The main driver of the US economy is being quietly subdued in plain sight.
We can create all sorts of private investment in the US economy and the stock market will love it. We can create a surge of American jobs and the decreased unemployment rate will bring interest rates down, raising the housing market after a while. But if we make life artificially too easy for our young adults, the lack of passion and enthusiasm for learning and working hard enough will manifest within 3-5 years with less competitive products, unsuccessful innovation, and once again, a huge glut in basic science researchers for the creation of new materials and technology. A workforce that only strives to do what is required and demands a yellow brick road will fail the US irreparably. All of the Trump administration’s economic growth initiatives will have been sabotaged! Not only are our young people compromised in the quality of their basic pre-college education, but they will be even more severely defeated by being handed a richer lifestyle than they could afford on their own.
Since 1981, through the Omnibus Reconciliation Act the 80% AMI category has made it possible for young adults starting out in life to be given government housing assistance to afford 100% area median income market rate housing. Indeed, the largest cohort of subsidized renters (44%) in North Carolina is in the working age group of age 25-50. Single parents with children made up 95% of all families with children. With the recent surge in illegal immigrants taking jobs and housing from our legal population, driving rents artificially high, more and more of our own young adults have been qualifying for this assistance. In 2021, the Urban Institute’s study concluded that about 100,000 young adults (ages 19-25) live in subsidized housing with about a quarter of them living alone, the majority of them with extremely low incomes (at or below 30% AMI).
The National Low Income Housing Coalition estimated in 2024 that in the US there were 10.9 M extremely low income households with only 7.1M units available to them and that construction needs to be ramped up and incentivized by local governments. The <30% AMI cohort of 11 million households end up with only an overall availability of 7.1 million affordable units. The cohort represented with the least availability is the extremely low income (30%) group for which several housing advocate groups are sounding a housing shortage crisis alarm, advocating for building more developments, which house up to 80% units with income groups above 30% AMI. As an incentive, these developers get below market rate loans from the state and tax credits from the federal government. In essence, the city councils and county commissions across the country are using the extremely low income group as justification to build and provide housing for the moderately low income group. As for the funds to do this, whether from local government loans, or bonds sold to investors, it will all eventually be paid for by state property owners in the from of significantly increased property taxes and state user fees. Developers are paid for construction in the form of a percentage of the resultant revenue from rents and tax credits from the federal government proportional to the number and degree of subsidized housing. So, in reality, the financial incentives are all toward building taxpayer assisted apartments for renters not far below the area median income. It will always be more enticing for young people to move into a brand new apartment rather than a smaller older one or a small older single family house without the associated amenities. Not only does this entice young people to perpetually subsist without the motivation to continue their education and strive to climb the economic ladder but it also creates a huge conflict of interest for the elected city councilmembers, the mayor, and the county commissioners, as they approve the use of taxpayer money to house a guaranteed growing voting constituency. If this continues unchecked, for those cities, counties, and states which insist on forcing the property taxpayer to fund the growth of their dependent voting constituency, this will stifle the economic growth of the entire country. Following the demographics of the emerging 50-80% AMI sector will tell the whole story.
Below are charts which depict the magnitude of the problem within the period of 2023 to 2025.
One aspect to note is that the housing authorities and coalitions claim that there is a significant gap between the households <30% AMI or extremely low incomes and available rental units for this group. As there has been an increasing demand from the 50-80% AMI group, the claim is that this group has been taking the units that would otherwise have been available to the <30% group. Obviously this is a fabricated demand that would not exist if they logically prioritized the <30% AMI group in the first place, committing tax dollars where they are needed the most, building separate developments for this group. They state that their overriding priority is to distribute this cohort throughout the community for the sake of diversity and the exposure of the unsubsidized renters to the <30% group. This does nothing but artificially inflate the rates of the unsubsidized group to make up for the subsidized one in terms of sufficient revenue to maintain the development. The logical solution would also include cutting back the subsidized income requirement to 65% and to develop separately for the <30% cohort for a more appropriate level of cost efficiency. Below, is a comparison in terms of the distribution trend over 10 years between a state that is not very compromised, North Carolina, in this fashion and one that is, Washington state, where the taxpayer will continue to subsidize the 65-80% AMI cohort even while the extremely low income cohort continues to grow.
Source: HUD
This artificial demand for the <80% AMI subsidy is the result of a globalist economic scheme to bring socialist regimes into local governance and facilitate the re-distribution of wealth across the country, thereby nullifying whatever the efforts of the Trump administration to incentivize traditional family values. The globalists continue to pay into their development and political campaigns, the local media support for the false narratives of deserving free stuff and a turn key living.
If DOGE were to investigate the abuse of the housing safety net laws of the 1970s and 1980s, I emphatically believe that they would find billions of dollars of misplaced government housing assistance. The Obama and Biden administrations did all they could to shrink the disposable income of our young people to create a huge spike in the demand for subsidized housing. This is now the desperate goal of local government housing advocates among mayors and city councils and county commissioners across the country. Now, the resultant lifestyle of deprioritizing home ownership and the accumulation of equity has woven into their culture. The lack of ambition to raise a traditional family has really become a facet of this culture. This is why they are so ripe to vote in a local socialist regime to destroy their economics. It is my fervent prayer that our children develop the spiritual maturity to intervene and stop this evil socialist economic scheme.