” is the problem just ignores the entire reality.
To be clear, I am making one statement in this discussion and that is that the price is being set higher than it needs to be.
By stating that int he discussion about Landlord greed, it can be inferred that I equate this with greed.It’s no different than any other product you could buy in a store.
Saying that other businesses operate similarly does not refute my point. As you yourself pointed out, at best your argument is that all “capitalism is greed”.
It’s interesting that when talking about the people building homes, you totally get the profit driven mentality.
I never pretended not to “get” it. I’m just claiming that it’s greedy.
The way I see it there are two ways to counter my argument:
Either show that landlords have no choice and must demand the prices they do.
Or argue that wanting more than you need (usually to the detriment of others) is not greed. In that case I would be very interested where greed actually starts.
You can’t get there buying cars and phones you can’t afford either.
The highest priced iPhone, all max specs, is $1600.
If you get a new one every year, and trade in the previous year’s, you’ll probably get around $600 trade in value. So we’re talking $1000/year for the highest priced phone.
On a monthly basis, we’re talking $83/month. That’s like a rounding error on rent, utilities, and food, much less transportation and health care.
And, more realistically, people are buying $800 phones once every 2 years, maybe seeing something like a $600 net expense spread over 24 months, for $25/month.
Phones are like the one thing that are cheaper in 2025 than in 1985.
Hell yeah, grind away for basic necessities. Bet you’re a dream to talk to at parties.
That argument is stupid, because usually people need a reason to save for. Now rent is so high that people can barely save, and houses are so expensive that even if they do and get a credit with their staggering student debt, they’ll never be able to afford it.
So what do people do? they just enjoy the small things, because they know they’ll never have the big ones.
It’s not stupid, you’ve just stupidly misinterpreted it.
I believe you’ve mistakenly interpreted it to mean that I disagree with the premise that people have been priced out of the things we’ve come to believe are the standard of living now. That’s not what I was objecting to.
My point is that money should ALWAYS be managed. If you have no money, then, well I guess it manages itself. But if you have very little money, you shouldn’t be buying s $60k car you can’t afford. You buy a $3k car you can. Saying, I can’t afford a house so I’m going to go into massive amounts of debt to buy a car to make up for it, is the REASON you need to manage money.
No, your take is very stupid
you just avocado toast even harder. Now you not only over generalized people, and willfully ignore the cause of the problem.
You then turn items that are essential to life in society into irresponsible luxuries. If you can’t afford to rent there is no such thing as an affordable phone/car.
The point of the post is that it’s not merely impulsive spending and you went, “nah, it is just that”
A $60k car and a $1600 cell phone are NOT essential for life and I didn’t just “nah, it is just that,” the argument. You’re just having reading comprehension problems.
Let’s drop to your level. Are you stupid enough to believe that people don’t buy things they can’t afford? If you only have even $10 to your name and you need food, you go to the most economical grocery store you can get to and maximize your purchases. You don’t walk into Starbucks and order a latte. The OP implied that because there is as larger economic problem at hand, money management isn’t an issue. They are ALWAYS both an issue.
And yes I understand that the problem is that people have to manage $10 now instead of $1000. It was not my intention to minimalize that.
You invent a scenario, and applied that to all people who struggle then? Context be dammed? Damn, sounds like a bad take.
The OP context is “older generations say that things are easy, when they had it easy. But here is an example that shows that things are not equal by a long shot.
Then you show up with a ‘if people would just stop eating avocado toast, they would have it just as easy’ ignoring the message in the OP and the systemic issues that not only make owning both your stated items a necessary component of life, but makes everything much more expensive.
A stupid take. Do struggling people own $1300 phones or expensive cars? Maybe there are some but not a lot. You fucking just dammed everyone struggling over just the possibility, inventing a character flaw on an entire class of people.
A very, very stupid take.
People who come into posts about struggles of poverty preaching “money management” are people who have never had to actually survive a day in their life and have always had an allowance or income they could depend on. I appreciate you mercilessly calling this user’s BS out.
