Yes, that is how it is suppose to work. However, the big corporate property management firms are not adhering to that. If that was truly the case, then the local property managers would have more discretion in rates and the ability to negotiate, they do not.

This is one aspect of many in which our current economy is severely broken. Another is in which products are carried and who decides what the stores carry (hint: not typically the local retailers).

Glad it's working out for you that way; however, you're certainly the exception.

Yes, it is effectively the result, but it's not a purposeful result; more of a by-product or unintended consequence.

Loundon County is an odd place in many ways. It's not typical distribution. Many may be considered near poverty, but they're mostly in the western portion and own land, homes, etc; while the eastern portion is a lot richer. Homeless are near 0% of the population, and more.

So where SF is a battle between rich and poor, or rich and wanna-be-rich; Loundon County is just a battle between the established residents and those that will likely live there for
However, my main point was that the people pushing these "life-style" ordinances often never think about the consequences of the ordinances. They're only thinking about the life-style they want to maintain, everyone else be damned. So I suspect that's the same case in NYC and SF and elsewhere.

Years back, in the housing bubble, places in Virginia would go on the market for one rate, say $500k. It was typically that someone would talk into the open house, and offer $20k above the asking price, put it under contract, etc at the very first open house mere days after it entered the market. The Realtor would certainly take that into account when calculating the "market price" and what they expected things would go for; but unreasonable people would still offer significantly higher with a goal of taking it off the market and securing a place, in part because housing was moving so fast on the market, but it also fed in on itself as a result.

Yes, standard practice is that rent is not suppose to be more than 30% of your pre-tax income. It still may end up being 60% of your post-tax income though.

Years back, I rented an apartment for $1315/month. Pre-tax it was no more than 30% of my income; however, post-tax it took up one of my 2 paychecks each month (50% of my income).

It's a little simpler than that. It's more like: people have been there for years and want to continue their life style in the face of change; refusing to change, they get the government officials to pass ordinances that support their life style; thus minimizing change and forcing prices high. The poor are completely left out of the equation.

The same thing is happening in Loundon County, VA where the western half the county wants to be left alone, and the eastern half of the county is embracing massive population expansion. So one pushes these "life style" ordinances (no lot can be less than 1/2 acre, etc) and the prices sky rocket. They didn't care about the price of housing - they already owned their home so would not be affected outside of taxes.

"market rate" is not what you think it means. It's defined by the corporations, not by what the rental offices themselves think the market will do.

I made the same mistake years back. I had an apartment at $1315/month on 12-month contract. New contracts were between $1315 and $1500 - which I figured was the "market rate", and we were going to move a couple months after the contract expired. So I figured I'd let it go. Learned market rate was set by some bureaucrat in an office some where else, the local office didn't have the authority to change it (based on supply/demand in the market), and that market rate was $1700+/month.

Exactly; so not only are you paying the "mortgage" on the mobile home, you're also shelling out another $700-$1k/month for where to park it.

The economics of it never made sense to me.

No, just NO.

From a performance perspective, you immediately run across thunking between C# and C++/CLI, not to mention the API idiocies like not being able to sent a buffer from C++ to the network directly (you have to write a loop and send integer sized chunks at a time, then at the end send the final few bytes).

So unless you want to screw yourself well, just avoid C++/CLI. You'll thank me later.

. Since you mentioned you have existing libraries, etc - QT certainly seems to be very beneficial here. With the QSharedPointer types (weak, strong, etc) and concurrency functionality (QtConcurrent, QtFuture) it seems to have the main tools you're looking for, and it will integrate well with other projects in that bringing in an existing library won't be much of an issue (well, unless it's a MSVC COM or something like that; those would need to be re-written). The main caveat is that it's a little harder to share Qt code in a static way (e.g libmyqtlib.a) from a Qt project to a non-Qt project; at least, I haven't tried that. Most just use a dynamic linker which works fine to do that.

There's also a very health e-mail list and forums at qt-project.org that you can use to ask questions and get answers reasonably fast. I can't say the same for Boost, where each library may have its own list if anything at all.

The QT Event Loop actually makes concurrency far easier. You can start each thread with its own event loop, and just pass objects back and forth between the threads using Signals/Slots. The Qt Signal/Slot automanages moving the objects between the event loops, and it all just works.

So you can easily have one thread that just reads data from disk, while 5 other threads receive the data to process, all using Qt signal/slots and not give a lick about which thread it's running in.

Furthermore, if you need to reduce it to one thread to debug, you can easily do so by changing which thread stuff lives in. So concurrency issues become easy to diagnose.

Of course, there are also several Concurrency frameworks within Qt as well - QtConcurrent, QtFutures, etc. - so if you have massive parallism capabilities you can just use those instead. They're all very easy to use.

Also, Qt integrates well with Boost. You can even use the Boost Signal/Slots (choose your version) if you like.

I would disagree. Even in a daemonized application the Qt (WxWidgets, Gtk, and Boost) signal/slot system works wonders.

Like with anything else, it can be abused, but it is by far superior to alternatives like the Message Maps (Gtk, MSVC, WxWidgets).

But you still have to care about what's coming from the right - namely pedestrians as you're still required to stop for them.

Between that and pollsters having questions and multiple-choice answers that were designed to give a desired answer...

Seriously, I had a Democrat pollster back 2005-2006 that asked a question regarding Bush and Iraq. The question was designed to give a very specific answer I didn't agree with, and I flat out told them that. But the kid doing the poll didn't have any way to record that in the poll. We discussed it for a few minutes. Last poll I ever got...

And you obviously do not even comprehend what I and others are saying - you cannot impose your right over someone else's equal right just because you want them to enter into a contract with you. You cannot force them to. It's that simple.

At no point did I make an argument for using a religious basis for that.

So until you can actually understand the argument at hand refrain from commenting further because you're not making any points that you have not already repeated, and not contributing to the conversation.

Please also look up reverse discrimination and think of how it applies.