02-10-2022, 10:17 PM
(02-10-2022, 06:12 PM)CKwi88 Wrote: That's actually an interesting point. Personally, when I hear "affordable housing" I think of subsidized public housing. That's the connotation, for me. But the HUD just describes affordable housing as housing that costs less than 30% of someone's gross income.
It's a pretty important distinction to make, and one that isn't 100% clear in this case.
That's the connotation for A LOT of people (I would guess the overwhelming majority). And herein lies the problem. It is nearly impossible to find a solid definition for affordable housing. It is generally accepted as housing costing 30% of someones gross income, but I've also read that that applies to a gross income that is 65% or less of the median income for a region. Incomes obviously vary greatly from region to region, so what is affordable housing can fluctuate wildly. This can even be applied to regions within regions.
Add to that, affordable housing when applied to rents is almost impossible to understand and is often left up to the input and determinations of the HUD Secretary. In the Chapelle's case, are we talking about affordable housing to buy or rent? We don't know. Regardless, just try to understand this word salad.....
https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/NAHA215.TXT
All of that said, the headline written the way that is, is vague. Wether it is done intentionally or not, we don't know. At the very least, it is pretty poor journalism to write it that way.
So here we are, being left to discussing and maligning a guy over his opposition to something that we cannot even define. It's honestly not fair to Chapelle to draw any conclusions about his statements and what motivated them. Hence, my first post in this thread.
