Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So, like Lacerta implies, when a LL questions an applicants income relative to total costs...
the utilities they'll be expected to be able to afford will include all of these (plus the rent).
They never included the phone line or asked about my ability to afford utilities in any apartment I've ever lived in. It's 2012. Something like 5 million people ditch their landlines every year anyways. I'd laugh if a landlord forced me to get or pay for a wired telephone line. Do you want me to get a washboard too? Learn some morse code? What does landlording have to do with the question anyways?
PLEASE, do not discount this data because the article is by the Heritage Foundation. This is not "evil conservative propaganda" but research based on actual data, federal government data, and it's footnoted so you can check the primary sources.
It shows:
1. Most of our "poor" aren't really so poor.
2. Going by household amenities people enjoy, there is not a whole lot of difference between the average US household, and the average poor US household.
3. Most of these "amenities" are categorized by a lot of people as "necessities."
Anyway this discussion of what it means to be "middle class," reminded me of this study, and what it means to be "poor."
One might conclude that most people classified by the government as "poor" would probably consider themselves middle class if asked, and many people who claim to be "middle class" are actually somewhere near "rich" in terms of amenities. Of course this is just going by physical amenities, not assets or income. A lot of those middle class people may have gone deeply into debt to get those amenities. A lot of people who qualify, by the numbers, as lower middle class or middle class could possibly be considered upper middle class or even wealthy if they have SAVED money instead of buying so many amenities.
Gas, electric, water, sewer were the limit once upon a time.
Since then many communities charge separately for trash so that gets in.
A phone line is required by construction code so that expense gets in too.
Basic internet access has also become a basic (high speed, FIOS etc are another matter)
Cable TV is a tougher sell but most providers have a bundle package with 'net and phone.
(The incremental upcharge for HBO, PPV, FIOS and high speed data are fairly another matter)
So, like Lacerta implies, when a LL questions an applicants income relative to total costs...
the utilities they'll be expected to be able to afford will include all of these (plus the rent).
Maybe when they build the place a phone line is part of the deal. We removed our phone line as we don't use it anyway. I removed all the jacks from the home, the box that the phone company put on the home and the wiring running from a pole at the back fence to the house. I asked Verizon to come do it but since I was not a customer of theirs at this address they would not come. Then again I am not a renter. Still the land line phone is becoming a thing of the past. we never use it as we all have cell phones. In our area you are not, nor have ever been required to have a phone, cable, internet or anything other than water, sewer, trash, gas, and electric. I have rented places were everthing accept the electric was included including basic cable. I have also rented places that covered just the gas and we had to pay everything else. Just depends I guess on who you rent from, how the rental market is in the area, and what is common in a specific area.
I couldn't find anywhere in the IBC 2012 edition where a phone line is even required anymore. The building code is updated every three years and in my state of California anyway, we use the International Building Code.
They never included the phone line or asked about my ability to afford utilities in any apartment I've ever lived in.
I never said they (or I) asked you.
I was describing the consideration that happens on the other side of the application:
What bills will the applicant have or can reasonably be expected to have in addition to rent?
The car loan and credit cards and child support and student loan and the judgment from the auto accident that never got paid and the cell phone account too... along with the direct 2012 utility bills will all be considered.
The last thing a LL want's is someone who has to stretch to afford the rent.
Last edited by MrRational; 07-09-2012 at 02:29 PM..
Whoa! Care to explain what "bad decision" I made? Is it choosing to have kids or choosing to have them in preschool so they can learn and interact with other kids while I earn a living? I was simply explaining the context of the article, which is for a family to live "comfortably", which includes "needs", "wants" and "savings".
"Comfortably" is highly subjective. You don't need to spend $21,000/year on pre-school. The fact that you would be unable to make do on minimum, while other more intelligent rational people do just fine on minium wage is not reason to raise the minimum wage, nor is it a reason to steal money from other people so that you can have the things you think you should have.
Quote:
Originally Posted by asufan
That's is what the poll in the article was based on. $17,000/yr. wouldn't cut it meeting that criteria.
Other people do just fine.
It's a logical fallacy to assume that just because you cannot, other people cannot either (especially when other people are doing it).
Quote:
Originally Posted by asufan
When you have kids, there are certain things that change.
You have to live in an area that has a reasonable expectation of safety.
So? That doesn't include their own personal private bedroom with bath. You are allowed to share a 3 bedroom apartment or house with another family with children you know. I assure you, your children will become deformed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by asufan
You have to provide a quality education, whether that means living in a decent school district, or providing private school.
And you cannot provide or supplement that? "Quality education" is also highly subjective.
Quote:
Originally Posted by asufan
You have medical bills/unexpected expenses. Getting new shoes every 6 months as their feet grow, etc.
My parents didn't have a problem with my father earning $1.90/hour. You can't share clothing with other families? Why not? It isn't illegal. Not everything has to be new or even name brand you know.
Quote:
Originally Posted by asufan
Provide reliable and reasonably safe transportation. Doesn't mean a luxury vehicle, but in most cases a $2,000 clunker won't cut it.
I rode around in a Ford Pinto and lived.
Quote:
Originally Posted by asufan
All of the above cost money, especially the first two items which increase housing costs.
Then decrease your housing costs by sharing a 3-bedroom apartment with another family. You get a bedroom, the other adults get a bedroom and the kids all go into the 3rd bedroom. It's not rocket science.
Billions and billions of people did that, and they all turned out okay.
Quote:
Originally Posted by asufan
Like I said, I was just explaining what the context of the article is, because anyone can say "I get by on $17,000", but the article isn't about living frugally as a hippy in a hovel, it's about living comfortably as a family, having wants, needs and savings.
I'm not responsible for that, you are.
Quote:
Originally Posted by asufan
I think realistically $120-130K is where you need to be minimum.
If you want to live the Extravagant American Life-Style™ consuming like locust-Borgs.
The other 6.6 Billion people that you share Earth with have different ideas about life-style, and in particular about consumption. Apparently the lot of you haven't figured that out yet.
No problem. You will. You will soon enough.
Realistically...
Mircea
Quote:
Originally Posted by TracySam
Here is a very informative research study on the amenities possessed by all US households, and possessed by US households classified as "poor."
PLEASE, do not discount this data because the article is by the Heritage Foundation. This is not "evil conservative propaganda" but research based on actual data, federal government data, and it's footnoted so you can check the primary sources.
It shows:
1. Most of our "poor" aren't really so poor.
2. Going by household amenities people enjoy, there is not a whole lot of difference between the average US household, and the average poor US household.
3. Most of these "amenities" are categorized by a lot of people as "necessities."
Excellent. You have just highlighted the crux of the matter.
I would also remind people that the propagandists are quite disingenuous on reporting "poverty" data. I whole-heartily recommend that you work part-time as an enumerator on the next Census. It will be an eye-opening experience for many as they see the, um, "impoverished" living better than they do.
That's especially true of single mothers receiving welfare benefits who also live with a man who earns $25,000 to $45,000/year. His income is deceitfully excluded from assessments of poverty.
I was describing the consideration that happens on the other side of the application:
What bills will the applicant have or can reasonably be expected to have in addition to rent?
The car loan and credit cards and child support and student loan and the judgment from the auto accident that never got paid and the cell phone account too... along with the direct 2012 utility bills will all be considered.
The last thing a LL want's is someone who has to stretch to afford the rent.
So true on the being able to afford the rent. Let me add that where I have rented the LL's wanted to make sure that I made 3X the monthly rent. With a $1,000 a month place, $3,000 in income. Interestingly you can be married and come up with the figure based on both spouses incomes, while two single individuals that are living together would have to have an income that is 3X the rent on their own, or in the above example a combined income of $6,000.
They never included the phone line or asked about my ability to afford utilities in any apartment I've ever lived in. It's 2012. Something like 5 million people ditch their landlines every year anyways. I'd laugh if a landlord forced me to get or pay for a wired telephone line. Do you want me to get a washboard too? Learn some morse code? What does landlording have to do with the question anyways?
Nothing directly, I'm just saying that optional utilities are still utilities. And yes, that includes not just your home phone, but your cell phone also.
When my tenants ask what utilities the rent includes, they are wanting to know on everything, mandatory and optional both.
So when someone says they pay $xxx for utilities, to me that includes both mandatory and optional utilities: Power, gas, sewer, water, trash, cable, phone, internet.
I think the true number varies widely depending on the state. Here is the government's ACCRA ranking based on the states' average household income and cola of living. It's pretty eye-opening in many places. For example, Alabama and Kentucky are actually ahead of California and New York in terms of actual adjusted income:
Mircea, adding an italicized word to the end of each of your posts with an ellipsis and signing your name at the end does not make you come across any more intelligent. Again, you missed the "comfortable" portion of the article. It's not "bare minimum" or "make-do". Sometimes I feel like I've stumbled upon the Dave Ramsey Parrot forum.
1. I don't need to spend $21,000 on daycare? Well I could go an additional 10 miles out of my way and take my kids to another daycare/preschool and pay $18,000 if I'm lucky. But then again my kids wouldn't grow up with the kids they are going to go to grade school with, and again, taking the time and wasting the gas to go to a lower rent area is not "comfortable".
2. Well, I guess my kids don't need their own bedrooms, true. I guess we can all shack up in one room, and my wife and I will go to bed at 7:30 so as not to disturb the kids. But then again I wont be able to finish things up on my business, clean things up around the house, watch a movie, etc. Or I can put my toddler in with my infant and he can wake up when the infant gets up throughout the night. "comfortable".
3. Quality Education is not really subjective. It can be measured. You can't throw out that "subjective" description on everything, you know. Quality education can get your kids into better colleges.
4. I'm sure your parents got by making $1.90 and hour and did just fine. My parents made next to nothing in the 1960' and 1970's as well. But then again that has nothing to do with this article. Glad you enjoyed your ford pinto, but cramming 2 adults and 2 children in a ford pinto with baby seats doesn't seem very practical or safe. And it doesn't have rear air conditioning for my kids on 115 degree AZ summer days, etc. Again I'm gonna say that darn comfortable word again.
5. The rest of what you said made zero sense. I explained that the article indicated comfortable meaning having needs, wants and savings met, and you responded with "I'm not responsible for that, you are. ". That's a head scratcher.
If you feel comfortable getting by on $17K/year as you indicate by your support of the post above, then by all means go for it. Keep in mind, most Americans would disagree with you. You can live "comfortably" in the slums, saving 15% of that $17K for retirement and work until 85. Not my business.
Comfortably...
ASUFan
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
