barry_abides

barry_abides t1_jefg3ap wrote

I'm familiar with the type of people you're referring to, and it does sound like they could benefit from some spending restraint to reduce some of their financial issues. My comments were directed more towards all the other folks who may not have a choice in their economic circumstances. It sounds like you have been tightening the belt both literally and figuratively, and it's good that you're able to find some positives in your own situation. For many who are struggling, the choice may not be about eating out less or getting a cheaper car, but opting to skip critical medical care or dealing with unsafe living conditions because they can't afford better. Always dangerous to generalize or assume the worst in people who aren't living under the same circumstances.

5

barry_abides t1_jef1agp wrote

Pretty sure the venn diagram of people making 35k and those going on multiple vacations a year has little to no overlap. If your income is that low you're not getting approved for a huge credit line to fund these hypothetical trips. Either way, your use of "some" and "a lot" seems to indicate a level of acknowledgement that some (if not many, or most) of the people struggling with a low paying job are doing so on a modest or highly constrained budget. Not everyone is able to find work that pays more or spend more time working to increase their income (or work period).

I want more programs and investment to help minimum wage earners, and everyone who can't or won't work, or is dealing with addiction, mental health issues, mobility issues, etc. - everybody deserves a safe place to live even if they aren't fulfilling people's capitalist ideals or "contributing to society". There are certainly those who spend beyond their means, but I highly doubt they're in the majority when it comes to the income bracket you're talking about.

9

barry_abides t1_jaey09y wrote

Yes, if we had the inclusionary zoning policy in place already they would have to provide the same number of affordable units (or pay into the housing trust) and we wouldn't need to provide any tax incentives. Tell your city councilors to get inclusionary zoning on the books ASAP!

13

barry_abides t1_jaewaqj wrote

I read through this proposal, currently they're planning to designate 36 one-bedroom units (out of 364 total units) as affordable. Their current projected monthly rent for the affordable units is $1,243. This is likely subject to change based on the 60% area median income (AMI) threshold once it gets built. As written, the affordability would only last as long as the tax incentive (15 years). After that they would go up to market rate pricing.

19

barry_abides t1_jadidej wrote

They're gonna need an authoritative elementary school crossing guard or physical barrier to get people safely across that rotary crosswalk during the morning and evening commute. Hope nobody gets hit by cars exiting the rotary. The parking lot will likely become a de facto pick-up drop-off area and create a mess with people trying to pull back out onto Shrewsbury Street.

8

barry_abides t1_j7r34o3 wrote

In theory, you could build equity the first 10-20 years, once you hit 62 you could get a reverse mortgage (or other financing/home equity loan earlier than that) to tap into the equity to pay for living expenses (sort of an elaborate savings account/retirement plan). Also when calculating whether it's cheaper to buy vs. rent don't forget to factor in taxes - all the interest you pay on the mortgage is tax deductible. If you sell the house after 2 years, the capital gains from any increase in value are also not taxable. Mortgage payment will also stay constant, while rent generally increases (property taxes and insurance will likely go up though).

Plus you have the advantage of not giving all your money to subsidize landlords who are exploiting a basic human need - housing. If you have a decent landlord who keeps up with maintenance and doesn't ask for significant rent increases, it may be better to stay in your current situation.

2

barry_abides t1_j2xy67m wrote

Great resource - thanks for putting this together! I'll also add that many of these accept CanPay (app that links to debit card to avoid additional fees). Their app shows Good Chem, Resinate, Trulieve, The Botanist, Bud's Goods, and Mayflower - some may also accept it as an online payment method.

3

barry_abides t1_j111lms wrote

Where the tax dollars go, per the FY22 budget: "Education costs account for 57.3% of all City expenditures, fixed costs account for 19.3%, Public Safety (including Police, Fire, Emergency Communications and Inspectional Services) account for 14%, Public Works and Parks account for 3.1% and the remaining 6.3% funds other city operations."

5

barry_abides t1_j110oa5 wrote

Here's all the salaries from last year, bet you can guess which dept. is actually getting the majority of the 6 figure salaries. Hardly any involved in city planning get anywhere close. https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/PRGYr/3/

5

barry_abides t1_ix3k5vc wrote

The good news is there are multiple offshore wind projects in the process of approval and development in federal waters off of MA - thousands of megawatts (far beyond the capacity of Pilgrim power station). The state already has power purchase agreements in place.

https://www.boem.gov/renewable-energy/state-activities/massachusetts-activities

11

barry_abides t1_iv26yrb wrote

It's the next county over, but some fun cider events going on over in Franklin County this weekend: https://www.ciderdays.org/

Some local breweries (Redemption Rock, Greater Good) host events pretty regularly, so worth checking their websites and social media.

New England Botanic Garden (formerly Tower Hill) seems to have some cool activities too: https://purchase.nebg.org/calendar.aspx

7