The Rent Is Too Damn High (For the Very Poor)

More housing charts! I came across these while reading about the shortage of starter homes, and they were interesting in different ways. First up is a chart from Bloomberg that shows total rent as a percent of total disposable income:

There are two ways to look at this. The rental market obviously goes though a boom-and-bust cycle, and right now we’re near the peak of a boom. Since the early aughts, total rent has soared from about 2.8 percent of disposable income to 3.8 percent. That’s an increase of about a third over the course of only a dozen years, which amounts to a real growth rate of 3 percent per year. That’s a lot. (Note, however, that some of this is due to higher levels of rentership following the housing bust. If more people are renting, then total rent paid also goes up even if prices remain the same.)

The other way to look at this is to follow rent from peak to peak of the cycle. If you do that, total rent has increased from about 3.7 percent of disposable income to 3.8 percent. That’s an increase of one-thirtieth over the course of 60 years, which amounts to a growth rate of only 0.05 percent per year.

Which one of these is the “true story”? Both of them. It just depends on what you happen to be interested in. Or what point you feel like making.

Next up is a pair of charts from the OECD. They don’t show housing burdens over time, but they do compare housing burdens in the rich countries of the world, which is kind of interesting. Here’s the first one:

This shows both median rents and median mortgages as a percent of disposable income. On this metric, the United States comes in a little above average on rents and a little below average on mortgages. But what about low-income households?

This is the average of the bottom quintile, which means we’re looking at the very poor (roughly the bottom 10 percent). On this metric the US does badly, clocking in with the third-highest rent burden. This chart includes government subsidies, which is the big difference maker. The market price for low-end housing in the US is probably similar to other peer countries, but we simply don’t provide the poor with as much assistance. As a result, the very poor pay upwards of 50 percent of their income for housing, compared to about 30 percent for countries like Germany, Japan, and France.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate