[MemoryHoleHQ]

For the ones that didn't read the article, it says there. The problem is that the state takes more and more away from the workers wages:

"The biggest flaw: It uses gross income, not take-home pay

One of the biggest issues with the 30% rent rule is that it’s based on your gross income—not the amount of money that actually lands in your bank account on payday.

To illustrate this flaw, let’s use some real-world numbers. According to the latest FRED data, the median household income in the U.S. is about $84,000 per year, or roughly $7,000 per month before taxes.

Under the 30% rule, you could theoretically spend about $2,100 per month on rent if this is your income.

But let’s take a look at what your take-home pay could be with this salary. "

[chadgpt3]

It may say the problem is taxes take too much money so you can't pay landlords, but how do we know the real problem isn't that landlords take too much money so you can't pay taxes? Or Comcast takes too much money so you can't pay landlords and taxes?

[MemoryHoleHQ]

We know it, because during the last 50 years, already adjusted to inflation the USA government budget increased by 2.48× per capita.

And unless your argument is that public services are 2.48x better now, then yes, I know that the problem is, as usual, that the government is taking workers money away to do as they please.