Raw Data: Rental Prices in Orange County

Here’s another chart that makes a point I didn’t have room for in this morning’s post on urbanization. It’s an example of why I consider urbanization per se a modest problem compared to everything else on the progressive agenda. It’s a little busy (sorry) but here it is:

The blue line at the top shows median household nationwide. The dotted line shows what household income would look like if it had grown at a steady, modest annual rate of 1 percent.

The red line at the bottom shows median rents in Orange County. I chose Orange County because it’s not a huge outlier like San Francisco or New York, but it’s still a very expensive place to live. It’s semi-urban, and places like OC house way more of the US population than the two or three big cities that are always the focus of urbanization articles. I did my best to be fair here, combining two different series that showed different rent levels and then deflating by an index that doesn’t itself contain rental inflation. I couldn’t find a single good long-term series, so the dotted part of the line is an assumed rental increase of 20 percent from 2000-2006.

Finally, the gray bars show rent as a percent of income: since 2000 it’s gone up from 28 percent to 34 percent.

That’s not actually outrageous, but it’s still an increase. However, the real reason for the increase isn’t rental inflation, it’s wage stagnation. The dotted black line shows rent as a percent of income based on household income increasing 1 percent per year. In that scenario, rent as a percent of income is flat.

So this is what I’m talking about when I say that I view urbanization through a political lens. As a progressive, what’s my real issue?

  • Development barriers are raising rents in big cities.
  • Bad economic policies have caused incomes to stagnate all over the country.

It’s the second one by a mile. Sure, there will still be a few insane places like San Francisco and the Bay Area that would have housing issues anyway. Nothing is perfect and no policy change solves every problem. But in this case, doing something about median wages fixes the rent problem and lots of other other problems besides. If I’m going to put my political energy into something, that’s it.

POSTSCRIPT: This all comes with my usual caveat. As a local issue, urbanization is fine. Fighting zoning and land-use rules that have run amok is a great thing to do. Educating people about transit is God’s work and pressing for more and better transit options is a good idea in practically every city. It’s just not, in my opinion, a major national issue, that’s all.

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest