https://libranet.de/display/0b6b25a8-1064-9f1d-19cc-889757430978
> one of the driving forces in the west of poverty is social stigma against multi-generational housing.
That's probably true, but most families don't have any kind of shared governance that makes that acceptable. Having "Big Momma" as the matriarch or "Poppa" as the patriarch worked in the 1800s when people didn't have any choice, but these days, we don't want someone ordering us around without our input.
Also, it isn't just a social stigma. It is endorsed by government agencies such as social services (one nephew lost custody of his child because he moved in with his mom, uncle, and grandmother despite the mother initially abandoning the child when she left) and schools (one nephew and his gf still live at home with their 3 kids; according to the school system, they are considered homeless ... the district gets special funding for the kid that is in school ... and all my sisters are current or former school employees)
> I have had numerous finical advisors tell me I should be spending ~50% of my income on housing costs.
It used to be that spending over 30% of household income was considered financially stressed. I don't know whether they still use that figure, but I think most renters are way over 30%.
LinuxWalt (@lnxw48a1) {3EB165E0-5BB1-45D2-9E7D-93B31821F864}
All Chirp! content and data are available under the