Subsidized and/or Affordable Housing

Introductions - Urban Issues - Miscellaneous News, Topics, Interests
User avatar
FISHMANPET
IDS Center
Posts: 4241
Joined: June 6th, 2012, 2:19 pm
Location: Corcoran

Re: Subsidized Housing

Postby FISHMANPET » January 2nd, 2014, 4:11 pm

Yeah we're here arguing minutiae of housing policy from the left and mplsjaromir has jumped straight to be arguing with someone on Fox News that their entire worldview is wrong (which is true, but nobody here is arguing that worldview).

mplsjaromir
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1138
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 8:03 am

Re: Subsidized Housing

Postby mplsjaromir » January 2nd, 2014, 4:47 pm

My initial comment that seemed to get mattaudio offended wasn't even directed at him. Let me clarify. I am sure most posters realize that as a society we do not do the best job of looking out for those in need. The justifications for not helping those in need usually fall into two camps, there no money to do it, or it would be a moral hazard. We have the wealthiest country of all time, so the former justification is without basis. My comment was a generic snipe at those in the larger society who portray anti poverty measures as inducers of poverty.

Other countries have robust federal programs that make housing more affordable. I think the U.S. should adopt similar programs, which include public housing. Reducing unnecessary regulation is great, but not enough.

Viktor Vaughn
Target Field
Posts: 593
Joined: July 10th, 2012, 6:37 pm

Re: Subsidized Housing

Postby Viktor Vaughn » January 2nd, 2014, 5:59 pm

If housing is a human right, then market failure in the housing sector ought to be corrected with subsidized housing. I would agree that a primary obstacle to housing for all is the moral hazard argument that jaromir brings up. Nobody here was making the argument, but since this is the prevailing view in this county it's hardly a strawman.

But damn. I just want to quote this because so many have redacted these facts from their brains. It should be so obvious.
But it is absolutely correct about how no amount of filtering will help the working poor, because the housing market has entirely failed them. Do the (message board) math. If you're lucky enough to get a 40-hour per week job at minimum wage, you take home around $1100 per month (before taxes). If somehow you score an $800 two-bedroom and a roommate, you're paying 36% of your income for rent, leaving $600 for food, transportation, and bills. If you're extremely lucky (and you'd have to be to get into this rare situation), you can scrape by in this no-frills situation until your first medical emergency or car breakdown. But don't think about kids, or luxuries like vacations (not that your minimum wage job will allow you to take them, even unpaid).

This is why we are seeing homelessness increase despite probably the largest effort ever to address it. The housing market has failed on the low end. Prices have increased, wages have stagnated, and benefits have decreased. What do you think is going to happen?

User avatar
Nick
Capella Tower
Posts: 2719
Joined: May 30th, 2012, 9:33 pm
Location: Downtown, Minneapolis

Re: Subsidized Housing

Postby Nick » January 2nd, 2014, 6:02 pm

Yeah, but that's the thing though. We see that there are people making $7.75 an hour at 30 hours a week and can't imagine living like that. We hear about Wal-Mart paying their employees far below a livable wage and literally telling them to apply for Medicaid and EBT. Is subsidizing housing kind of the same thing? Shouldn't we be expecting people to be paid a livable wage? I guess I'm trying to think deeper about what some real solutions could be here, instead of just giving money to/not giving money to people. We've created a system where, while being poor certainly isn't easy, it is very easy for the poor in this country to end up living completely outside the regular economy. I don't know that that's a good setup if we're trying to get people out poverty and into the legitimate workforce.
Nick Magrino
[email protected]

David Greene
IDS Center
Posts: 4617
Joined: December 4th, 2012, 11:41 am

Re: Subsidized Housing

Postby David Greene » January 2nd, 2014, 6:39 pm

I can't imagine anyone actually thinking "that the poor are poor simply because they have somehow failed morally"
Really? Have you not read comments on Strib articles...ever?

User avatar
woofner
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1242
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 10:04 am

Re: Subsidized Housing

Postby woofner » January 3rd, 2014, 12:04 pm

While I can understand the point that a higher wage floor would obviate much of the need for housing subsidy at the lower end of the market, I'm not sure it is more politically palatable than a large-scale housing program. Remember that the constituency for affordable housing extends beyond the people who will reside in it; builders of course love that shit, as do civic boosters. Affordable housing programs also have fewer opponents, since most developers that aren't in the low-income sector also don't want to be, so don't mind the competition. Meanwhile I can think of one or two huge companies with business models that rely on exploitative labor practices that resent big gummint sticking its paws in.

On top of that, wages themselves are only a part of the issue. Probably underemployment is a bigger issue, but lends itself less to message board math.
"Who rescued whom!"

clmarohn
Block E
Posts: 1
Joined: January 6th, 2014, 10:41 pm

Re: Subsidized Housing

Postby clmarohn » January 6th, 2014, 10:54 pm

VAStationDude....you said a lot of things, but the most absurd was.

If the mythical inflation threat ever comes to fruition it certainly won't affect Middle class individuals as much as would the wealthy. Non rich people have low assets and high debt relative to their income. With the wealthy the exact opposite is true. People with debt benefit from inflation as their obligation is diluted.

Inflation here in the US and throughout history in places like Wiemar Germany has devastated the middle class. It has hurt the rich too, but wealthy people have more options to avoid the confiscation of their wealth through inflation. They can buy equities (which is what you see happening here in the US today). They can send their money abroad to places where it won't inflate. They can purchase hard assets like land and commodities.

Middle class people need to eat. Yes, they have debts, but (and if you love Keynes you should know this) wages are sticky and won't rise as quickly or as dramatically as inflation. Sure, the mortgage may be cheaper in real dollars but a trip to the grocery store will cost $500 and a tank of gas $250. The middle class should not be wishing for inflation.

You also seem to be assuming that any future inflation we have will be similar to inflation episodes of the past, which were largely domestic. We've been exporting our inflation for decades. As the world's reserve currency, that is our luxury. What do you think Chinese, Japanese, Indian or Korean savers (and there are a ton of them) are going to do with their dollars when we continue to devalue it? Convert them into their local currency? Roll them over into more US debt? Dream on. They are going to buy US assets here and all that money will come flooding back.

Those houses in Las Vegas will finally sell....to foreigners. Then they will use our dollars to buy gasoline, airplane tickets and automobiles and all you overconfident, religious Keynesians can enjoy the boost in aggregate demand.

VAStationDude
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 764
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 10:30 am

Re: Subsidized Housing

Postby VAStationDude » January 7th, 2014, 12:38 pm

Thanks for responding, Chucker. I was hoping to get a couple Paul-bots to take the bait but it's nice to have Planner Paul come out from his Crow Wing lair.

You're missing the all important context in which I wrote my response. Your disciple Mattaudio incorrectly stated that increases to middle class incomes would be wiped out by inflation. My retort to Mattaudio was made in line with the theme of what Mattaudio and several others above him wrote. The theme of the thread at that point was rising wages would help alleviate housing difficulties faced by low income individuals. Let's walk through this again. We were discussing rising wages, Mattaudio mentioned rising wages would be wiped out by inflation and I wrote non-rich folks have huge amounts of debt relative to income which, in an environment of rising wages, would more than offset any inflation. Planner Paul then comes in with a rant about stagnant wages, the Chinese, hyper inflation and $200 tanks of gasoline.

Ron Paul and his gaggle of Bots warn about run away inflation and scream if the USA doesn't return to the pre-Great Depression gold standard, we will soon be paying for milk and Wonder Bread with wheelbarrows full of cash. Paul has been sounding the warning horn for decades. If you don't believe me look at some of Paul's 1980s news letters. Between anti-Semitic and racist screeds you'll see the rabid warnings about our impending inflationary doom. Forty years after Paul's political career began, we're still paying for bread with small bills (though I do like $6 artisan loafs on occasion).

In the real world inflation has been low low low. Non financial corporations are sitting on nearly $2 trillion of cash. Source: https://twitter.com/MatthewPhillips/sta ... 2928944128. If we had inflation and money was losing value just sitting corporations and the wealthy would invest and hire people, rather than just letting their money sit on the sidelines. In conclusion, moderate inflation is very healthy and we are not on the brink of replicating the Germany in the 1930s.

Oh, and I'm sure you're not a xenophobe like Ron Paul but I did chuckle at the rant about foreigners buying up America. Reminds me of the Japan Inc scare of the 1980s. The Japanese economic ascendancy came to a close due to a deflationary spiral which is the prescription the Paul Bots are offering here in America. Ironic.

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7752
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: Subsidized Housing

Postby mattaudio » January 7th, 2014, 12:56 pm

Those Paul-bots like Dennis Kucinich.... yes indeed. You are aware that a significant wing of progressives are skeptical of the way the dollar is controlled and its relation to corporatism, right?

VAStationDude
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 764
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 10:30 am

Re: Subsidized Housing

Postby VAStationDude » January 7th, 2014, 5:14 pm

Substitute hard dollar cranks for Paul bots if Dennis K is more your flavor.

at40man
Rice Park
Posts: 438
Joined: January 3rd, 2013, 6:49 pm
Location: Maplewood

Re: Subsidized Housing

Postby at40man » January 24th, 2014, 6:19 am

I simply don't see how subsidized housing can truly help that many people. We've tried this experiment with rent control, and it is an abject failure. Both liberal and conservative economists agree that it is harmful, so it is somewhat surprising to see a few folks here so vehemently defending similar policies. This 5 minute video does a good job of explaining the situation:


VAStationDude
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 764
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 10:30 am

Re: Subsidized Housing

Postby VAStationDude » January 24th, 2014, 6:45 am

You do know rent control and subsidized housing are two separate things, right? Rent control in NYC is definitely bad policy. Housing subsidies are a better response to housing affordability than artificial price ceilings. The fact that homelessness hasn't shot sky high in the last three decades as working class incomes have plummeted, proves housing policies have succeeded. I'd like to see you live (no begging mommy for money either) a couple months on two 30 hour a week jobs at $8.50 an hour like the "lazy" poor folks in this country.

