New construction in NRW: Situation of construction costs and craftsmen 2024

This support forces one parent behind the stove.

Why does one have to be behind the stove? Two Aldi cashiers could work full-time within the income limits while the child is in daycare. Or one works full-time, the other part-time. Or one full-time and the other not at all.

Why does one have to be behind the stove? Two Aldi cashiers could work full-time within the income limits while the child is in daycare.
Or one works full-time, one part-time. Or one full-time and one not at all.

Two Aldi salespeople working full-time could earn around 70k gross. So it gets tight, which is why, as you yourself say, one is forced into part-time or has to stay at home entirely. And then it also gets tight with the loan.

All these low limits are simply extremely performance-hostile and unfair. In the end, a household with an annual income of 80-100k has the same place and the same burdens as a household earning 60k. Whereas a family with the latter income is already scraping by on citizen’s income or housing benefit.
This country is simply finished.

Two Aldi full-time employees should come to about 70k gross.

In normal circumstances about 65 together. That’s why the example - in Munich of course significantly more with up to 25€/hour. So the example fits well. Support for low-income people. Targeted.

So it gets tight, which is why someone like you yourself says is forced to part-time or has to stay at home altogether. And then the loan also gets tight.

No, I didn’t say that. I said that you can reach the income limits in three ways: 1. Two moderately earning partners full-time (there are enough jobs in Germany to stay within the income limits) 2. One better earning partner full-time + one partner part-time 3. One better earning partner full-time + a stay-at-home partner

And how crazy is your statement that one scratches citizen’s income with an annual income of 100k. What world do you live in? Is the hungry Hugo blue today?

In the end a household with an annual income of 80-100k has the same house and the same burden as a household earning 60k.

With the same house and the same burden, however, the better earning household can spend 40k (minus deductions/taxes) more per year. Or simply afford a 1k higher rate per month to build a more demanding house.

And whoever earns 100k a year doesn’t need support. They can buy/build anyway.

This subsidy forces one parent behind the stove. How was it again with equality?

For some funding requirements that may apply, but not for the principle of favoring family-friendly rather than lavish living space - which I find very welcome as such. I also have different rates for the "get out of renting" clients than for the ones who "really want to splash out"..

we went with an architect's design to a local general contractor who works exclusively with local companies. Everyone knows each other and no one can afford to deliver shoddy work.

After all, no one wants to be greeted at the next game by the comrades of his bar team with the words "and what crap are you building today?" [another ZwSm].

we went with an architect's design to a local general contractor who works exclusively with local companies.

However, it still makes a significant difference whether you go to a general contractor after or instead of a tender - actually two significant differences: 1. if you require a service including the tender from the architect, you have filtered out the " warns" architects of the "performance phase 1 to 4" faction (where the budget errors accumulate); 2. it also applies to the general contractor that the tender winners are of a different quality league than those to whom the fixed-price "smart" guys go.