What matters to the economic conservative is whether or not his salary increase will afford a reasonable increase in standard of living. The liberal economic voter cares more about whether their standard of living will approach that of the higher economic class while maintaining the same level of employment. For him, the work of a CEO should not be any more valuable than that of a blue collar worker per unit of work whether it be hours or widgets. The crucial difference between the two can be found in the messaging that they receive from both political factions.
If the conservatives fail to meet the liberals where their viewpoint lies, the socialist candy man candidates will win every time. The liberals believe that the economy under the control of the government should afford them a comfortable lifestyle regardless of the value of their work to society. The belief that the “rich” are merely greedy and don’t deserve their wealth, that they set prices too high and don’t pay “their fair share” of the tax burden is simply a social analgesic to the disparity in earnings. So, let’s meet them where they are.
The first question should be how did you arrive into the less than deserved lifestyle? The answer is almost always that the big corporations collude to set prices too high. The response in turn should be that if the prices were too high for too many customers, they would sell less widgets. The second question should be why are their prices that high? The answer is almost always that corporations are greedy, taking advantage of the demand for their goods and services. The explanation should be offered that for every product type, there is a cost to produce. As the manufacturers compete for customers and set prices high enough to make a sufficient profit above the cost of production, but yet low enough to attract enough customers, the industry competitors establish competitive profit margins. this indicates the range of profit that makes a company competitive in that industry.
As the global elites lose their US federal slush funds that flowed through their shadow NGOs, NPOs, and the UN, they are desperately trying to protect their state and local government sources, the paid for elected officials and their obscure welfare networks. It is the global elites that pay the professional activists. It is they that subsidize the Islamists campaigns for city council and mayor, and state legislature. They are the engineers that shape the local political landscape from town aldermen to county commissioner. This is all going on across the country. Their objective is to socialize the US and redistribute its wealth to the poorer nations, rendering our selves economic dependents of our rivals.
Their tactics have changed since President Trump came into his second term. Rather than to facilitate federal government agency operatives to expand the welfare state, they use their assets to prepare and support their chosen local candidates to reign in socialist local economies and create violent protests against the deportation of their most loyal voting bloc, the illegal migrants. They are still intending to house them and give them full local voting rights. Each bond issue produces a 5-8 year increased tax burden on the property owner. In North Carolina, the $80M bond issue of 2020 was covered in part by Biden’s American Rescue Plan to the tune of $556,224,453. With that being no longer available in 2026, local governments will tax the private sector to death and chase corporations out of the blue cities and states in order to economically enslave the renters. They will tax seniors out of their homes and into apartments and condos. They will waste no time going after single family homeowners to tax them out of their homes. Their interest is in acquiring an increasing high density voting constituency that can be secured with all kinds of expensive services like mental health, health insurance, and rent assistance, all on the increased revenue of maximized property taxes. The city councils attract developers by offering them loans at below market interest rates and federal tax credits for each subsidized unit they make possible. The legal stipulation is that the development must make 40% of the units available to families earning less than 60% of AMI or 20% of the units available to less than 50% AMI. Households earning from 50 to 80% of AMI also are being given the same living standards as those paying full rent income assistance to afford rent so that their rent does not equal more than 30% of their income. What this means is that taxpayers, in one way or another are going to subsidize housing those that make just a bit less than average more and more as this housing demand explodes. In Raleigh, the waitlist has been closed since June 6, 2025 because of the inability to match demand with existing vacancies. In North Carolina, this means that those earning $38,940 will take the same apartment with government assistance as those earning $48,300. This scheme leads to long term, if not permanent dependence on the taxpayer. They strategically place developments on the perimeter of the city and very often annex land and buildings on the adjacent county property, bringing urbanization further and further out into the rural areas, bringing subsidized units with them. This inevitably limits the wealth producing families in each locality, thereby limiting the economic growth of our towns and cities. Their ultimate plan is to grow medium sized cities into huge city centers, creating an ever increasing government dependent democrat voting bloc.
If the conservative young adults don’t act, North Carolina will become a prime example. According to the NC Home Builders Association there is a 150,900 subsidized “housing supply gap”, in both urban and rural communities, 89,479 rental units and 61,421 units for home ownership. This gap is made up of families making less than 80% of their AMI, families in homes that are in disrepair and renters that are in buildings in disrepair. The report totally excluded the homeless sector. There were, according to an HUD study, 11,626 homeless individuals, including children that were sheltered and unsheltered in 2024. With a current vacancy rate of 1% of the 67,506 tax credit or government subsidy units and a waitlist of 44,236 households, the HUD solution is for the state to move them into brand new apartment buildings, units that are affordable to the local AMI. The vacancy rate for market rate units is 6% and corresponds with 6% of the overall waitlist. Those with a 40 to 80% AMI comprise 54% of the waitlist while those with less than 40% AMI comprise 40% of the waitlist. The NC Treasurer approved in September 2025 another $80 million in bonds for Raleigh to build an additional 2,000 units in the next 2-3 years, with more and more developments along the perimeter of the city. The market rate units of these developments will also be game for conversion to subsidized units as the waitlist grows.
This is just the beginning! There will be a dangerous cycle of rising market rate rents causing inflated housing prices, causing more families below the 80% AMI category. This is the urbanization and socialization of the entire country intended by the globalist led local governments. The more it grows the harder it will be to stop. Not all families currently making less than 80% of AMI need to be moved into new market rate apartments at property owner’s expense! Many more existing homes and apartment buildings can be repaired and renovated. Less expensive homes and apartment buildings could be built specifically for subsidization. Contrary to the myth that homelessness is due to lack of housing, homelessness is due to lack of adequate and competent mental health facilities, to mandatory addiction recovery programs, and up to recently, the unchecked availability of cocaine and fentanyl. Merely housing those that have addiction and employment problems will merely spread the crime and vandalism into otherwise low crime areas. It will propel a subculture of low productivity and development among our young adults, our most precious human resource gone to waste!
A Constitutional Solution
The only absolute defense against the socialization of the US will be the property owner signature. When a large enough petition arrives on the desk of a state elected official in sufficient numbers, it will reverse the role of the property owner as the economic slave to that of the local government being a rightful fiduciary servant of the property owner. Rather than using this revenue to maintain and improve local government services so as to optimize market property values, city councils and county commissioners are using it to subsidize housing while creating powerful incentives for migrants to locate themselves in more and more expensive communities. It is now imperative for the local property owners to demand oversight of where their taxes are actually going. This means petitioning state legislators to write new oversight and transparency laws. The actual process of local government establishing subsidized housing affords the active conservative voter a few opportunities to fight the explosive pace of subsidized developments. Notice that in the schematic below, knowledge of this process affords such opportunities.
A sample petition may look like this:
Dear (senator, representative) ,
As it had been understood in the past that local governments stood for the purpose of serving in the best interest of their property owners, this is no longer the case. Their primary focus now is to facilitate the influx of permanent legal and illegal renters. Consequently now, there is a conflict of interest between our city councils, county commissioners and the responsible stewardship of our property taxes. The whole system is fashioned to create an artificial demand for subsidized housing. I tis being subsidized on the backs of property owners that will bare the resultant tax burden.
We implore you to write legislation that effectively limits the use of our taxes as collateral for financing subsidized housing. Although we certainly do not want truly incapable individuals and families to not be safely housed, we vehemently oppose the moral argument of income inequality, allowing those who simply refuse to develop comparable abilities to earn an equal lifestyle to those that do. We also implore you to write the legislation that not only discriminates by income levels but limits such housing to 60% of area median income (AMI) and is not afforded the exact same living standards as those who are unsubsidized. We are currently incentivizing too many of our young adults to become long term dependents for their housing amongst other services.
references:
- North Carolina Justice Center https://www.ncjustice.org/publications/fact-sheet-impact-of-the-american-rescue-plan-on-north-carolina/
- The Demographic Statistical Atlas Of The United States https://statisticalatlas.com/state/North-Carolina/Overview
- Achievable https://app.achievable.me/study/finra-series-7/learn/municipal-debt-general-obligation-bonds-the-basics
- Housing Gap Analysis, Bowen National Research https://ncchamber.com/wp-content/uploads/Housing_Supply_Gap_Analysis.pdf
- Housing Affordability Among Renters and Owners in NC, Carolina Demography https://carolinademography.cpc.unc.edu/2025/11/17/housing-affordability-among-renters-and-owners-in-nc/
- Housing Bonds, NC State Housing Financing Agency https://www.ncsha.org/advocacy-issues/housing-bonds/
- Local Conduit Issuances of Affordable Housing Bonds in North Carolina: The Basics httphttps://canons.sog.unc.edu/2023/09/local-conduit-issuances-of-affordable-housing-bonds-in-north-carolina-the-basics/
- New Research Shows North Carolina Has a 764,000 Unit Housing Gap https://www.nchfa.com/news/policy-matters-blog/new-research-shows-north-carolina-has-764000-unit-housing-gap
- Housing Affordability & Supply https://www.nar.realtor/sites/default/files/2025-05/2025-housing-affordability-and-supply-05-15-2025.pdf
- § 159-61. Bond referenda; majority required; notice of referendum; form of ballot; canvass. https://www.ncleg.net/enactedlegislation/statutes/html/bysection/chapter_159/gs_159-61.html
- Open Meetings and the Public’s Right to Speak https://canons.sog.unc.edu/2011/11/open-meetings-and-the-publics-right-to-speak/
- State debt: How and why US states borrow money https://journalistsresource.org/economics/state-debt/
- Local Government Commission OK’s $300 Million in Bonds for Raleigh Outer Loop https://www.nctreasurer.gov/news/press-releases/2025/04/02/local-government-commission-oks-300-million-bonds-raleigh-outer-loop
- RHA Waiting Lists https://rhanc.gov/waiting-list/