#rent payment policies | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

justinspoliticalcorner · 1 month

Text

Lorie Konish at CNBC:

The Social Security Administration is set to implement new rules to make it easier for beneficiaries to access certain benefits and increase the payments some may receive. The new changes affect Supplemental Security Income, or SSI, which provides more than 7 million Americans with monthly benefit checks. Those benefits are for seniors ages 65 and up, or adults and children who are disabled or blind, and who have little or no income or resources. “We already know that the benefit amounts that are available to people receiving SSI are incredibly low,” said Lydia Brown, director of public policy at the National Disability Institute. “They’re not as high as perhaps they could be to fully account for the needs that people have,” Brown said. The maximum federal monthly SSI benefit is currently $943 per eligible individual and $1,415 for an eligible individual and eligible spouse. The changes, which are slated to go into effect Sept. 30, are a “positive move in the right direction,” Brown said.

Updates to definition of public-assistance household

The agency on Thursday announced a new rule to expand the definition of a public-assistance household. Now, households that receive Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, payments and those where not all members receive public assistance will be included. With the change, more people may qualify for SSI, current beneficiaries may see higher payments and individuals who live in public-assistance households may have fewer reporting requirements, according to the Social Security Administration. The previous policy required all household members to receive public assistance. A public-assistance household will be defined as one with both an SSI applicant or beneficiary, as well as at least one other member who receives one or more forms of means-tested public income maintenance payments.

[...]

Other rule changes to help beneficiaries

The Social Security Administration is also working to address outdated practices through two other rules that are set to go into effect on Sept. 30. One change will expand the SSI rental subsidy policy to make it less likely that renting at a discounted rate or other rental assistance will affect a beneficiary’s SSI eligibility or monthly payment amount. That policy, which was already available in seven states, will apply nationally. Another change will make it so the SSA no longer counts food assistance toward support beneficiaries receive from other parties that may reduce their SSI benefit amounts.

The Social Security Administration keeps track of the resources SSI beneficiaries receive outside of their federal benefits, formally known as in-kind support and maintenance, or ISM. The purpose of ISM is to reduce SSI benefits if a recipient receives support from family and friends by treating that as unearned income, Milburn said.

Effective September 30th, Social Security Administration (SSA)’s changes to loosen Supplemental Security Income (SSI) eligibility will take effect.

#Social Security Administration #Social Security #SSI #Supplemental Security Income #SNAP #Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program

113 notes · View notes

racefortheironthrone · 6 months

Note

On the subject of UBI, I always ask about the MCU UBI: Tony is a billionaire who lives a life of luxury, Bruce has a serious chronic illness that requires expensive medical care, and Trevor just wants to sit round all day drinking and doing drugs. I take the UBI guys more seriously if they can say what each man gets from a UBI.

That's a somewhat odd choice of characters to think about how a UBI would function in the MCU.

So yes, Tony Stark would get a UBI. Relative to his private income, his UBI check would be totally inconsequential - and given the level of taxation needed to support a UBI, it's pretty much guaranteed that Tony would be paying far more in taxes than he would be getting back in UBI payments.

This is not an accident or a mistake or a flaw in the system; this is how a healthy social policy should function. When Social Security was established in 1936, FDR made a big deal of the fact that even John D. Rockefeller would get a Social Security check - because it hammered home the point that everyone contributes, and everyone benefits. Reciprocal solidarity would short-circuit the divisive politics of distribution and redistribution and cement a permanent majority coalition in support of a universal welfare state.

Bruce Banner would also get a UBI check. Now, his financial situation is a little unclear - originally, Banner was a top research scientist at Culver University with U.S military contracts, so he would probably have been in the top 10% of incomes (affluent but not wealthy). After his transformation into the Hulk, however, Bruce was a wanted fugitive with no way of earning income.

After that, Bruce was an Avenger - and this is where things get odd. As established in Falcon and the Winter Soldier, Avengers in the MCU don't get a salary: Tony gave them free housing and paid their Avengers-related expenses, but Sam Wilson notably relied on his veteran's pension and government contracts for his living (thus why his banker could justify turning him down for a small business loan rather than admitting to structural racial discrimination) and Steve Rogers even with his veteran's benefits, Social Security, and SHIELD salary couldn't afford a place in Brooklyn. This means that, while Bruce doesn't need to worry about money for his research and can save on rent, he does actually need the UBI for everything else.

This is very different from in the comics, where Avengers get quite decent salaries:

$4k a month in 1983 dollars works out to around $150k a year (on top of free housing at the Avengers Mansion), putting them solidly in the top 13% of U.S personal incomes.

As for Trevor Slattery, I feel like your description is unfairly characterizing a working actor. Slattery was not a major success in Hollywood - hence why he took Aldrich Killian up on his job offer and became part of a criminal conspiracy - and he does have some serious substance abuse issues, but what he does in his private life is his own business. Hell, even when he was abducted by the Ten Rings, he kept working as an actor. That being said, Trevor is going to have a hard time getting UBI, both because he's a wanted fugitive and convicted felon (which would end his eligibility in the U.S) and because he's now living in a rural village in another dimension.

#mcu #marvel #marvel meta #universal basic income #ubi #policy history #social policy

70 notes · View notes

serahlink · 5 days

Text

‼️HELP A HOMELESS ARTIST ‼️

Reblogs are greatly appreciated! :")

Making a new post because my family and I are in dire need of help. My name is Link, I'm a 22 y/o artist and since November 2021, my family and I have been homeless and living in a motel. Since neither of us had our documents or IDs when we first got here, it was up to me to open commissions to support us. Although my father has his id now, getting a job out in the mountains where we don't have transportation or a way for them to contact us is very difficult. Until that changes, we're still dependant on my commissions to help us through paying for rent and soon food, as this is our last month of food stamps due to the policies here.

This week and especially this month has been super tough on us since work has gone down for me tremendously. There's been weeks were we can't pay and owe upwards of 100$+ every other day since it adds up so quickly. There are days where if we didn't have food stamps, we wouldn't have any food at all and since it's ending soon, I'm hoping this will help me find some more work to care of my family with. Right now our situation is urgent. We need 250$ to cover for tomorrow and we don't have anything as of yet. If we can't have everything paid for by tomorrow, we will be kicked out and since families on both sides have cut us off both communication and money wise, it doesn't look good if that happens.

So, all my slots are open for anyone who's interested in helping us out! I'm a primarily DnD/fantasy themed artist. I mainly draw Dragon Age centered art but I've also done work of Baldurs Gate 3 tavs and other DnD related stuff as well! I can also work outside of fantasy, I've done all things from simple portrait commissions to furries to even dragons, I'm flexible with most things. The only thing I won't do is sexual nudity since I'm not particularly educated enough to draw that sorta stuff yet. Payment will be upfront since our situation is extremely dire at the moment and in turn since we have to use the money we get immediately for rent and soon enough food, no refunds can be given back so please take that into consideration. I'm all for making changes if you aren't happy with how a piece is turning out.

My prices will be below! Thank you to all that sees this and helps either through reblogging or commissioning me, it always means a lot to my family and I! :")

~Prices~

Sketch (price depending on type of sketch) - base price of 15$

Sketch page - 15$ per sketch

Headshot - 25$ (+10$ if shaded)

Bust - 35$ (+10$ if shaded)

Expression Sheet (minimum of 3 heads per sheet, 10$+ per extra head) - 45$ (10$+ if shaded)

Half body - 50$ (+10$ if shaded)

Full body - 70$ (+15$ if shaded)

Couples Commission (a commission that includes two people) - 90$ (+15$ if shaded)

Group commissions (commission that includes more than two people, price dependant on the details) - 60 base price(one character, unshaded; each extra character is +75% to the original price) (40$+ if shaded)

Paintings (price depending on the details) - 100$+

24 notes · View notes

mostlysignssomeportents · 1 year

Text

Wall Street Journal goes to bat for the vultures who want to steal your house

Tonight (June 5) at 7:15PM, I’m in London at the British Library with my novel Red Team Blues, hosted by Baroness Martha Lane Fox.

Tomorrow (June 6), I’m on a Rightscon panel about interoperability.

The tacit social contract between the Wall Street Journal and its readers is this: the editorial page is for ideology, and the news section is for reality. Money talks and bullshit walks — and reality’s well-known anticapitalist bias means that hewing too closely to ideology will make you broke, and thus unable to push your ideology.

That’s why the editorial page will rail against “printing money” while the news section will confine itself to asking which kinds of federal spending competes with the private sector (creating a bidding war that drives up prices) and which kinds are not. If you want frothing takes about how covid relief checks will create “debt for our grandchildren,” seek it on the editorial page. For sober recognition that giving small amounts of money to working people will simply go to reducing consumer and student debt, look to the news.

But WSJ reporters haven’t had their corpus colossi severed: the brain-lobe that understands economic reality crosstalks with the lobe that worship the idea of a class hierarchy with capital on top and workers tugging their forelacks. When that happens, the coverage gets weird.

Take this weekend’s massive feature on “zombie mortgages,” long-written-off second mortgages that have been bought by pennies for vultures who are now trying to call them in:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/zombie-mortgages-could-force-some-homeowners-into-foreclosure-e615ab2a

These second mortgages — often in the form of home equity lines of credit (HELOCs) — date back to the subprime bubble of the early 2000s. As housing prices spiked to obscene levels and banks figured out how to issue risky mortgages and sell them off to suckers, everyday people were encouraged — and often tricked — into borrowing heavily against their houses, on complicated terms that could see their payments skyrocket down the road.

Once the bubble popped in 2008, the value of these houses crashed, and the mortgages fell “underwater” — meaning that market value of the homes was less than the amount outstanding on the mortgage. This triggered the foreclosure crisis, where banks that had received billions in public money forced their borrowers out of their homes. This was official policy: Obama’s Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner boasted that forcing Americans out of their homes would “foam the runways” for the banks and give them a soft landing;

https://pluralistic.net/2023/03/06/personnel-are-policy/#janice-eberly

With so many homes underwater on their first mortgages, the holders of those second mortgages wrote them off. They had bought high-risk, high reward debt, the kind whose claims come after the other creditors have been paid off. As prices collapsed, it became clear that there wouldn’t be anything left over after those higher-priority loans were paid off.

The lenders (or the bag-holders the lenders sold the loans to) gave up. They stopped sending borrowers notices, stopped trying to collect. That’s the way markets work, after all — win some, lose some.

But then something funny happened: private equity firms, flush with cash from an increasingly wealthy caste of one percenters, went on a buying spree, snapping up every home they could lay hands on, becoming America’s foremost slumlords, presiding over an inventory of badly maintained homes whose tenants are drowned in junk fees before being evicted:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/02/08/wall-street-landlords/#the-new-slumlords

This drove a new real estate bubble, as PE companies engaged in bidding wars, confident that they could recoup high one-time payments by charging working people half their incomes in rent on homes they rented by the room. The “recovery” of real estate property brought those second mortgages back from the dead, creating the “zombie mortgages” the WSJ writes about.

These zombie mortgages were then sold at pennies on the dollar to vulture capitalists — finance firms who make a bet that they can convince the debtors to cough up on these old debts. This “distressed debt investing” is a scam that will be familiar to anyone who spends any time watching “finance influencers” — like forex trading and real estate flipping, it’s a favorite get-rich-quick scheme peddled to desperate people seeking “passive income.”

Like all get-rich-quick schemes, distressed debt investing is too good to be true. These ancient debts are generally past the statute of limitations and have been zeroed out by law. Even “good” debts generally lack any kind of paper-trail, having been traded from one aspiring arm-breaker to another so many times that the receipts are long gone.

Ultimately, distressed debt “investing” is a form of fraud, in which the “investor” has to master a social engineering patter in which they convince the putative debtor to pay debts they don’t actually owe, either by shading the truth or lying outright, generally salted with threats of civil and criminal penalties for a failure to pay.

That certainly goes for zombie mortgages. Writing about the WSJ’s coverage on Naked Capitalism, Yves Smith reminds readers not to “pay these extortionists a dime” without consulting a lawyer or a nonprofit debt counsellor, because any payment “vitiates” (revives) an otherwise dead loan:

https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2023/06/wall-street-journal-aids-vulture-investors-threatening-second-mortgage-borrowers-with-foreclosure-on-nearly-always-legally-unenforceable-debt.html

But the WSJ’s 35-paragraph story somehow finds little room to advise readers on how to handle these shakedowns. Instead, it lionizes the arm-breakers who are chasing these debts as “investors…[who] make mortgage lending work.” The Journal even repeats — without commentary — the that these so-called investors’ “goal is to positively impact homeowners’ lives by helping them resolve past debt.”

This is where the Journal’s ideology bleeds off the editorial page into the news section. There is no credible theory that says that mortgage markets are improved by safeguarding the rights of vulture capitalists who buy old, forgotten second mortgages off reckless lenders who wrote them off a decade ago.

Doubtless there’s some version of the Hayek Mind-Virus that says that upholding the claims of lenders — even after those claims have been forgotten, revived and sold off — will give “capital allocators” the “confidence” they need to make loans in the future, which will improve the ability of everyday people to afford to buy houses, incentivizing developers to build houses, etc, etc.

But this is an ideological fairy-tale. As Michael Hudson describes in his brilliant histories of jubilee — debt cancellation — through history, societies that unfailingly prioritize the claims of lenders over borrowers eventually collapse:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/07/08/jubilant/#construire-des-passerelles

Foundationally, debts are amassed by producers who need to borrow capital to make the things that we all need. A farmer needs to borrow for seed and equipment and labor in order to sow and reap the harvest. If the harvest comes in, the farmer pays their debts. But not every harvest comes in — blight, storms, war or sickness — will eventually cause a failure and a default.

In those bad years, farmers don’t pay their debts, and then they add to them, borrowing for the next year. Even if that year’s harvest is good, some debt remains. Gradually, over time, farmers catch enough bad beats that they end up hopelessly mired in debt — debt that is passed on to their kids, just as the right to collect the debts are passed on to the lenders’ kids.

Left on its own, this splits society into hereditary creditors who get to dictate the conduct of hereditary debtors. Run things this way long enough and every farmer finds themselves obliged to grow ornamental flowers and dainties for their creditors’ dinner tables, while everyone else goes hungry — and society collapses.

The answer is jubilee: periodically zeroing out creditors’ claims by wiping all debts away. Jubilees were declared when a new king took the throne, or at set intervals, or whenever things got too lopsided. The point of capital allocation is efficiency and thus shared prosperity, not enriching capital allocators. That enrichment is merely an incentive, not the goal.

For generations, American policy has been to make housing asset appreciation the primary means by which families amass and pass on wealth; this is in contrast to, say, labor rights, which produce wealth by rewarding work with more pay and benefits. The American vision is that workers don’t need rights as workers, they need rights as owners — of homes, which will always increase in value.

There’s an obvious flaw in this logic: houses are necessities, as well as assets. You need a place to live in order to raise a family, do a job, found a business, get an education, recover from sickness or live out your retirement. Making houses monotonically more expensive benefits the people who get in early, but everyone else ends up crushed when their human necessity is treated as an asset:

https://gen.medium.com/the-rents-too-damned-high-520f958d5ec5

Worse: without a strong labor sector to provide countervailing force for capital, US politics has become increasingly friendly to rent-seekers of all kinds, who have increased the cost of health-care, education, and long-term care to eye-watering heights, forcing workers to remortgage, or sell off, the homes that were meant to be the source of their family’s long-term prosperity:

https://doctorow.medium.com/the-end-of-the-road-to-serfdom-bfad6f3b35a9

Today, reality’s leftist bias is getting harder and harder to ignore. The idea that people who buy debt at pennies on the dollar should be cheered on as they drain the bank-accounts — or seize the homes — of people who do productive work is pure ideology, the kind of thing you’d expect to see on the WSJ’s editorial page, but which sticks out like a sore thumb in the news pages.

Thankfully, the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau is on the case. Director Rohit Chopra has warned the arm-breakers chasing payments on zombie mortgages that it’s illegal for them to “threaten judicial actions, such as foreclosures, for debts that are past a state’s statute of limitations.”

But there’s still plenty of room for more action. As Smith notes, the 2012 National Mortgage Settlement — a “get out of jail for almost free” card for the big banks — enticed lots of banks to discharge those second mortgages. Per Smith: “if any servicer sold a second mortgage to a vulture lender that it had charged off and used for credit in the National Mortgage Settlement, it defrauded the Feds and applicable state.”

Maybe some hungry state attorney general could go after the banks pulling these fast ones and hit them for millions in fines — and then use the money to build public housing.

Catch me on tour with Red Team Blues in London and Berlin!

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/06/04/vulture-capitalism/#distressed-assets

[Image ID: A Georgian eviction scene in which a bobby oversees three thugs who are using a battering ram to knock down a rural cottage wall. The image has been crudely colorized. A vulture looks on from the right, wearing a top-hat. The battering ram bears the WSJ logo.]

#pluralistic #great financial crisis #vulture capitalism #debts that can’t be paid won’t be paid #zombie debts #jubilee #michael hudson #wall street journal #business press #house thieves #debt #statute of limitations

129 notes · View notes

transgenderer · 5 months

Text

i think this has been passed around here before but i now understand finance enough to be like. good lord. its not even like, class interests, its just stupid! Part of the reason GSEs exist is to help low-income homeowners get access to financing. The GSEs have benchmarks for this. For example, Fannie needs to make 24% or more of their loans to borrowers whose income is below 80% of the area’s median income. Even for a government anti-poverty program, this is pathologically bad. A house is an illiquid asset whose value is mostly tied to local labor markets. You want people with low incomes to borrow money to double down on this!? Here’s what will happen: when the one big factory in a one-factory town closes, everybody who rents will leave. Real estate prices will plummet, so everybody who bought a house with a 10% down payment will lose their biggest asset and probably have a negative net worth.

If anything, our policy should do the opposite of what the GSEs promote: if you have a low income, and you try to borrow money to buy a house near where you work, there should be a surtax to discourage this bad diversification. There are other savings vehicles that don’t closely correlate with your income; buy those instead!

23 notes · View notes

survivingcapitalism · 11 months

Text

Without Affordable, Accessible, and Adequate Housing, Health Has No Foundation

Roshanak Mehdipanah 1

Abstract

Policy Points Today's housing disparities are rooted in the increasing commodification of housing that has taken precedence over the need for shelter, a basic human right. With rising housing costs across the country, more residents are finding their monthly income going to rent, mortgage payments, property taxes, and utilities, leaving little for food and medication. Housing is a determinant of health, and with increasing housing disparities, action must be taken to ensure no individual is displaced, communities remain intact, and cities continue to thrive.

Keywords: housing access; housing affordability; housing conditions.

#Housing #Housing is a human right

35 notes · View notes

hellionhpau · 1 month

Text

Request for Help

Hey guys. In compliance with AO3's policy, I'm posting this here on my private blog for this fic. I ask that if nothing else, you read and share!

So, this is not only embarrassing but also extremely difficult and saddening on my part. Unfortunately, I don't have a chapter update for you, but I am reaching out publicly to ask for help. Please read this whole thing before you dismiss this because I am in seriously bad shape here and am rapidly running out of options.

To hear a fuller story, you're free to reach out to me personally. If nothing else, if any of you can share that around, it would be a huge help.

Here's the low down, and some of you who have been with me from the beginning know some of it. So, in short order over a span of a little over a year: covid hit, I lost my job, I lost my house, my mother got extremely sick (not with covid), my sister, her family, and I move in together to help take care of her and to financially support each other. Turns out my sister's husband is a complete asshat, and it was a very abusive home for the year I lasted there. Shortly after I moved out, my mother died, my dog died, and then my grandmother died right before Christmas. Both my mom and my grandmother were my two biggest maternal figures of my life, so you can imagine the blow. Add to it, I was just staying with a friend, was making shit money, and spiraled into a bad, bad depression.

That's why I was gone for a year lol. I tried to pick myself up and became roommates with another friend. We had grand plans to move to the city and start great lives. However, it didn't work out. Suffice to say that neither of us were who the other thought we were. It ended on friendly terms, and thankfully, we hadn't made the jump to the city or I would have been fucked, man.

Things were looking up from there, but my depression wouldn't go away. I ended up staying too long at that shit job, then moved to factory work, and now I'm working two fucking jobs day in and out. I'm burning at both ends, and it's just not enough to cover the bills I'm still paying off for those two horrible years, my mother's funeral and burial, not to mention medical bills.

Right now, I can't pay my rent. I can't afford food, and I've been struggling to get on food assistance. I can't pay my therapist or doctor. And now this month, thanks to coming to head with some of the earlier mentioned debt (ie, my mother's gravestone), I don't know how the hell I'm supposed to pay my electric and phone bill, let alone afford the gas to get to my second job. I was so, so close to getting ahead of everything, and I just can't get over that edge…

I want to make this very, very clear—this is not me soliciting in any way. That is to say, this is not in any way, shape, or form requesting payment for anything I do on here. It's just my way of trying to reach out to anyone wanting to help a dude out.

I do want you guys to know I have no plans on abandoning this fic. Just the other day, I made time to pick through chapter six, adding in an extra ghoul scene for you. Also, you guys are hilarious. I give you an awesome adventure into Muggle London with Draco sodding Malfoy, and you guys were just like "i love the ghoul!"

Don't blame ya. I love them too. Don't worry, I had originally planned on the ghoul having more scene time in this than canon. Anything creature related, you know Hellion's going to be all over it lol.

If you took the time to read all this, thank you. It's embarrassing, having to ask for help, but I'm officially at the begging strangers position. Please, please, help if you can, even if it's just a dollar or sharing this.

For anyone interested, my paypal is paypal@deanjharrison or https://www.paypal.me/deanjharrison

Or this one: https://www.gofundme.com/f/dean-and-pets-recover-financially

Thanks, you guys! I appreciate you just taking the time to read this.

#harry potter #harry potter fandom #harry potter au #hellion #i need help #this is not my personal profit

7 notes · View notes

ausetkmt · 2 months

Text

National Review: Absurd Government Regulations Are Keeping People Out of Their Own Beds

sight. So policy-makers passed an ordinance that criminalizes camping on public land. People guilty of unauthorized sleeping sued, and the Supreme Court heard oral arguments on April 22, 2024. The case, Grants Pass v. Johnson, tests how far cities can go to regulate what happens on public property. But cities would not have so much homelessness in the first place if they did not actively stop affordable housing on private property.

This is what happened to Chasidy Decker, who lives 500 miles east of Grants Pass in Meridian, Idaho. Her problem is not that she lacks a bed. She already has one inside her tiny home on wheels, a 252-square-foot vehicle that she parks on private property. Her landlord leases space to her behind a fence in his side yard, which has hookups for water, sewer, and electricity. Yet Meridian will not let Decker sleep under her own roof. They warned her about expensive fines the day after she moved in. So, she has been homeless since August 2022.

Her trailer sits empty, while she scrambles for other accommodations.

Decker and her landlord sued to be left alone on private property. Our public-interest law firm, the Institute for Justice, represents them. A district-court trial ended in April, and they expect a decision by late summer.

Meanwhile, similar zoning disputes are unfolding nationwide. Many cities and counties oppose private housing solutions, which has contributed to a crisis affecting nearly every part of the economy. One charity, Tiny House Hand Up, tried to build affordable housing on its own land in Calhoun, Ga. But zoning officials stopped the project because of square-footage minimums. Calhoun residents must pay for bigger homes, even if they want smaller homes.

Anita Adams encountered a different roadblock when she tried to build a house in Seattle for her family. Zoning laws allowed construction, but the permit price included a $39-per-square-foot “housing affordability” fee—which added $80,000 to the project. Seattle demanded this payment to its public-housing fund before Adams could break ground. She and her family cannot afford the expense, meaning the city is effectively preventing them from building on their own property.

Amanda Root, a disabled, older resident living on a fixed income in Sierra Vista, Ariz., just wants to stay put on the same lot she has owned and occupied for more than 20 years. But code enforcers want her gone, citing a technicality: Her trailer has axles, and her street is zoned for mobile homes without axles. “I have looked at different options,” Root says. “There is nothing out there that I can afford. A tent? Where am I going to go? Behind Food City?”

Tiny House Hand Up, Adams, and Root all sued with representation from our firm. Lower-income families suffer the most from misguided policies such as these. Common tactics include occupancy caps, prohibitions on multifamily housing, and overregulation of accessory dwelling units, or “granny flats.” Shawnee, Kan., even criminalizes roommates. A 2022 ordinance makes it illegal for friends to split rent in single-family homes.

Multiple studies show what must be done: Let people build and operate housing on their own property. Yet real reform remains elusive — hindered on one side by not-in-my-backyard activists who think they should have control over how their neighbors live, and on the other side by people who believe it is immoral for developers to earn a profit — as if there were some other reason they would be willing to build.

Meanwhile, millions of ordinary families are getting pushed past their limits as the cost of living rises. People with mortgages are downsizing or consolidating. People who lease are falling behind. And those on the fringes are becoming homeless. Already, half of U.S. homeowners and renters are struggling to keep up.

The Grants Pass case deals with the fallout. Zoning reform could address homelessness before it happens. The Constitution provides the necessary firepower through the due-process clause of the 14thAmendment. State constitutions use similar language. Put in simple terms, these provisions mean the government cannot restrict activity on private land without good reason.

Decker does not want to sleep in a park. She has a bed. She just needs permission to use it.

#homeless

7 notes · View notes

museum-spaces · 1 year

Text

Oh nerds, I have had a week of a week. Frist off; house keeping. I got the job in Vancouver and my last day at Camel Town was yesterday. I start in Van in 7 days.

Now for my week of weeks,

While still interviewing find the Perfect Place to live. A 2 bedroom condo in my price range available in time for my start date. Stop looking for other places.

Get job offer, tell new landlord to move forward, get emails from his rental company, look up rental company and see it is a real one that exists.

Make plans with Sister to transport Ianto and I to Vancouver. Sister's partner takes a day off work to help.

Send deposit of 3400CAD to rental company [deposit consists of 1 month rent 1700, and two damage deposits - one for Ianto -totalling 1700]. Normal and legal in Canada. Most places just ask for one of the deposits but not illegal.

Do all that by Friday [9th]

Walking Ianto at 6;30am on Monday 12th - 4 days before planned move in date - and get email from rental company asking for another deposit of 3400 as 'insurance' because they have been 'having issues with transactions from Canada and the United States'. Will not send keys and paperwork before getting the additional funds.

Think for a minute and reply something like 'Landlord and I agreed on 3400, which you have just confirmed you received. Please send the keys etc asap.'

Alarmingly quickly Landlord [not company] emails me to say company got in touch with him and this is their policy. He will give me 20 per cent off rent for first 6 months if I just send the money. [This is the first red flag I actually notice]. I replythat I am moving in 4 days and if the transaction takes as long as the first one, I won't have anywhere to live but be out a fuckton of money.

Calll my parents. It's 6;30 in BC but they are visiting Ontario where its 9;30. Not worried about waking them. Mum immediately offers to transfer the money for me because part of the issue is that I have to move money around to get that much which takes up to 48 hours. I cut her off and say 'I feels scammy' which dad agrees with.

Dad is a retired real estate agent, gets in contact with folk in BC a few hours later while I go to work and freak out [had already packed my anxiety meds... not fun]. Turns out 'Landlord' doesn't have title for the condo.

Also Rental Company email is very obvious fake. I googled the company but didn't check the email. Like a fool.

Tell 'landlord' that I cannot move that amount of money in the time allotted and would like my deposit back please [didn't expect to get it back but... its the presidency.]

Looked for another rental. Found one that wasn't dog friendly. Ianto is a service dog but is not yet certified to BC standards. Thought I'd give it a shot anyway. Called and was very frank; just got scammed, moving at end of week for work, have a dog. She gave me a short list of other rentals she knew accept dogs because she could not allow Ianto before his test.

Contacted a few, Ianto was too big for a few, filled out an application to one, and got a virtual tour set up for the other [this takes us to Tuesday].

Tuesday email my contact at job in Vancouver to let her know that I might not be able to start on the 22nd because no home. She [witn permission] then contacts my board to let them know. One has a line on an apartment.

Discover my mattress is very mouldy.

Application denied with no option to contest, virtual tour cancelled because property manager got sick and couldn't reschedule until this coming Monday.

Call my bank about the scam. They start an investigation which will take about 10 days and cancel my debit card because... I don't know. [bringing us to the end of Wednesday]

Application to board member's suggestion accepted. Need to pay the down payment which is just one of the damage deposits. They take in-person payments or money orders. Because my card is currently... gone. I cannot do online or app banking. Would have to do in-person or phone. Nearest branch to me is 2 hours away by car and I don't drive. Try calling. It takes over an hour to discover that because of the investigation I cannot get a money order done via the phone. Because that would be too easy.

Call my parents - they were busy - texted my brother. Asking both if they could help. Brother puts me in contact with his partner who would have their car tomorrow at the same time my parents offer to do a money order for me. Get the address etc from new rental company [legit]. Send confirmation.

Move in date is [probably] Saturday.

So, a very week of a week if I do say so myself and it's not over yet. I need to finish packing still [wall art, blankets, the last of Ianto's stuff and odds-and-ends]. Still need to get there. Chance the Money Order won't get there in time - as it has to go from Ontario to BC and tomorrow is Friday. but... Better position by miles than on Monday.

There is a small chance my bank can get my money back but.... Unlikely and it was a painful lot of money to say the least.

#not museums #moving #scam #fraud #actually autistic #this is the first time that I really felt #gullible #I hate every second of it

35 notes · View notes

dreaminginthedeepsouth · 6 months

Text

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

January 4, 2024

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

JAN 5, 2024

The Democrats on the House Oversight Committee today released a 156-page report showing that when he was in the presidency, Trump received at least $7.8 million from 20 different governments, including those of China, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait, and Malaysia, through businesses he owned.

The Democrats brought receipts.

According to the report—and the documents from Trump’s former accounting firm Mazars that are attached to it—the People’s Republic of China and companies substantially controlled by the PRC government paid at least $5,572,548 to Trump-owned properties while Trump was in office; Saudi Arabia paid at least $615,422; Qatar paid at least $465,744; Kuwait paid at least $300,000; India paid at least $282,764; Malaysia paid at least $248,962; Afghanistan paid at least $154,750; the Philippines paid at least $74,810; the United Arab Emirates paid at least $65,225. The list went on and on.

The committee Democrats explained that these payments were likely only a fraction of the actual money exchanged, since they cover only four of more than 500 entities Trump owned at the time. When the Republicans took control of the House of Representatives in January 2023, Oversight Committee chair James Comer (R-KY) stopped the investigation before Mazars had produced the documents the committee had asked for when Democrats were in charge of it. Those records included documents relating to Russia, South Korea, South Africa, and Brazil.

Trump fought hard against the production of these documents, dragging out the court fight until September 2022. The committee worked on them for just four months before voters put Republicans in charge of the House and the investigation stopped.

These are the first hard numbers that show how foreign governments funneled money to the president while policies involving their countries were in front of him. The report notes, for example, that Trump refused to impose sanctions on Chinese banks that were helping the North Korean government; one of those banks was paying him close to $2 million in rent annually for commercial office space in Trump Tower.

The first article of the U.S. Constitution reads: “[N]o Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under [the United States], shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument [that is, salary, fee, or profit], Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.”

The report also contrasted powerfully with the attempt of Republicans on the Oversight Committee, led by Comer, to argue that Democratic Joe Biden has corruptly profited from the presidency.

In the Washington Post on December 26, 2023, Philip Bump noted that just after voters elected a Republican majority, Comer told the Washington Post that as soon as he was in charge of the Oversight Committee, he would use his power to “determine if this president and this White House are compromised because of the millions of dollars that his family has received from our adversaries in China, Russia and Ukraine.”

For the past year, while he and the committee have made a number of highly misleading statements to make it sound as if there are Biden family businesses involving the president (there are not) and the president was involved in them (he was not), their claims were never backed by any evidence. Bump noted in a piece on December 14, 2023, for example, that Comer told Fox News Channel personality Maria Bartiromo that “the Bidens” have “taken in” more than $24 million. In fact, Bump explained, Biden’s son Hunter and his business partners did receive such payments, but most of the money went to the business partners. About $7.5 million of it went to Hunter Biden. There is no evidence that any of it went to Joe Biden.

All of the committee’s claims have similar reality checks. Jonathan Yerushalmy of The Guardian wrote that after nearly 40,000 pages of bank records and dozens of hours of testimony, “no evidence has emerged that Biden acted corruptly or accepted bribes in his current or previous role.”

Still, the constant hyping of their claims on right-wing media led then–House speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) to authorize an impeachment inquiry in mid-September, and in mid-December, Republicans in the House formalized the inquiry.

There is more behind the attack on Biden than simply trying to even the score between him and Trump—who remains angry at his impeachments and has demanded Republicans retaliate—or to smear Biden through an “investigation,” which has been a standard technique of the Republicans since the mid-1990s.

Claiming that Biden is as corrupt as Trump undermines faith in our democracy. After all, if everyone is a crook, why does it matter which one is in office? And what makes American democracy any different from the authoritarian systems of Russia or Hungary or Venezuela, where leaders grab what they can for themselves and their followers?

Democracies are different from authoritarian governments because they have laws to prevent the corruption in which it appears Trump engaged. The fact that Republicans refuse to hold their own party members accountable to those laws while smearing their opponents says far more about them than it does about the nature of democracy.

It does, though, highlight that our democracy is in danger.

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

#corrupt GOP #corruption #letters from an american #heather cox richardson #Emolument

17 notes · View notes

mitigatedchaos · 7 months

Text

GPT-7: Thank you for your question!

I have analyzed the file you have uploaded.

The policy vector you have provided is generally referred to as "Genetic Mutual Insurance" by political scientists. It was first implemented as a general policy directive via executive order by Governor Manuel Alvarez of the Texas Free State in 2052.

There were significant questions about ethnic tensions following the breakup of Mexico in the previous decade, the secession of Texas from the weakening United States, and the merger of significant portions of Texas, New Mexico, and the northern Mexican League. GMI was an attempt to address these questions by the leadership at the time.

Alvarez considered the application of low-resolution equity-seeking racial classification schemes to have contributed to the 21st-century Mexican Civil War, which, along with the death of his son in the conflict, encouraged him to support Texas secession. GMI can be viewed as an inversion of these schemes.

