Who is paying the price for Iranian sanctions?

The media has picked up a new refrain and it goes that the Iranian threat is causing oil and gasoline prices to go up. Those increasing prices will add more misery to the home economy of a huge percentage of the US population but they are not being caused by the Iranian threat. Gasoline prices are going up because of US and European economic threats and action against Iran.


According to the following article, 25% of the US population pays half their income on housing costs. This is further indication of the  terrible condition of the US housing market. Add to this misery, increasing energy prices and  the economic situation worsens for US households.  


You cannot listen to any talk radio program without hearing some cheery voice telling you how to make money on the opportunities offered by the foreclosure mess. The same so called right-wing radio is calling for more  misery  by demanding more US military action against Iran and that misery will fall on the bottom half of US households.


I would argue that right-wing values should be those that fight for nationalist objectives on doing what is best for the USA and the economic security of US households, the basic guardians of family values.


Let ’s at least tell the truth: Oil prices are not going up because of Iranian threats. Oil prices are going up because of western actions against the Iranian economy. The aggression is against Iran and not the other way around. The lower half of US households, as usual are those that will pay the price for the stupidity of their rulers and masters. 


_____________________


More households spend half of pay on housing
Renters hit hardest, with rent costs rising as income falls

By Amy Hoak, MarketWatch

CHICAGO (MarketWatch) — With rent and other housing costs rising and incomes falling, a growing share of working households are spending more than half of their income on housing, according to a new report from the Center for Housing Policy.

In 2010, about 24% of U.S. households paid more than half of their income on housing costs, compared with about 22% in 2008, the report said.

In its report, the Center, which is the research arm of the National Housing Conference, a nonprofit affordable-housing advocate, used U.S. Census data from 2008 to 2010 on housing costs and income.

For homeowners, housing costs included first and second mortgage payments, property taxes, insurance, homeowner association fees and utilities. For renters, housing costs included rent and utility costs.

Renters were hit particularly hard in recent years, as incomes decreased and rents rose. Incomes among renters fell 4%, while renters’ housing costs rose 4%, the report said.

“More and more people are interested in renting,” said Laura Williams, research associate at the Center for Housing Policy and author of the report, in a news release. “Some prefer it because it allows them to be more mobile in a tough job market. Others are postponing purchasing a home or facing difficulties obtaining a mortgage.”

Supply of rental properties is tight, and adding new inventory takes a while: There’s a long lead time between the when demand is identified and product materializes. In the meantime, the rental market has tightened, and rents went up as vacancy rates fell, Williams said.

But homeowners are also struggling: While housing costs fell about 2% for them during the two years, household incomes fell more than twice as much, mainly due to the decrease in the median number of hours worked each week. Homeowners’ income fell 5% during the period, according to the report.

“One of the big underlying points of the study is that sometimes the broader trends we see in the market aren’t reflected in the real-life experience of the individual,” said Jeffrey Lubell, executive director of the Center, in a phone interview.

“In the market, we’ve seen a decline in home prices and people think that housing is affordable,” he said, although a look at the income data shows that isn’t the case. Many working homeowners have had to deal with layoffs or reduced hours, he said.

There also has been a drop in working households overall, according to the report. There were 45.1 million working households in 2010 — about half of those homeowners and half renters — down almost 5% from 47.3 million in 2008. A “working household” is one in which a member worked at least 20 hours a week and had household income of no more than 120% of the median income for the area.

California was the state with the highest share — 34% — of working households who spend more than half of their income on housing.

California was followed by Florida, where 33% of households spend more than half of their income on housing; New Jersey, 32%; Hawaii, 30%; and Nevada, 29%.

The metro areas with the highest share of households spending more than half of income on housing, in order: Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach; Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana; San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos; Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, Calif.; and New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island.