Brooklyn Breaks the Bank for Housing
Homeowners in Brooklyn are paying plenty for their housing—more than just about anyone else in New York City or State, in fact. According to 2006 Census data, 31 percent of Brooklyn homeowners with a mortgage are spending half or more of their earnings on housing, the highest percentage of any large county in the state….
Homeowners in Brooklyn are paying plenty for their housing—more than just about anyone else in New York City or State, in fact. According to 2006 Census data, 31 percent of Brooklyn homeowners with a mortgage are spending half or more of their earnings on housing, the highest percentage of any large county in the state. And 55 percent of Brooklyn homeowners paid 30 percent or more of their income for housing while shouldering the second-highest (after Manhattan) monthly costs in the city, at $2,194. A recipe for disaster or just the way it’s always been?
Housing Takes Bigger Bite of New Yorkers’ Incomes, Census Data Shows [NY Times]
For most people, 150-200K is pretty affordable still.
You’re splitting hairs now.
Looking for anything less than 150K in ANY city would be a more difficult task these days. This is still New York, afterall. To be able to find something for 200K in the city and within a half hour of Manhattan is a doable thing.
That’s all I was saying.
“Usually with these examples, one need not look too far to find missteps.”
Spoken by a true rich fucker who most likely works in finance or some other occupation without true labor but simply shuffling other peoples money around.
To just get you started, there are no $100K condos to be found in:
Midwood
Ditmas Park
Kensington
The minimum asking price in those areas seems to be about $150-200K these days. Alas.
There’s an article in today’s amNY that features Woodhaven, Queens. I think that this is a classic example of the type of neighborhoods that 12:37 is referring to. It may not be Park Slope, Astoria, or Williamsburg, but it exists and the rents there are more affordable.
http://www.amny.com/news/local/am-cityliving0913,0,292054.story
I do agree that peoples commonly (and perhaps unknowingly) define Brooklyn as the tiny northwest portion near Manhattan. Brooklyn is a huge place and not all areas are as expensive as Brooklyn Heights.
Midwood
Ditmas Park
Kensington
Brighton Beach
Coney Island
Flatbush
Bushwick
Jackson Heights
Sunnyside
To just get you started….
Guest from 11:26-
Could you tell me which neighbourhoods, please? Just curious.
This doesn’t happen in other cities.
In Los Angeles, no one think they deserve to live in Beverly Hills or Bel Air or Holmby Hills. That’s how the whole inland empire of Riverside came to be. Those that couldn’t afford the exclusive sections of LA, moved to the west and south. In San Francisco, people have been priced to Oakland, a far less desireable area.
Here in New York, you people are so caught up with materialism that if you can’t live in Manhattan or a select handful of Brooklyn neighborhoods, you think the world has come to an end.
There are places in Queens, Brooklyn etc that are perfectly lovely places to live where you can get a 2 bedroom apartment for 250k-300k.
Most of you would consider that horrific.
That’s fine, but please don’t exclaim that these places don’t exist and that New York is only a place where rich people can live.
If you have a modest income, you get a modest place to live. You don’t get to make 60K and year and live in a loft in Tribeca.
Sorry.
The data used for this report are from the Census’s American Community Survey. The information is based on what is reported by whoever in the household answers the survey. As in the decennial Census, the income data reported in the ACS is supposed to be gross income, from all sources.
Doesn’t this just go hand in hand with why Black people are moving down south….