Implementation

First, government programs in the Texas Free State were rephrased in terms of insurance or similar styles of program. A number of programs, such as schooling, medical care, and social housing, were shifted to a voucher system.

Second, the genomes of citizens of the Texas Free State were collected. 64 reference genomes were produced in order to divide the population into roughly 64 groups of approximately equal size.

This was used to form 64 risk and revenue pools, which would determine the amount of insurance payment and the size of the insurance payout. There was also a 65th pool for "citizen refused classification."

Though the original intent of the policy was that the evaluation of genetic distance should be continuous, the 64 bucket model was deemed easier to administrate. It was intended that the 64 reference genomes would be updated every ten years, although this did not occur while the policy was in effect.

Third, for each of the 64 reference genomes, each citizen was issued an 8-bit similarity score, including a version normalized across the distribution. This would determine how much of their funding would come from, or go into, each bucket, the size of the vouchers they would receive, and their required amount of payments.

Further plans, in which case workers would be assigned based on similarity, were quietly abandoned.

The Blake Committee, established by Alvarez in 2053 to work out how to enact "continuous autogenetic self-regulation" as an alternative to previous constructions such as national states, reached the conclusion that the fundamental tensions within the system could not be resolved, and wound down in 2057.

Effects

During the time that the policy was in place, gene therapy was becoming cheaper. Citizens with higher genetic proximity to the reference genomes associated with less wealthy, or higher-risk, pools engaged in gene therapy to shift their membership more towards pools with higher revenues and higher payouts. This kind of pool-shifting became a local industry.

However, due to the diverse origins of wealthy citizens in Texas, genetic homogenization did not proceed along one axis. Instead, shifters sought low-cost or perceived high-benefit gene therapies targeting multiple reference genomes, both for themselves, and for their children.

Termination

GMI was terminated in 2067 with the re-admission of Texas into the United States. It was supplanted by the more gene-agnostic "Inheritance Equilibrium Flow, Land & Material Rents" ('ILMR') model for a variety of reasons, including that the incentives for homogenization were considered problematic.

Todd James

During the rule of GMI, 1,086 children were born based on synthesizing the virtual reference genomes into actual DNA, including the popular streamer Todd James. These 'Texan reference genome children' have been subsequently studied by scientists. No special health effects have been found.

#augmented reality break #dont actually do this

11 notes · View notes

nazmazh · 8 months

Text

Not that I speak for my whole generation, let alone GenZers too, but man...

My parents and their friends are such fuckin' Boomers(TM) about certain generation differences.

It's all "Nobody wants to work", "People want too much money for too little effort and that's why nobody likes hiring them."

And, like. Just... Ugh.

Trying to explain things to them from the point of view of someone who gets lumped in as "one of them damned Millennial socialist-types" (which, I mean, I am, but still - my points don't stop existing because of that) or what have you, would be like trying to explain particle physics to a brick.

They just utterly cannot wrap their heads around the idea that things have changed in significant ways.

That even with consumer goods being cheaper, the costs of living, especially establishing yourself when you're young have gone way up - Rent/housing, vehicles, food, maintenance, loan payments, etc. - God forbid you actually want to start a family on top of all of that.

While wages effectively decrease more and more, especially relative to the amount of actual productivity generated.

And that with that, a lot of the "stay late, put in 110%" mentality (while being toxic and fundamentally just being free labour for employers, which we're all more conscious of as being, well, shitty for us workers) - That stuff isn't a nicety that'll make you stand out and look good for an employer come promotion-time. It's just expected or outright demanded of you. And when it comes time to promote or at least give raises? Nah - They'll nickel and dime and hem and haw about giving their own workers more money or less duties - They'll just bring in someone who feels more exploited somewhere else - And then turn around and complain about disloyalty when their employees leave for greener pastures in the same way.

And we're all a lot more conscious of the ill-effects of too much stress and poor work-life balance, so we try to push back against being overworked and burnt out where we can (That being said I absolutely do know people my age and younger who willingly get into that "grind mindset" and I worry for them. Like, are they actually getting enough money to meaningfully get ahead? Or are they just working themselves into an early grave for no real benefit?)

It's no longer the "just walk in, shake the manager's hand, work in the same place until retirement and comfortably make enough to buy a house and raise your kids through university with your partner being a SAHP." world anymore.

Like, the Boomers just don't get that we're in a situation where working harder doesn't translate to meaningful improvements for our lives.

To the point that it feels impossible to meaningful get ahead and achieve "milestones".

And when you're stating that down, expecting it to only get worse because of policies Boomers voted into place and by-and-large continue to vote into place. And that this is the expectation of how your life is going to be for the next 40+ years- It does lead to a sort of crushing, existential despair.

And if that doesn't break you just a little bit, well you're probably doing a lot better than a lot of people.

So there's two approaches that emerge from that (and they're not mutually-exclusive):

The first is just to check out. "If this job isn't gonna pay my bills no matter how good I do it, I'm just gonna do enough not to get fired."

And honestly, there's always been people like this in the workforce. The Olds are just mad because "How dare someone young not hop-to when they ought to!" They'll complain about useless coworkers of the same age too, but not with the same vitriol. Not with the same disdain. And they won't dismiss the whole generation as "lazy" or worse because if them.

The second strategy is to embrace what you can - Enjoy our many frivolous things. Toys (including recreational vehicles), games, computers, phones, streaming services, makeup, clothes, good food, whatever floats your boat. Because, as I said, those sorts of things are relatively less expensive these days.

Because if you're gonna never really be able to get a house, no amount of cutting back on avocado toast is gonna change that. And there's no point in denying yourself little joys indefinitely to aspire to it.

And this offends The Olds, because, 'how dare you have conspicuous consumption of any kind of you complain about not being able to afford rent or a mortgage?!". And back in the day, maybe you could save a meaningful amount if you cut back on little luxuries, and it would make enough of a difference to get you into a house/whatever your goal was notably sooner. And it'd only mean tightening your belt for a pre-determined amount of time - Not in perpetuity.

