31–40 of 93 posts
I think one of the big problems with public housing in the US is that we had a big push for it in the past but went about it in the wrong way and managed it poorly, and had very notoriously terrible results. Now the idea of building any at all for any reason is basically radioactive in most of the country and no politician wants to touch it.
It is the way.
The apartment building they highlight (in Montgomery County,MD) might be a good start, but it’s also missing larger floor for families. By sqft, two plans are planet big (1100, 1200sqft) but only 2 bedroom (using space for large open plan living space). I would like to see apartments more suitable for families. 3 bedrooms.
My understanding is that one of the feature's of Singapore's public housing is that there is a range of qualities from basic to luxury. It seems to me that could help make such a program more palatable.
Much like single payer healthcare (which even a majority of Republicans are in favor of), the program is perfectly palatable to voters. The problem is that the investors who fund political campaigns and media oligarchs hate HATE HATE public housing, because it reduces the value of their property investments. Extra supply reduces the price of existing supply. In order to win elections, you almost need those investors…
So pretty much anyone who owns property?
It's not like homeowners are fighting to have new apartments built in their neighborhood. It's very well known that even the most bleeding heart liberal areas still have insane NIMBY problems.
The blunt truth is that everyone who invested in a home in popular markets (read: a regular everyday metro homeowner) is going to have to take a big hit on the largest investment most of them will ever make in their life. This intrinsically makes it very unpopular on the whole. It's not some shadowy organization pulling strings behind the scenes. It's just about everyone who pays a mortgage and votes.
Just read a housing expansion approval measure through a homeowners eyes:
"Do you approve a measure to lower your home's sale price by 10-20% in order to allow people who earn less than you to move into the area? To grow classroom sizes and increase traffic?"
It's like asking people to volunteer to have needles stuck in their eyes. What is the upside for them?
The apartment building they highlight (in Montgomery County,MD) might be a good start, but it’s also missing larger floor for families. By sqft, two plans are planet big (1100, 1200sqft) but only 2 bedroom (using space for large open plan living space). I would like to see apartments more suitable for families. 3 bedrooms.
Only < 30% of US households have children present. The majority of households will be satisfied with 2 bedrooms or less.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In order to win elections, you almost need those investors on your side more than the actual public …because those few elite investors outnumber the voting public at the voting booth? This claim doesn’t make any sense. It’s weird conspiratorial thinking. EDIT: Yes, people. I’m familiar with Fox News and the concept of campaign donations. However, Fox News’ prime time viewership is around 0.5% of the US population a…
The problem is that getting to run for president requires a constant stream of money throughout your entire political career (or you need to have your own funds to contribute). This acts as a filter for any candidates that take anti-investor stances.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In order to win elections, you almost need those investors on your side more than the actual public …because those few elite investors outnumber the voting public at the voting booth? This claim doesn’t make any sense. It’s weird conspiratorial thinking. EDIT: Yes, people. I’m familiar with Fox News and the concept of campaign donations. However, Fox News’ prime time viewership is around 0.5% of the US population a…
Political campaigns today are decided by advertising budgets. It isn’t conspiratorial to think that the people funding these media campaigns would want something in return.
This is not the way mainly because the state does not have the resources to satisfy all housing demand (but also because two-tier rental markets are really unfair to newcomers). What we need is radical reforms in permitting and regulation at all levels of government (but especially at the local level). Imo the main obstacle to these reforms is that it is too easy to shout them down with talking points like "neighbourhood character", "lawn space", "shoeboxes" or "greedy developers".
If North American cities zoned a quarter of their area as 5-story midrises with large parks and mixed use and made permitting quick and easy we could really bankrupt the rent-seekers.
> Governments have successfully addressed housing shortages through publicly developed housing in places like Vienna, Finland, and Singapore in the past, but these examples have typically inspired little attention in the US Those countries demographics are way different than the US for affordable housing. It’s comparing apples and tennis balls.
If so how?