Property Taxes will go way up in the Blue Wall After the Election

[DOTR]

it makes more sense to raise the minimum wage to fifteen and hour, and provide recourse to unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed, so land lords can charge enough rent to upgrade their properties.

But if you raise it to 500 an hour landlords can turn their properties into palaces.
Why are you so stingy?

 

[DOTR]

So why should that be a landlords problem?

I'm addressing your opinion that younger people don't want the responsibility of ownership. In many places, housing prices are so high that ownership is wildly unrealistic.

You should give them your house.

Or we can discuss this complex topic like adults. And acknowledge that its unrealistic for a young person to be able to afford the mortgage where median home prices are 1.6 million dollars.

If it's impossible to live there, the solution is simple: move.

Here you can buy a nice home for around a 150K. They are still affordable and homes under 30 years old.

And what is the average wage 'there'?

Are you implying home prices reflect the ability of people to buy them?

 

[danielpalos]

it makes more sense to raise the minimum wage to fifteen and hour, and provide recourse to unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed, so land lords can charge enough rent to upgrade their properties.

But if you raise it to 500 an hour landlords can turn their properties into palaces.
Why are you so stingy?

There must be some Pareto Optimum; let's ask Academia to help out.

 

[DOTR]

it makes more sense to raise the minimum wage to fifteen and hour, and provide recourse to unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed, so land lords can charge enough rent to upgrade their properties.

But if you raise it to 500 an hour landlords can turn their properties into palaces.
Why are you so stingy?

There must be some Pareto Optimum; let's ask Academia to help out.

Forget those Ivory Tower nabobs. Let’s ask Mr Market. He’ll know to the penny what the correct rate is.

 

[danielpalos]

it makes more sense to raise the minimum wage to fifteen and hour, and provide recourse to unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed, so land lords can charge enough rent to upgrade their properties.

But if you raise it to 500 an hour landlords can turn their properties into palaces.
Why are you so stingy?

There must be some Pareto Optimum; let's ask Academia to help out.

Forget those Ivory Tower nabobs. Let’s ask Mr Market. He’ll know to the penny what the correct rate is.

structural disemployment may happen for public sector requirements, not Only capital profit. Eminent domain is a social Power, for that purpose.

 

[DOTR]

it makes more sense to raise the minimum wage to fifteen and hour, and provide recourse to unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed, so land lords can charge enough rent to upgrade their properties.

But if you raise it to 500 an hour landlords can turn their properties into palaces.
Why are you so stingy?

There must be some Pareto Optimum; let's ask Academia to help out.

Forget those Ivory Tower nabobs. Let’s ask Mr Market. He’ll know to the penny what the correct rate is.

structural disemployment may happen for public sector requirements, not Only capital profit. Eminent domain is a social Power, for that purpose.

?

 

[danielpalos]

it makes more sense to raise the minimum wage to fifteen and hour, and provide recourse to unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed, so land lords can charge enough rent to upgrade their properties.

But if you raise it to 500 an hour landlords can turn their properties into palaces.
Why are you so stingy?

There must be some Pareto Optimum; let's ask Academia to help out.

Forget those Ivory Tower nabobs. Let’s ask Mr Market. He’ll know to the penny what the correct rate is.

structural disemployment may happen for public sector requirements, not Only capital profit. Eminent domain is a social Power, for that purpose.

?

fixing the goalposts, is a function of Government. structural disemployment is to be expected. we should be losing jobs that don't cover the cost of social services, regardless. higher paid labor pays more in taxes and creates more in demand.