When it comes to the unhoused, liberals really do go full mask off. It's awful.

  • TheLepidopterists [he/him]
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    I mean it just depends on the area you're in and your background right? If you live somewhere with a higher COL the rate is lower (42-55% in DC, CA and NY) locally. Also it's calculated as (homes occupied by owner)/(all occupied homes).

    So like if you have 2 houses in a neighborhood, both owned by Bourgeois Bobby and he lives in one and rents the neighboring one to a group of 4 roommates, that's a 50% home ownership rate.

    If you added a third house owned by Family Fred and Family Francine, a married couple, who also live with the following adults who don't own the home: Francine's ailing mother, adult son Chuck, adult daughter Samantha and Chuck's boyfriend Tom who they let move in because he was going to be homeless otherwise.

    66% home ownership rate in this neighborhood now. Mind you Fred and Francine can own 3% equity in the house and owe the bank 97% of the houses value: they still count as a home owning household.

    EDIT: to clarify, most of my point here is that most people would say 1/11 of the people in this neighborhood, 3/11 of we're being generous, own a home. The rate is calculated in a way that maybe is misleading.

    • ClimateChangeAnxiety [he/him, they/them]
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      So like if you have 2 houses in a neighborhood, both owned by Bourgeois Bobby and he lives in one and rents the neighboring one to a group of 4 roommates, that's a 50% home ownership rate

      Ah yes okay, so a 60% home ownership rate is a lie. The right way to calculate this situation would be a 20% home ownership rate, not 50%, as 1 in 5 people owns the home they live in.

      Being deliberately miscalculated to tell a lie does explain why that number feels like bullshit.