And of course, that's assuming you have the luxury of disposable income at all. I know I'm relatively privileged with an MSc (even if disability means I can't work, myself), let alone any university, so my friend circle is largely similarly privileged. There's plenty of people - Both younger and older than me - That can't even cut back on luxuries to save, because there's no money going to luxuries, period.

I guess the shift is that even things that used to guarantee you a "good, middle-class life" aren't really guaranteeing that anymore.

The kicker is that they too complain about life being shitty, work sucking, etc.

But then when anyone proposes that maybe the whole system is broken and we could rethink it?

Well, now that's outrageous! "How dare you be so ungrateful and not just pull yourself by your bootstraps you lazy slacker?! And why bother trying to change things? Just get sloppy drunk every night at the bar after work or something like that. That's how we've always coped as a society!"

I don't know if I ultimately have a point or solution to any if this, beyond, like, a total societal shift in the way we approach labour compensation and property commodification.

I just needed to get this ranting out of my system after holding my tongue at the table, several hours ago at this point.

Because as much as I disagree with their whole approach, down to their utter lack of empathy for those suffering in a world they helped make, there wouldn't be anything meaningful for me to actually gain by engaging them on their misinformation in the heat of the moment.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I've got to look up the difference between a fermion and a boson for a conversation I'm about to have with a paving stone.

#generation gap #ugh... Boomers #ramblings and rantings

9 notes · View notes

serahlink · 8 months

Text

‼️IN NEED OF HELP - please read!!‼️

Reblogs are also greatly appreciated!! :)

URGENT EDIT (8:17pm Oct 19th) : we only have three hours left to get the rest of what we need to pay another week with and so far we haven't been able to get any of the rest of what we need. We still need 120$ to be good for another week. If anyone could help us out (will present a receipt after we pay for the room) I would really greatly appreciate it since I'm afraid we really won't stand a chance if we have to go back to paying daily. Thank you.

Hi, back to bump my commissions again since we're getting to our payment deadline this week and we're still a good bit short. I've been doing my best to try and get everything we need but so far, nothing has been helping so I'm hoping to get some help here if possible since today is our last full day to try and get everything together.

For those who are just coming across this post, hi I'm Link and for two years now, my family and I (father and younger sibling) have been homeless due to a series of events back in November 2021 (my dad was in a diabetic coma and lost his van driving job so he and my sibling were left without a home, at the same time i was also left with nowhere to live so I got my friend to drive us to a motel, opened commissions and tried to keep us afloat from there.)

Just this month we've been able to pay for a week instead of daily, which was a blessing since we were barely paying for food, let alone rent. I'm hoping that we can get the rest of what we need (120$) because if we can't, we'll have to go back to paying daily. Which means, since they changed their policies from allowing us to let us take a day to collect the money if we needed, the moment we don't have it we will be kicked out, no if ands or buts. We have no family or anyone to turn to if that happens, so we're in desperate need of help.

Please, if anyone can reblog this or is interested in helping us out financially, you can either d/nate here or commission me! It means a lot since all the money goes to the room, and any little bit really does help. I'll put my prices and examples below if anyone is interested. Thank you if you do help, it really does make all the difference in our lives. :) <3

~Prices~

Sketch (price depending on type of sketch) - base price of 10$

Sketch page - 10$ per sketch

Headshot - 20$ (+10$ if shaded)

Bust - 30$ (+10$ if shaded)

Half body - 45$ (+10$ if shaded)

Full body - 60$ (+10$ if shaded)

Couples Commission (a commission that includes two people) - 90$ (+15$ if shaded)

Paintings (price depending on the details) - 100$+

28 notes · View notes

anon-e-has-a-tmblr · 2 months

Note

Hey moron, to the question about the Israeli who lost their leg, it was to make fun of you. Imagine literally becoming disabled over a land grab, then being dependent on the taxpayers. Pathetic. I was mocking her.lol

Hey there my lovely anon, I hope your friday is kind to you. You know it's very inpolite to come to random strangers and starting to insult them. Very uneducated and uncivilised of you.

Now to address your ask. It's far more common here to lose your limb in a car crash or a work accident, that's a first. Second, many people who lost their limbs (or were never born with them in the first place) still go to work and do what they can, since the disability benefits are not enough to even pay rent (not to mention food, bills, hygene etc.). Not to mention, people who become disabled later in life have paid their national insurance up until the time of injury, so whenever they start getting their disability payments they get it first from the money they paid. So they live off their own taxes for the first few years at least. Not to mention other insurence policies that people pay for when they're healthy so they can reclaim when they get so sick they can no longer work (or can't work for a very long time). So in summary, nobody is living off other people's taxes and your assumption is not only factually wrong, it's also abelist.

Also, now that I mentioned disabled people at large, how can you differenciate between veterans and other amputees? They all look the same sitting on a wheelchair. Are you gonna tell Rafael he's lost his legs in a "land grab war" when in fact he just got yoiked out of his bike when a truck hit him? Or are you gonna make fun of Issac, who lost his leg to a mine, not knowing it happened to him when he was a teenager who got lost in an old minefield? And why, because both just so happened to be Israeli?

Yes I know, a very serious and thoughtful answer to a troll who doesn't even care because they're so antisemitic they became an abelist in the process. But you should have known better before sending an ask my dear, I use you as a teaching moment to the lovely people who visit my small corner.

#amd yes these 2 stories are real men who came to my highschool #they were a part of a group who came to play basketball with us #the game was quite fun and they also told us about their daily life #3 out of 7 mentioned their background #the third that i didnt mention here was born with a disability so his story is irrelevant to this conversation #ask #anon #idiot #obviously the names are not the guys' rean names #not that it matters because i dont remember their names lol

3 notes · View notes