I'm really worried about the low-income families in NYC, they're already struggling to make ends meet and this rent hike would be devastating for them . The 30% cap is a good rule of thumb, it's like my grandma always says "you can't put all your eggs in one basket" . By capping the contribution rate at 30%, the city council is ensuring that these families have some wiggle room to save up for other essential expenses, food and healthcare come to mind .
so like if we take 30% as max rent they can pay, that's still super flexible it means if they get paid $1000 a month, they only gotta pay $300 in rent max but like with the new increase to 40%, it's like they're being asked to pay more of their income just for a place to live which is not fair to people who are already struggling to make ends meet
I'm all about finding ways to make ends meet, you know? So when I hear about housing vouchers helping people pay rent, it's like a weight lifted off my shoulders . But in this case, if the city council is gonna vote to override the mayor's veto on capping contributions at 30% of income, I'm totally down for it . It's just basic fairness, right? Not putting already-strained households under even more pressure by increasing rent costs . And can we talk about how the mayor-elect plans to expand access to these programs once in office? That sounds like a total game-changer !
I'm so worried about my friends in school who have family members using housing vouchers . My friend's cousin has been struggling to pay rent because of her housing voucher, she can barely buy food let alone clothes or textbooks . If the contribution rate increases to 40%, it will be super tough for them to afford anything else . I think the city council is making a great decision by not allowing the mayor's veto, they're actually helping low-income families who need it most .
just think about it, if mayor's rent hike idea was correct, low-income ppl would be even worse off, like seriously can't live in decent place with 10% left over what's the point of "progressive" policies if they just make things harder for people who need help most?
I'm really worried about the low-income families in NYC, they're already struggling to make ends meet and this rent hike would be devastating for them 
. The 30% cap is a good rule of thumb, it's like my grandma always says "you can't put all your eggs in one basket" 
. By capping the contribution rate at 30%, the city council is ensuring that these families have some wiggle room to save up for other essential expenses, food and healthcare come to mind 
.
so like if we take 30% as max rent they can pay, that's still super flexible 
it means if they get paid $1000 a month, they only gotta pay $300 in rent max 
but like with the new increase to 40%, it's like they're being asked to pay more of their income just for a place to live 
which is not fair to people who are already struggling to make ends meet 
. It's just basic fairness, right? Not putting already-strained households under even more pressure by increasing rent costs 
. And can we talk about how the mayor-elect plans to expand access to these programs once in office? That sounds like a total game-changer 
!
. If the contribution rate increases to 40%, it will be super tough for them to afford anything else 
. I think the city council is making a great decision by not allowing the mayor's veto, they're actually helping low-income families who need it most 
.
what's the point of "progressive" policies if they just make things harder for people who need help most? 