When I was younger I lived in a town with a high proportion of rentals, mostly occupied by students at a nearby college. There was a middle-aged guy who had come to town as a student, never got ahead, and was watching the world pass him by. He had lived in town for maybe 25 years, the last 10 or 15 at the same address, and was very concerned about ongoing efforts to improve the neighborhood.
He said people at his income level normally ended up in the ghetto and he desperately wanted to avoid that - he'd gladly continue to put up with the problems of a student rental neighborhood to avoid the ghetto.
He considered himself a "permanent renter" who was "living on the economic margin" with "no hope of buying a home". He came to neighborhood association meetings and the rest of us regarded him as a sort of neighborhood Luddite, trying to gum up the works of progress. He said he had seen all but one of his neighborhood friends forced out of town by rising rents, and the one who remained was able to buy a home before the rents got too high.
He said he was "all in favor of improving the neighborhood" as long as it didn't make him worse off financially. He said he wasn't part of the problem and wasn't able or willing to pay for a solution. After all, he said, what's the use of spending time and effort to improve your neighborhood if you get priced out and can't enjoy the fruits of your labor? He would ask whether any of the rest of us would get up in the morning and go to work if there was no payoff at the end of the week - why would anyone shoot themselves in the foot?.
We didn't know what to say to the guy - nothing we said seemed to placate him. What would you say? Improving the neighborhood is good for investors and homeowners, but is it good for the renter on the margin?
He said people at his income level normally ended up in the ghetto and he desperately wanted to avoid that - he'd gladly continue to put up with the problems of a student rental neighborhood to avoid the ghetto.
He considered himself a "permanent renter" who was "living on the economic margin" with "no hope of buying a home". He came to neighborhood association meetings and the rest of us regarded him as a sort of neighborhood Luddite, trying to gum up the works of progress. He said he had seen all but one of his neighborhood friends forced out of town by rising rents, and the one who remained was able to buy a home before the rents got too high.
He said he was "all in favor of improving the neighborhood" as long as it didn't make him worse off financially. He said he wasn't part of the problem and wasn't able or willing to pay for a solution. After all, he said, what's the use of spending time and effort to improve your neighborhood if you get priced out and can't enjoy the fruits of your labor? He would ask whether any of the rest of us would get up in the morning and go to work if there was no payoff at the end of the week - why would anyone shoot themselves in the foot?.
We didn't know what to say to the guy - nothing we said seemed to placate him. What would you say? Improving the neighborhood is good for investors and homeowners, but is it good for the renter on the margin?
Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum:
Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.
Last edited: