It is hard for me to buy that Hueso genuinely views renters as inferior constituents and I wonder if you, a renter, are just being a bit sensitive about the matter. However, thought I would illustrate something about your use of absolutes. Renting is a rational choice for many but so is owning... Take for example the following... a house (same floor plan as mine) on my street recently rented for 2400.00 a month or 28,800/yr. The annual nut on my house 8 doors down is 38,400 (including p tax). The tax benefit on my house (yes I am in a high bracket) is approximately 10,400. So effectively my cost of ownership is 28,000/yr or 8 hundred less than I would pay for renting the same house (which actually has nicer landscaping). I bought at the highpoint (in 2005) with a conservative loan (fixed rate).

Posted by Basic Civics | reply to this comment
November 19, 2008 6:32 pm

Take a trip around District 8. Look at the areas that are primarily rented and those that are long term homeowners, particularly in the South of the District. There is no comparison of the standards of the neighborhoods. Homeowners generally take significantly more care of a neighborhood they are invested in. Encouraging home ownership for people intending to stay for long periods of time is a great strategy. The current financial meltdown has created an atmosphere of unmatched opportunity for particularly first time buyers who thought that they would never be able to get on the homeowner ladder. Scott, HYPER sensitive. He stated a simple fact that neighborhoods with owner-occupied properties are generally better maintained, creates a higher buy in to long-term community buy in and "pride of ownership". I have never heard "pride of rentership" banded about.

Posted by Homeowner | reply to this comment
November 19, 2008 10:50 pm

Homeowner says: "The current financial meltdown has created an atmosphere of unmatched opportunity for particularly first time buyers who thought that they would never be able to get on the homeowner ladder." Assuming they want to buy on the way down, you bet. Let's see ownable properties show up in an environment liquid enough to make straight-across trades possible for people who make $20k or even $50k a year, and maybe you'll be onto something, Homeowner. I'm not holding my breath on that one. Yes, there is more "soundness" in homeowners; they're more nearly "all-in". Yes, some renters treat their dwellings and surroundings like rented cars with the waivers paid up. Still, Scott's post is moving me to hit the tip jar here, even though I live halfway upstate from you folks. Thanks, Scott!

Posted by Nortius Maximus | reply to this comment
November 20, 2008 12:30 am

To quote Krugman: "And while we’re at it, let’s try to open our minds to the possibility that those who choose to rent rather than buy can still share in the American dream — and still have a stake in the nation’s future." No matter how you slice it, buying a $500,000 home that is worth $350,000 two years later is NOT a good investment, even if you get a tax break. We're now looking at a Japanese style liquidity trap. That's not good for those hoping inflation would bail them out.

Posted by kirkH | reply to this comment
November 20, 2008 7:22 am

We have very long term renters in Kensington. Like many of the homeowners here, the renters tend to stay in an apartment, condo or house for ten or twenty years or longer. Often houses are passed down in families and the surviving heirs, who live elsewhere, are happy to find long term renters. The renters know a good neighborhood when they find it, and, unless you ask, there is no way to tell a renter of a single family home from an owner around here. Everyone seems to take the same "pride in ownership" in our neighborhood. They seem to fall into the two ends of the age spectrum - young couples/families just starting out, or older, singles who are either divorced or widowed and near retirement age. Renting works for them, and renting in our community works for us all. We arehappytohavehem.

Posted by goodhabits | reply to this comment
November 20, 2008 8:59 am

Basic Civics situation is great, for him. Unfortunately, most households do not make his apparent income, which I would guess is over $150k. Most households last year made less than half that much, according to the Census. In addition, his calculation does not include maintenance, utilities and yard upkeep, which an apartment/condo renter does not have. Civic pride does not have anything to do with ownership. Civic pride is a product of your family and ethnic upbringing, coupled with the appreciation for local, regional and national history. I owned a home for almost eight years, but most of my life I have lived in a rented home, and I consider myself an upstanding citizen(with the record to prove it.). It still makes more sense for most households in San Diego to rent so that their members aren't saddled with a mortgage that prevents them from enjoying this beautiful city.

Posted by David | reply to this comment
November 20, 2008 10:37 am

I think that the effect on communities with renters vs. owners is pretty apparent. By and large, landlords are not going to invest in upscale landscaping, pretty-up the exterior of the rental home or do a lot of upgrades -- whereas owners will. I'm the only renter on my block in an upscale neighborhood, and my house LOOKS like the rental house in comparison with my neighbors. We get the basic lawn-mowing included in our rent, but the auxiliary plants are pretty low-budget. We are good neighbors and responsible members of the community, but we're obviously not going to invest in painting the exterior of our house or the faded shutters or adding attractive ornamental plants. So there is a difference, even when the renters are "well-heeled" and just making a smart choice.

Posted by Effect on community | reply to this comment
November 20, 2008 11:07 am

Come on, Scott. Do you really think that Hueso has the intellectual capacity to differentiate between those who have to rent vs those who choose to rent? I'm not being trite here. Ben Hueso is a superficial person who has shown time and time again that he's not one of those deep thinkers we all want making decisions. I'd like to hope that he's just in that "developer mode" to support the unbridled growth of homes, but in reality he is truly unable to grasp basic facts. Let's admit that and move on.

Posted by Larry | reply to this comment
November 19, 2008 5:44 pm

Thanks. I was gonna make the same point. We're often too quick to forget that going interest rates and the mortgage interest tax deduction are germane to the question of what's rational for individuals with a regular income. Sure, that tax deduction is screwy and has some ill effects and I think it's worth amending. But it has to be accounted for in the meantime.

Posted by Augmented Ballot | reply to this comment
November 19, 2008 10:23 pm

So to followup... I could obsess irationally that I have now lost about 80k on my investment due to short term volatility in the market, or I could take the long view and be pleased with my investment. I chose the latter. I also note, that rental payments typically rise at an amount higher than inflation (no rent control in my hood)... So if I were to do an ROI and provide you with it... You would still have a tough time arguing that I got screwed. Also consider that on a ten year horizon my net cash out is the same while your rent will likely have increased two fold. As far as renters being lame, well I must say that the college kids that moved into the house aren't the most concientious neighbors but I try and avoid absolutes...

Posted by Basic Civics | reply to this comment
November 19, 2008 6:40 pm

Calm down, Scott, just because all the lily-white journalists at VOSD are renters, it doesn't mean that renters make the best mortar for strengthening communities in either poor OR rich neighborhoods, as Councilman Ben Hueso rightly said. Hueso knows whereof he speaks, first of all because he owns numerous rental properties in his own district, and probably could tell plenty of landlord war-stories as well as dreams-of-redevelopm stories. Secondly, homeowners always have a bigger stake in how things are going on the block or at the local school, because they are rooted in placed by their financial commitment, aka mortgage. Renting right now may be an intelligent personal financial strategy for DINK couples like voice writers, but owning a home is the all-American ideal lifetime investment for working families like Hueso's constituents.

Posted by Fed Up | reply to this comment
November 19, 2008 6:54 pm

Yes, renting is a rational choice, and most renters are good people. But there is no question that home ownership causes the owners to feel like they have a greater stake in their community, and more at risk should things in the community not go well, such as the crime rate going up, or taxes going up or down. They are also, on average, more industrious and involved in the community. Of course, one cannot include in this generalization all the knuckleheads who became "homeowners" through inflated income numbers and 100% financing - they never were homeowners, and the way things are going might never be. In any event, this is really scraping the bottom for a news story - the NY Times would probably love it.

Posted by Ronald Truman | reply to this comment
November 19, 2008 8:28 pm

I heard this same "no renters in my backyard" song and dance from Nick Inzunza- straight from his mouth. I was insulted then. I am insulted now. I have been a renter for decades in the same apartment, same neighborhood. I am committed to my community. I work and I pay taxes. We should not help people to home ownership who can not afford the full cost. I think we're seeing the impact of moving too many, too quickly -into homes that they can not afford. Hueso wake up.

Posted by mimi | reply to this comment
November 19, 2008 8:54 pm

It appears the city's own report (I believe March of 2007) on Barrio Logan has the population at about 90% Latino and about 90% renters. It seems they are currently paying an average rent of some 450 dollars a month. When rents go up due to redevelopment – where will all those people go? Affordable housing – what is truly affordable when some 65% of people in San Diego make less than 47,000 a year? Home ownership – the city should just tell people the reality of their inability to provide services due to costs to all these working class people living in single families homes all over our city. The city must housed them in high-density housing (for the workers) if the city is to have any hope of providing even a basic level of services into the future.

Posted by Gregory | reply to this comment
November 19, 2008 10:11 pm

Scott, homeowners tend to vote more reliably. So programs targeting their interests, including the mortgage tax break, are rational. Same with dumb ideas, like forcing lenders to fund mortgages for political rather than economic reasons. Ben Hueso is signaling he'll use city resources to bail out homeowners because homeowners elect local politicians. Renters are fickle voters in comparison. Hueso will rationally benefit reliable home owning voters rather than undependable renters. It has nothing to do with economics, everything to do with winning elections. To a politician, those renters ARE undesirables.

Posted by Fred Williams | reply to this comment
November 20, 2008 7:23 am

I am almost 50 years old. I have rented in San Diego all my adult life. I have voted in every major election, and every minor election except two (one special election when I wasn't sent a sample ballot, and another special election when I couldn't decide who to vote for in a runoff). I'd buy a house, but that's hard to do here on one income.

Posted by LCb | reply to this comment
November 20, 2008 8:23 pm

Homeowner...interest point. So I ask, the properties that Hueso owns, how well maintained are they? I know some landlords that buy property to suck the money out them. They don't care about improvements or maintenance just the money. I wonder about Mr. Hueso's ambition to become council president. Is it public service goals or his ego? It's evident that Ms. Frye works her butt off and digs down deep to find out the truth and make changes. But it's the old boys group here and Hueso got pushed onto the Coastal Commission so I wonder what the future will bring. I also wonder what kind of a property owner he is ...actions speak louder than words. So if anyone out there has comments fill me in. Muchas Gracias!

Posted by Norman | reply to this comment
November 20, 2008 8:02 am

Anyone who buys a house in this market is a sucker. This is a time when buying a home is throwing one's money away. I'll buy when I can get the house I want in an area I want for the same as rent.

Posted by Poppa | reply to this comment
November 20, 2008 11:17 am

Can they bailout the Homeless ? Can they help pay my student loan? Can they pay my credit card that I had spent for my x girl friend breast implant?

Posted by Sarcastic Gman | reply to this comment
November 21, 2008 11:54 am

The single most used, durable, and reliable source of stored wealth for the working class is their home. Yet over the last eight years, it appears the average total wage and other compensations to the majority of workers in our country decreased at a rate of about $500 a year (in value). All this while the cost of living, insurance, food, energy, housing, education… has just about tripled. In the recent economic model wealth is being pulled from the worker, not from a disparity of wage compensation v production - as in a real Capitalist economy, but in allowing, nay encouraging and coxing, the working families of our nation to gather untenable levels of debt. Moreover, as those workers in the past were allowed access to levels of debt they had no realistic expectation of maintaining, the reserve wealth of the older generations of workers was removed.

Posted by Gregory | reply to this comment
November 23, 2008 10:55 am

• Users may post more than one comment, but should not pose as multiple users. Multiple posts from the same IP address but with a different user name on each will be reviewed to determine whether abuse has occurred.
• Posts with overly personal attacks or unsubstantiated allegations may be edited or deleted.
• Please be patient with the posts -- there may be a delay before they appear on the site -- and make sure to enter the code in the "image verification" box.