The Ratio says it’s actually pretty stupid. The percentage of people who can’t afford a home purely because they bought a $60k car is going to be absolutely minuscule, but it’s a great dog whistle for trying to lay the blame at the feet of personal responsibility.
It’s a whole lot more than you think.
It’s a whole lot less than you think.
No, it’s not. It’s not measured in the decimals of percentages, so it’s significant.
deleted by creator
I can’t make this sink into the minds of privileged people who never lost everything in their lives due to medical disasters from not being able to afford insurance, or having their house suddenly literally collapse one day while you’re at work because you couldn’t afford to get the pipes replaced.
There is no such thing as a $3k car, those days are gone. If it’s going to be something that is expected to start and drive every day without major repairs that are overdue, you need to spend closer to $10k.
I know this because I recently bought my sons some used cars. Used 2006 Volvo was $6k in about as good of condition it could be for the age and miles. Still needed a bunch of little things that quickly added up. New tires ($800), PCV breather system ($120 did myself), new ignition coils ($200, did myself), brakes ($80, did myself), etc. If I wasn’t doing my own work, it would have been 3x the cost.
I also bought a 2013, nearly identical car to the 06. It needs far less, put tires on it, still has an evaporative emissions leak causing a check engine light. Not going to fix that.
I buy $1k cars sometimes, but they usually don’t run. A $3k car will be usable if you know how to turn wrenches, have space to work, and own multiple other cars for when it breaks down.
$10k barely buys a reliable car in most markets these days.
There is no such thing as a $3k car,
Yes there is …
My 2009 honda fit cost me 5k 3 years ago and has needed no repairs at all… You can go lower pretty easily…
Used car markets are highly localized markets and depending on demand in the area can fluctuate wildly, just because you got a steal on a 14 year old car 3 years ago doesn’t mean other people aren’t struggling to find an affordable used car now.
Your take only gets stupider the more you try to explain it.
My point is that money should ALWAYS be managed.
Is that what you think people are talking about in here? money management?
You are truly too dense for any of this. Fortunately for you, you probably have never been touched by actual hardship and I hope that continues for you. The rest of us have had to deal with the very worst our nation can throw at us.
Ok. Troll go ahead and keep believing what you want. You will always be right.
Troll
You don’t even know how words work huh?
A troll is someone who doesn’t believe what they say they’re just trying to make you mad.
I believe STRONGLY that you’re too dense/young for this conversation and I WHOLHEARTEDLY believe that you should back out of this topic and learn more about other humans and how civics works and a host of other broad topics so you can be a better person and not get your ass kicked someday for saying some offensive shit around people who have lived a lot more than you.
This isn’t trolling, it’s actual advice, you need to get your head on better. Nobody cares about your stupid “life philosophies” about money. Put that shit on a wooden carved sign hanging over the kitchen sink, but out here in the real world, it’s far more complicated and people face a lot more problems than your stupid phrases and 2-dimensional witticisms. Lose literally fucking everything to some medical bills then get back to me, let me know how fair the system is then.
The phone that you use every day, that is required to function in daily society, and is the NUMBER ONE priority when you’re homeless, aside from maybe obtaining legal documentation?
That cell phone?
OMG, would people get off the friggin cell phone thing already. People buy all kinds of things they can’t afford. Money management would help with that. That was my only point. But if we HAVE to talk cell phones then fine. High end phones are over $1k. I just bought one for $200. To a person with little money, yeah cell phones too.
Nice strawman you got there, goes well with all the avocado toast I buy instead of using it for a mortgage payment.
No you see, that serious toothache you have because you can’t afford to get to a dentist because you haven’t been able to afford dental insurance since 2010 is just a matter of managing your money you stupid poor. Just ignore the pain and inability to eat and manage your money!
Honestly, if you had better money management you would have gotten that taken care of immediately and then spent the additional $4000 for implants so you have a great smile for your job interviews and not get passed up because there are also 300 younger, more attractive people willing to work for less also applying for the same position.
MONEY MANAGEMENT!
As you type this, people in poverty who had their state-sponsored cheap telephones so they could get callbacks for work and take care of their families, are getting notified that the program has been canceled and they have to now somehow pay for their own phones on top of every other fee and expense that increases when you’re poor.
It’s also kind of hard to not pay for your car when you live in it. Speaking from experience.
That’s truly terrible but I don’t know what that has to do with money management, which is the only point I’m trying to make. I agree on the rest of all of this.
I don’t know what that has to do with money management,
That’s because I don’t think you actually understand the conversation. We’re talking about the difficulty of poverty, you’re thinking “money management” and that REEKS of someone who’s never actually been poor. You do not get it. You should be ASKING QUESTIONS and not dispensing life-advice about money to people who have been through actual hardships you clown.
“Greedy landlords” is an easy cope out. Instead we should realize the system that’s built to continously inflate the economy whereas our wages stagnate at best.
deleted by creator
I used to pay $1100 for a 3 bedroom apartment 10 years ago, now a 2 bedroom is $2600+
So someone is renting it out. It’s all supply and demand?? I don’t think landlord just leave their apartment empty unless someone comes with 1600 bucks rents.
In Denver here, it’s hard to find apartment and 2 bed 2 bath close to boulder is 2500 bucks minimum. But people still want to stay close to boulder rather than living on cheaper town.
Hot take, but it’s both. I make $40k in a major american city, and while it sucks I have a decent amount saved up, I live alone, and I’ve paid off all my debt (although I’ll probably never be able to afford a home).
To be clear, I don’t think anyone should have to cut the corners I do to live with financial security, and not everyone can (my partner is disabled, financial security is a pipe dream for them), but it isn’t impossible for most people.
I make $40k in a major american city
I hope you have healthcare, because that sounds terrifying.
I do, I actually have very good insurance and a pretty-alright 401k. My partner doesn’t, and it’s… brutal. They’ve got several serious health conditions that they just hope aren’t going to kill them in the next decade or so.
Nobody should be subjected to that.
We had to give up entirely on affording a house. There are ROOMS for rent at $1200 here. This used to be a low COL area until COVID. We had low infection rates so a ton of people moved here and we don’t have the infrastructure to support them. We’ve been priced out of what living space we did have and since there’s still the illusion it’s cheap to live here, it’s almost impossible to get a living wage.
Landlords are not greedy. They are inherently parasitic.
Adam Smith would agree with you.
“Have you tried simply having more money?”
Life’s really easy when you’re born rich and white.
If you’re born rich it doesn’t matter what color you are. The difference is probably being born middle class and white, that’s probably where you reap the most benefit from systemic racism. Being born poor, doesn’t matter, the cards are forever stacked against you.
Please, I’m begging you, please call Habitat for Humanity. Don’t make assumptions based on what you think you know about the program or have heard, just fucking call.
Worst case scenario: You spend an hour at the initial meeting and discover it won’t work for you. The other scenario: You end up owning a brand new home (or one refurbished to brand new) at cost.
Because my es-wife picked up the phone, I now own my own home at $600/mo., 19-year mortgage. Took us right at a year to complete the program and have keys in hand.
Be glad to answer questions, but there are variations according to the local outfit’s way of doing things.
She correct i worked making 6 bucks an hour in early 2001 and had my own apartment. Was 300 a month. Today fucking 1,000 for the same place. Bullshit not even close to what it should be.
I’ve thought about begging a similar outfit for that kind of help - I just got my first apartment on my own six or so months ago, and I’ve always been on the edge/dependent on others for help.
Do they ever help single people? I’d do anything just to have my name on a place. I’ve slept in a car before and I never want to be in that position again.
Perhaps you and a friend could pretend to be a couple? Doesn’t matter their gender or sexuality.
Oh uh hey, andros_rex, wanna go out? We can take a nice, romantic drive to a Habitat for Humanity’s interview.