RailBaronYarr
Capella Tower
Posts: 2625
Joined: September 16th, 2012, 4:31 pm

Re: Subsidized Housing

Postby RailBaronYarr » February 7th, 2014, 8:55 am

Interesting: http://www.mprnews.org/story/2014/02/07 ... rom=social

Couple thoughts:
- I'd be interested to see if it's true (and if so, how!?) housing units are $30-40k cheaper to build in suburbs after land costs are taken out. What could possibly de driving that disparity?
- Isn't Abdi (and his family) an example of someone who other targeted subsidies would help more? Ie, already has access to a market-rate housing option close to work that costs just over a third of gross income. I would think better back-end rental tax credits for people on a sliding scale of income/housing cost continuum would work better than building more housing in areas that aren't (and likely can't be) served well by transit
- Suburban poverty is rising. I understand the desire to live in an area with good school districts, but how does building affordable housing in Minneapolis = concentrating poverty, but when it happens in the suburbs none of those effects will be felt? Moreover, once again society at large shows its bias toward "safety," ignoring that (depending on what areas you're comparing) the health risks (obesity, crashes, etc) of getting in your car to drive everywhere comes very close to balancing out the crime rates found in cities. Not to mention the cost of owning said car.

mplsjaromir
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1138
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 8:03 am

Re: Subsidized Housing

Postby mplsjaromir » February 7th, 2014, 9:09 am

Somewhat tangential but interesting nonetheless.

http://nextcity.org/theworks/entry/five ... high-rents

I am not sure which one I prefer.

User avatar
FISHMANPET
IDS Center
Posts: 4241
Joined: June 6th, 2012, 2:19 pm
Location: Corcoran

Re: Subsidized Housing

Postby FISHMANPET » February 7th, 2014, 10:27 am

The fact that the MPR article barely mentions transportation seems like a pretty big problem to me. We need to be building at least some affordable housing in areas that are transit accessible, because the poor are more likely to not have a car.

RailBaronYarr
Capella Tower
Posts: 2625
Joined: September 16th, 2012, 4:31 pm

Re: Subsidized Housing

Postby RailBaronYarr » February 7th, 2014, 10:32 am

I re-tweeted that yesterday. For me, it's obvious: the Japanese model. Yes, there were some environmental/health impacts from industry, something land-use regs might not have been a good tool to prevent (light industry should be allowed, poisonous chemicals should not). But those are counteracted by a great rail/transit network (home prices may be slightly higher than say, Houston, but owning a car is super optional), super-low environmental impact due to lifestyle choices, etc. Their architecture leaves something to be desired (obviously my US-Europe bias showing here), but overall seems to be the best route.

I see the Japan and Houston models as mostly similar, but one shows the result of massively subsidizing auto-oriented transpo options.

ECtransplant
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 711
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 9:56 am

Re: Subsidized Housing

Postby ECtransplant » February 7th, 2014, 11:35 am

Abdi works at a grocery store in Eagan and makes $15 an hour. His wife stays at home with their three year-old child. They're paying about $950 a month for an apartment in Eagan and want something cheaper. But Abdi would not be willing to move to Minneapolis or St. Paul for it. The reason? "Safety," he says. He also thinks the schools are better in Eagan.
Umm I pay less than $950 to live in a neighborhood where the kids would go to Southwest. I know the problems the article talks about are real and important, but they didn't exactly choose the most sympathetic example of it

bubzki2
Foshay Tower
Posts: 811
Joined: September 19th, 2012, 5:38 pm
Location: Snelling-Hamline

Re: Subsidized Housing

Postby bubzki2 » February 10th, 2014, 4:14 pm

Related:

http://www.twincities.com/localnews/ci_ ... eport-says

Edit: It looks like this might be a bit redundant to previously posted articles in this thread.

twincitizen
Moderator
Posts: 6368
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 7:27 pm
Location: Standish-Ericsson

Re: Subsidized Housing

Postby twincitizen » February 10th, 2014, 4:37 pm

MinnPost also put something out over the weekend: http://www.minnpost.com/politics-policy ... port-finds

(Welcome back Steve Berg!)

Tcmetro
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1768
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 8:02 pm
Location: Chicago (ex-Minneapolitan)

Re: Subsidized Housing

Postby Tcmetro » February 10th, 2014, 6:42 pm

The problem with spreading out low-income housing is that bus service is very poor outside of the central cities, and relocating public housing evenly throughout the metro forces many of the poor to have to purchase cars, which are expensive and probably help keep them in poverty rather than rising out of it.


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests