U.S. rent has increased 175% faster than household income over past 20 years

[Hydrogen]

Bright lights, big city.

"And lack of affordable rental housing," says University of Cincinnati researcher Mike Eriksen, Ph.D.

The West Shell Associate Professor of Real Estate from the Carl H. Lindner College of Business recently published a report entitled, "The Location of Affordable and Subsidized Rental Housing Across and Within the Largest Cities in the United States" with the Mortgage Bankers Association's Research Institute for Housing America.

Covering subsidies to employment and population growth in the top 50 American cities, the report starts to unpack the intertwined complexities that have contributed toward the general trend towards unaffordability in large metropolitan areas in the United States over the past 20 years.

"Across the largest 50 cities, median rent has increased 175% faster than household incomes," said Eriksen. "For low and middle income populations in these regions, housing is getting more expensive at a faster rate."

One subset of the issue Eriksen examines is subsidies—which make up $50 billion in annual federal expenditures. On average, one subsidy is available for three otherwise income eligible households, but that statistic changes drastically to one in nine eligible households in the fastest growing metro areas.

Looking at Cincinnati, Eriksen found the region to have the best of all worlds.

"With the expected spend on rent being 30% of household income, Cincinnati is actually the most affordable region in the country when you measure the dollar gap between median rent and expected housing spend of a moderate-income household," he said.

Unfortunately, Cincinnati also leads large cities in the percentage of renters considered low-income according to federal guidelines, Eriksen shared.

For Eriksen, this report scratches the surface on uncovering what equitable housing opportunities could mean—and look like in practice—in cities of any size growing at any rate in the United States. He says more research is needed to help untangle the knotty mess of housing inequality and understanding the economic obstacles for renters and first-time homebuyers alike.

https://phys.org/news/2021-03-rent-faster-household-income-years.html

....



Can cryptocurrencies do much to address these issues?

There are several different fundamental forces behind the observation of rent increasing dramatically faster than average income. Similar to bitcoin BTC real estate in the US might be labeled a deflationary asset due to construction and development of new living space failing to match population and immigration growth. The chart below shows how new home development has floundered.



Real estate over the Last 20 to 40 years has become an increasingly scarce commodity. There is not enough new living space being created to satisfy demand and maintain affordable prices.

Perhaps a new cryptocurrency could be designed to fund innovative and new living space alternatives in the country. Which would decrease demand for living space and result in more affordable markets?

Tiny house and container based architecture could have potential. Micro timesharing of living space is another possible solution I've seen experimented with. I always see many interesting and bright ideas discussed on the internet and so perhaps someone has a good solution for this.

[odolvlobo]

In general, because the aggregate demand for housing is fixed (it basically follows population), the solution to the lack of affordable housing is to increase the aggregate supply. Unfortunately, most laws and regulations, including those intending to make housing affordable, have the opposite effect by reducing the incentives to build more housing.

Can cryptocurrencies do much to address these issues?

Probably not. Cryptocurrencies might be able to reduce inefficiencies or increase transparency, but those problems don't seem to be major contributors to the lack of affordable housing.

The chart below shows how new home development has floundered.

Your chart needs to go back further. The housing situation was not normal between 1992 and 2009, so your chart may be misleading. Also, the chart's title contradicts the chart itself. The chart clearly shows that new housing starts are not flattening out.

Perhaps a new cryptocurrency could be designed to fund innovative and new living space alternatives in the country. Which would decrease demand for living space and result in more affordable markets?

The idea that a new cryptocurrency can "fund" something is a misconception.

Anyway, those are my opinions.

[Kong Hey Pakboy]

I think part of the reason why the prices of rent is skyrocketing is because of blatant overpricing of the land and the 2008 housing crisis. Not to mention that the congress doesn't have any plans to increase wages of their minimum wage workers because they are lobbied into not doing it and their presidents are idiots that only wants to bomb Middle East and sell more weapons.

[davis196]

USA is a country with a growing population and an economy,that is driven by debt.I large part of this debt is built around mortgages.All the mortgages are a big reason why real estate is overpriced in the US(and almost all the other first world countries).
I don't think that the crypto industry can provide any solution to this problem.
The people need new and cheap houses,which means cheap materials and cheap labor(I don't know how this is going to happen) and also less regulations and restrictions,when it comes to building new houses.

[Lucius]

Perhaps a new cryptocurrency could be designed to fund innovative and new living space alternatives in the country. Which would decrease demand for living space and result in more affordable markets?

Cryptocurrencies being known for innvation and flexibility, could this issue be addressed by rolling out a new crypto token designed to fight global hunger?

You need to get rid of the impression that some new token will solve the problem of world hunger or living space, because these problems are far more complex than having someone create a new coin that will magically change that for the better. Proof of this are the thousands of coins that have been created so far, but on the fingers of one hand you can count those that have some purpose in real life.

The problem of real estate prices and the rising cost of rent are just part of the problem that exists in the US, but it is part of their economic strategies over the past 50 years that are now becoming more pronounced - after all, everyone has to pay for their mistakes. In 50 years (probably even earlier) the descendants of today's people will have to bear the consequences of today's decisions.

[BrewMaster]

but it is not just rent, the cost of living in general is increasing in US. compared to 20 years ago, they say it is bigger than the inflation. the purchasing power of dollar has been decreasing fast.
the worst part is that this speed is only going to get faster when you consider the amount of money they've printed over the past 2 years compared to the past 100 years.
with that said i don't think there is anything cryptocurrencies even bitcoin could do. the world is still entangled with the centralized inflationary fiat and the governments are inflating it more and more every year!

[Hydrogen]

Probably not. Cryptocurrencies might be able to reduce inefficiencies or increase transparency, but those problems don't seem to be major contributors to the lack of affordable housing.

Isn't an inability for markets to provide affordable housing to consumers an issue of efficiency by definition.

You say crypto could increase efficiency. But that wouldn't help. Why not?

Your chart needs to go back further. The housing situation was not normal between 1992 and 2009, so your chart may be misleading. Also, the chart's title contradicts the chart itself. The chart clearly shows that new housing starts are not flattening out.

"Not normal" how.

Can you say something specific about it.

The idea that a new cryptocurrency can "fund" something is a misconception.

Anyway, those are my opinions.

A "misconception" how?

Raising taxes to randomly throw money at problems is the modern trend society is founded upon. If you yourself support tax hikes for these programs and incentives. How does that allow you the moral high ground to buck the trend?

You need to get rid of the impression that some new token will solve the problem of world hunger or living space, because these problems are far more complex than having someone create a new coin that will magically change that for the better. Proof of this are the thousands of coins that have been created so far, but on the fingers of one hand you can count those that have some purpose in real life.

The problem of real estate prices and the rising cost of rent are just part of the problem that exists in the US, but it is part of their economic strategies over the past 50 years that are now becoming more pronounced - after all, everyone has to pay for their mistakes. In 50 years (probably even earlier) the descendants of today's people will have to bear the consequences of today's decisions.

Would it be fair to say Satoshi Nakamoto created a token to help solve issues relating to fiat devaluation, an overreliance short term economic/finance management and hyperinflation?

If you answered yes to this. Why would this trend be limited exclusively to inflation protected assets or a single sector.

You say "problems are more complex than creating a new coin". But is there a specific reason which guarantees a new token couldn't be utilized to solve poverty, hunger, unaffordable housing or other issues society faces?

[Darker45]

Can cryptocurrencies do much to address these issues?

I am not thoroughly informed as to the real housing situation in the US, but I suppose the problem is rather systemic. It is very deep that a mere token can barely effect change in it. The bursting of the housing bubble in the US way back in 2008 was huge enough that it shaken the entire country's economy and has led to around a trillion in rescue allocations. That's how large its scope is that it cannot magically be solved by a mere issuance of token.

Well,

For Eriksen, this report scratches the surface on uncovering what equitable housing opportunities could mean—and look like in practice—in cities of any size growing at any rate in the United States. He says more research is needed to help untangle the knotty mess of housing inequality and understanding the economic obstacles for renters and first-time homebuyers alike.

There is probably so much to discover and understand about this extremely complicated and multi-faceted issue. Not to mention that it is recurring as well as global.

[odolvlobo]

Probably not. Cryptocurrencies might be able to reduce inefficiencies or increase transparency, but those problems don't seem to be major contributors to the lack of affordable housing.

Isn't an inability for markets to provide affordable housing to consumers an issue of efficiency by definition. You say crypto could increase efficiency. But that wouldn't help. Why not?

No. By definition, economic efficiency is related to transaction costs. I don't think that the cost of buying and selling houses is a primary factor in the lack of affordable housing. The primary factor is the lack of supply.

Your chart needs to go back further. The housing situation was not normal between 1992 and 2009, so your chart may be misleading. Also, the chart's title contradicts the chart itself. The chart clearly shows that new housing starts are not flattening out.

"Not normal" how. Can you say something specific about it.

Compare to this chart that goes back to 1959. It shows a bigger story:

The idea that a new cryptocurrency can "fund" something is a misconception.

A "misconception" how?

A coin will not generate money or change behavior. If you want to create a program that funds affordable housing, you need a program, not a coin.

[Poker Player]

Can cryptocurrencies do much to address these issues?

Yes they can to some extent but I don't think the solution comes from the creation of tokens. Price increases have two components: inflation due to money printing by central banks and the supply/demand ratio.

Liberalizing is one of the solutions. More restrictive states have more prohibitive home buying and renting prices.

On the inflation side, in general people should protect themselves from price increases by investing in assets that beat inflation. Today the most profitable and with the best future prospects would be Bitcoin. Those who buy Bitcoin will beat inflation, and to the extent that it becomes widespread for transactions such as the purchase of a house, this problem would also be moderated, although that is a long way off, as I do not see financial institutions giving mortgages in Bitcoin in the near future.

[slapper]

Actually, Tax on owning houses are what prevent US people from buying a house

In my country, the situation is slightly different. Rent is affordable but the number of people who do not own a house increase quite fast compared with those who have. Even though new houses and apartments are constructed every year, they can't afford to buy one. Why? The price of houses keeps increasing drastically over years without any sign of stopping. This induces rich people to keep buying houses while construction contractors keep target those people and build high-class accommodations. They have the belief that real estate is the safest asset on the planet because the world is just a whole, it can not expand while the number of people keeps increases every year, especially in the urban

Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies can be a good investment for ones lacking money. In fact, young people in my country tend to invest their money in digital assets rather than traditional ones. This move does bring effective results since many of them start to have money to buy houses or reinvest in cryptocurrency. Cash is always affected by the inflation because of regulation and centralization of the government

[stompix]

Would it be fair to say Satoshi Nakamoto created a token to help solve issues relating to fiat devaluation, an overreliance short term economic/finance management and hyperinflation?

You realize that just solving inflation will not keep housing spaces affordable indefinitely?
There is population growth, there is limited space there is a need for housing closer to city centers where there is no room left to build.
A token, an altcoin a shitcoin or any defi project won't be able to magically transmute another dimension on top of the current one to make land affordable!

And since you're referring to satoshi, your idea goes against one of the principles of bitcoin, and is more akin to fiat currency, as you want to fix prices just like in a planned economy. There have been numerous attempts at doing this, how did they end? Either with total failure or turning those areas of the cities into underdeveloped ghettos.

In 2000 there were 282 million people in the united states, now there are 328, an increase of 46 million, 46 millions, twice the population of the entire metropolitan area on New York.

You say "problems are more complex than creating a new coin". But is there a specific reason which guarantees a new token couldn't be utilized to solve poverty, hunger, unaffordable housing or other issues society faces?

Yeah,  tokens will solve hunger, the moment you train your token to know how to handle a shovel and pick some apples.
We have lived for two millennia with the gold standard, has that kept poverty, hunger, inflation, unaffordable houses away?
Not from what I read in the history books.

[Poker Player]

Would it be fair to say Satoshi Nakamoto created a token to help solve issues relating to fiat devaluation, an overreliance short term economic/finance management and hyperinflation?

You realize that just solving inflation will not keep housing spaces affordable indefinitely?
There is population growth, there is limited space there is a need for housing closer to city centers where there is no room left to build.
A token, an altcoin a shitcoin or any defi project won't be able to magically transmute another dimension on top of the current one to make land affordable!

And since you're referring to satoshi, your idea goes against one of the principles of bitcoin, and is more akin to fiat currency, as you want to fix prices just like in a planned economy. There have been numerous attempts at doing this, how did they end? Either with total failure or turning those areas of the cities into underdeveloped ghettos.

In 2000 there were 282 million people in the united states, now there are 328, an increase of 46 million, 46 millions, twice the population of the entire metropolitan area on New York.

You say "problems are more complex than creating a new coin". But is there a specific reason which guarantees a new token couldn't be utilized to solve poverty, hunger, unaffordable housing or other issues society faces?

Yeah,  tokens will solve hunger, the moment you train your token to know how to handle a shovel and pick some apples.
We have lived for two millennia with the gold standard, has that kept poverty, hunger, inflation, unaffordable houses away?
Not from what I read in the history books.

I quite agree with what you say. Would you agree that part of the solution lie in lifting restrictions on the construction of new homes, as I was commenting? On the other hand, with the gold standard, price increases were more contained and in relation to convertibility, but what has done the most to end hunger and poverty in the world has been mass production, which is related to the above. It is not that the system is perfect but it has led to reach levels of development and welfare throughout the world unimaginable centuries ago.

[stompix]

I quite agree with what you say. Would you agree that part of the solution lie in lifting restrictions on the construction of new homes, as I was commenting?

