Should the U. S. Build More Public Housing?
video description
Date: 2022-07-09
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 8
Here_We_Go_Again2
1) Stopping unregulated immigration should be the first priority!
This country needs to provide for its own elderly, disabled and poor citizens BEFORE it accomodates foreigners!
2) Priority for public housing should be allocated to the elderly and disabled since neither group has the option
of increasing their income. The location should include a handicapped- accessible contracted grocery store
(that is mandated to provide a complete array of groceries); bank; a pharmacy and a general (style) store as
well as locations for the payment of utility, phone, Internet/TV bills. Perhaps all three run by one business (like
a Walmart super store) with discounted prices.
3) Most public apartments are not set up to accomodate families (i. e. the units are in high-rise complexes
and/or the floor plans are not suitible for life in a temperate /4 season climate. People who live in a climate
with snow and a lot of rain need mud rooms and extra closet space to accomodate seasonal clothes.
4) There is a lack of decent housing for low-income young adults who do not have children. These people
are often forced into run-down, inefficient housing. A rent-controlled studio style apartment in a building with
common areas (parking, laundry, recreation rooms) and security cameras would be sufficient for most
of these people. Young people in college have this sort of housing, but they incur debt to live in student-
style dorm / studio apartments. Addressing this issue would help to solve the unwed parent problem.
(For a poor single woman, acquiring three children is, almost, a guarantee of housing)
reply
1) Stopping unregulated immigration should be the first priority!
This country needs to provide for its own elderly, disabled and poor citizens BEFORE it accomodates foreigners!
2) Priority for public housing should be allocated to the elderly and disabled since neither group has the option
of increasing their income. The location should include a handicapped- accessible contracted grocery store
(that is mandated to provide a complete array of groceries); bank; a pharmacy and a general (style) store as
well as locations for the payment of utility, phone, Internet/TV bills. Perhaps all three run by one business (like
a Walmart super store) with discounted prices.
3) Most public apartments are not set up to accomodate families (i. e. the units are in high-rise complexes
and/or the floor plans are not suitible for life in a temperate /4 season climate. People who live in a climate
with snow and a lot of rain need mud rooms and extra closet space to accomodate seasonal clothes.
4) There is a lack of decent housing for low-income young adults who do not have children. These people
are often forced into run-down, inefficient housing. A rent-controlled studio style apartment in a building with
common areas (parking, laundry, recreation rooms) and security cameras would be sufficient for most
of these people. Young people in college have this sort of housing, but they incur debt to live in student-
style dorm / studio apartments. Addressing this issue would help to solve the unwed parent problem.
(For a poor single woman, acquiring three children is, almost, a guarantee of housing)
reply
Andrew
The biggest problem with section 8 vouchers is how little guarantee there is that anyone will accept them. It's discriminating who can own a home in a given area without outright discriminating. Citing seemingly legitimate financial concerns while really going 'We don't like your kind here. '
Personally as someone that would benefit from new developments being put up? I would look at the soviet micro-district instead of just dense packed housing. Have destinations nere to hand for these people who might not be able to afford or have the capacity to drive. Bussing or other transit options so they can get to work if they aren't working within the micro-district. That kind of thing.
And make these buildings have solar, wind collectors, along with the ability to gather rain water for greywater uses (watering the common lawns, dedicated lines for tank fill on toilets, etc) I can think of a lot of things these sorts of micro-district type housing units should have (such as a sort of district wide micro-net that is a sortof combination social media, info gathering/pooling wiki, marketplace, etc. Something that can serve immediate local needs while also being able to stay up in case of wider network outages, or possibly something that comes free with the housing even for those that aren't paying teleco fees for wider internet access) but I know the will isn't there. One side is actively spiteful and gleeful acting as if punching down at these people is their God Given Right. the other side sees no profit for it for their corporate backed donors and so nothing gets done.
reply
The biggest problem with section 8 vouchers is how little guarantee there is that anyone will accept them. It's discriminating who can own a home in a given area without outright discriminating. Citing seemingly legitimate financial concerns while really going 'We don't like your kind here. '
Personally as someone that would benefit from new developments being put up? I would look at the soviet micro-district instead of just dense packed housing. Have destinations nere to hand for these people who might not be able to afford or have the capacity to drive. Bussing or other transit options so they can get to work if they aren't working within the micro-district. That kind of thing.
And make these buildings have solar, wind collectors, along with the ability to gather rain water for greywater uses (watering the common lawns, dedicated lines for tank fill on toilets, etc) I can think of a lot of things these sorts of micro-district type housing units should have (such as a sort of district wide micro-net that is a sortof combination social media, info gathering/pooling wiki, marketplace, etc. Something that can serve immediate local needs while also being able to stay up in case of wider network outages, or possibly something that comes free with the housing even for those that aren't paying teleco fees for wider internet access) but I know the will isn't there. One side is actively spiteful and gleeful acting as if punching down at these people is their God Given Right. the other side sees no profit for it for their corporate backed donors and so nothing gets done.
reply
Sandwich247
so, before I watch this video, I was to get my understanding of how things tend to be in the cases of public housing, and I can see how it stacks up to the research and how things are in the states, etc
So, in the UK, generally speaking public housing has been a case of big blocks of housing which has been really really tall and has had the absolute worst of the worst trouble cases of people all stuffed in together with zero investment or maintenance causing a horrible environment for everyone there, and everyone near there
The areas of public housing that tended to be more on the good side are low-medium density (from semi-detached houses to the 4-in-a-block cottage flats) social housing mixed in with the exact same stuff but it's private (I imagine that if it was all public and the councils didn't just stuff all the worst people in there, it'd be alright but you can't trust the council to not do that)
And they need to have robust public transport links, there needs to be lots of green space that's well maintained and plenty of local amenities within walkable distances to keep a sense of community about the place
High rises tend to be absolutely terrible in terms of build quality, but medium rise (the 4-6 storey style) flats and maisonettes aren't so bad either so long as they're kept clean and are well maintained and it's also important that the councils don't just _FILL THEM ENTIRELY WITH ONLY PROBLEM TENANTS_
gosh dang it
reply
so, before I watch this video, I was to get my understanding of how things tend to be in the cases of public housing, and I can see how it stacks up to the research and how things are in the states, etc
So, in the UK, generally speaking public housing has been a case of big blocks of housing which has been really really tall and has had the absolute worst of the worst trouble cases of people all stuffed in together with zero investment or maintenance causing a horrible environment for everyone there, and everyone near there
The areas of public housing that tended to be more on the good side are low-medium density (from semi-detached houses to the 4-in-a-block cottage flats) social housing mixed in with the exact same stuff but it's private (I imagine that if it was all public and the councils didn't just stuff all the worst people in there, it'd be alright but you can't trust the council to not do that)
And they need to have robust public transport links, there needs to be lots of green space that's well maintained and plenty of local amenities within walkable distances to keep a sense of community about the place
High rises tend to be absolutely terrible in terms of build quality, but medium rise (the 4-6 storey style) flats and maisonettes aren't so bad either so long as they're kept clean and are well maintained and it's also important that the councils don't just _FILL THEM ENTIRELY WITH ONLY PROBLEM TENANTS_
gosh dang it
reply
Luboman411
Hmmmm. if this were a different, more enlightened country, I'd be all for bringing back public housing. But we have a rather large constituency of incorrigible, meanspirited voters who are hellbent on punishing the poor in whatever counterproductive and spiteful way they can think of, including the working poor. They vote in large numbers and have a big constituency in Congress (the Freedom Caucus, etc. These people will never allow lessons to be learned about the last awful round we've had with public housing. They'd be more than happy to repeat those mistakes and maybe even make them worse. So, because those people exist and we can't run them out of the U. S, I feel highly pessimistic that we'd do a better job the second time around with public housing. It's a big no for me. We need other solutions to the housing crisis here in the U. S.
reply
Hmmmm. if this were a different, more enlightened country, I'd be all for bringing back public housing. But we have a rather large constituency of incorrigible, meanspirited voters who are hellbent on punishing the poor in whatever counterproductive and spiteful way they can think of, including the working poor. They vote in large numbers and have a big constituency in Congress (the Freedom Caucus, etc. These people will never allow lessons to be learned about the last awful round we've had with public housing. They'd be more than happy to repeat those mistakes and maybe even make them worse. So, because those people exist and we can't run them out of the U. S, I feel highly pessimistic that we'd do a better job the second time around with public housing. It's a big no for me. We need other solutions to the housing crisis here in the U. S.
reply
Swarrly
The housing crisis in this country will never be solved unless we ban using residential real estate as an investment. Its mathematically impossible for something to both stay affordable and be an investment. Since for something to be an investment it must grow in value over inflation and for something to stay affordable it must either deflate in value or stay the same. The market cannot solve the issues since it will always prioritize profits and investment returns. Public housing is the obvious solution. Use public money to undercut the market forcing prices down. Raise taxes on rental units to make it unaffordable to run/own so the public can acquire the property to rent or sell at a below market rate.
reply
The housing crisis in this country will never be solved unless we ban using residential real estate as an investment. Its mathematically impossible for something to both stay affordable and be an investment. Since for something to be an investment it must grow in value over inflation and for something to stay affordable it must either deflate in value or stay the same. The market cannot solve the issues since it will always prioritize profits and investment returns. Public housing is the obvious solution. Use public money to undercut the market forcing prices down. Raise taxes on rental units to make it unaffordable to run/own so the public can acquire the property to rent or sell at a below market rate.
reply
Andy
The problem with capitalism is that not everyone gets to win - there are losers - and many losers just by definition. Old people. Mothers. People who have mental or learning deficiencies and can't get hired. People whose trade or job has become obsolete and they are too old to be retrained and rehired in a new job ( employers prefer younger workers. The point is - if we have to embrace an economic system that leaves people behind through no fault of their own, then there is a moral obligation to help those people live their lives. Think of all of the millions and millions of dollars in corporate tax breaks - them that got shall have - them thats not shall lose. It doesn't have to be this way
reply
The problem with capitalism is that not everyone gets to win - there are losers - and many losers just by definition. Old people. Mothers. People who have mental or learning deficiencies and can't get hired. People whose trade or job has become obsolete and they are too old to be retrained and rehired in a new job ( employers prefer younger workers. The point is - if we have to embrace an economic system that leaves people behind through no fault of their own, then there is a moral obligation to help those people live their lives. Think of all of the millions and millions of dollars in corporate tax breaks - them that got shall have - them thats not shall lose. It doesn't have to be this way
reply
Ross
Freedom for me, restrictions for thee. The ideology of the elites. The amount of government intervention in the housing market is astonishing. If they re going to intervene so much, figure out a way to build more housing and especially more affordable housing. People are putting off having families because all we re being offered in big cities are 700, 000 1 bedroom condos.
Politicians don t care about restrictions on zoning, they already own homes and usually are amateur landlords profiting off other human beings. These members of the ownership class expect their residential real estate investments to appreciate endlessly.
reply
Freedom for me, restrictions for thee. The ideology of the elites. The amount of government intervention in the housing market is astonishing. If they re going to intervene so much, figure out a way to build more housing and especially more affordable housing. People are putting off having families because all we re being offered in big cities are 700, 000 1 bedroom condos.
Politicians don t care about restrictions on zoning, they already own homes and usually are amateur landlords profiting off other human beings. These members of the ownership class expect their residential real estate investments to appreciate endlessly.
reply
Maz
The ideal solution to the housing crisis would have been from the private sector, but we're stuck in no man's land where overregulation from local & state governments mostly in the form of zoning has harmed private developers' ability to respond to market needs. Cronyism and NIMBYism go hand in hand. With common citizens unable to wrest the political capital from this entrenched class of landowners in order to build more private housing, wielding government power to expand public housing may be the next best thing. We may not have been the best at it in the past, but we can learn from our mistakes and do it right the next time.
reply
The ideal solution to the housing crisis would have been from the private sector, but we're stuck in no man's land where overregulation from local & state governments mostly in the form of zoning has harmed private developers' ability to respond to market needs. Cronyism and NIMBYism go hand in hand. With common citizens unable to wrest the political capital from this entrenched class of landowners in order to build more private housing, wielding government power to expand public housing may be the next best thing. We may not have been the best at it in the past, but we can learn from our mistakes and do it right the next time.
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