Unfortunately, there will be no such thing.
Current politicians live in a bubble, they want buildings in their town to be only a few levels tall, to not disturb the architecture, with a lot of green space, and most of all, they must be cheap. They are forcing you to build only in certain areas, increasing artificially the price of land, forcing you to obey a thousand and one rules that only drive costs up and when you want to rent the apartments here comes rent control.

Probably this is one of the few good things that are going to come from this pandemic, a lot of people might move away from major cities to smaller ones or even villages where they might even afford to construct a modest house with the money they would have paid in rent.
But from officials and politicians, there will be no real solutions, they live in la la land.

On the other hand, with the gold standard, price increases were more contained and in relation to convertibility, but what has done the most to end hunger and poverty in the world has been mass production, which is related to the above.

And the same politicians are trying to stop this with their new eco current, driving farmers nuts with their regulations and imposing again thousands of restrictions and rules and taxes. They care more about how much an apple suffers when you pick it from a tree and are deaf to everyone who is telling them this will only end with lower production and more expensive food. Rules are necessary, but when the government officials are writing them just to please voters without thinking of the consequences disasters will follow.

[Lucius]

Would it be fair to say Satoshi Nakamoto created a token to help solve issues relating to fiat devaluation, an overreliance short term economic/finance management and hyperinflation?
If you answered yes to this. Why would this trend be limited exclusively to inflation protected assets or a single sector.
You say "problems are more complex than creating a new coin". But is there a specific reason which guarantees a new token couldn't be utilized to solve poverty, hunger, unaffordable housing or other issues society faces?

You got quite good answers in the posts above, there's not much more to say - except to repeat that no token can solve the problems you are considering in your threads. If you have a concrete idea how the tokens you envision would solve the world’s problems, maybe it’s time to move from words to concrete things? What you are actually advocating is the idea of creating even more shitcoins with thousands that already exist and serve no purpose.

Nakamoto made Bitcoin as an alternative to the existing system, not as something to completely replace it - unless you think all bankers and politicians will just give up what has been created for centuries to secure them a place at the top? I don’t think they want to be even equal to others, let alone become inferior to those they rule over.

[Kittygalore]

Well the price of real estate is getting higher day by day and so they have to make sure that they can get a value out of their land by raising the rent and there is nothing we can do because the people in the real estate business are in control of this kind of thing and they overestimate their prices so they can get more money out of it, not to mention that big businesses are lobbying the senate into not putting forward a raise in the minimum wages and they are so far are successful in doing it.

[el kaka22]

I think there is a correlation between people buying their houses and rents being higher. Back in the day rent prices were lower, because there was more people renting so landlords would have a lot of homes they rent to and make a living from that, however there were some improvements on mortgages so right now it is easier to buy a house, and that means less people are renting and that means there are less money to be made from being a landlord and that is why the rent is higher.

It is supply and demand, if there is less demand that should mean the price should go down, but when the supply drains like it did thanks to mortgages that means people who like to rent would have to find places that exists less and less. It is definitely about economy not being good and salaries not increasing at the right level as well, minimum salary purchasing power dropped 70% and should have been 34 dollars if kept with the last 30 years, they are saying no towards 15 dollars, let alone consider even possibility of 34.

[Harlot]

The more effective way I see how this will be solve is for the US to establish new areas/cities with cheap real estate and a whole new business district to come with it, this just gives people a chances to relocate and decongest the existing cities that have a high standard of living. This will just inject a healthy competition in a lot of the real estate markets forcing them to have lower their rent. Of course in order for them to do this the government should have a way to attract businesses to invest into the new areas offering them tax cuts and other incentives just to lure them on investing into that area.

[paxmao]

It is a highly cyclical market in most places in the world, with cycles in the range of 5 to 10 years of time depending on several factors. We must take into account that "Real State" or housing is not all created equal. On one side, you have the highly liquid markets of downtown NY, London, Singapore, Tokyo, Sydney, ... This cities are traditionally the subject of foreign and corporate investment. In London for example, the ridiculously long planning process extends the cycle whereas in NY it is simply about lack of buildable greenfield.

However, even the most imperfect markets eventually reach a valley and go up again, e.g. people start thinking that they would rated earn a bit less in other cities or places and have a better quality of life and lower rents than to pay the massive rents, or the prices are so high that eventually regulations are relaxed,... Remember that for every rent, there has to be someone willing to actually pay it and have the means to do so.

[StartupAnalyst]

Think Covid-19 disease influenced a lot on decision of many citizens to buy suburban housing by means of mortgage. Don’t think that crypto can somehow to help in building new houses and to lower prices on them. Scarce goods always inflate in price. Only oversupply of houses can help to decrease prices or, probably, the full end of covid-quarantine.