If we are concerned about housing prices and rents, the obvious solution is a measure to facilitate the building of more.
aging
Almost everyone in the United States would agree that there is a “housing crisis” in the country. But what the term, the crisis, actually means quantitatively and qualitatively, remains dark. For some, it is the fact that their children are struggling to buy their first home in an expensive city. For others, the crisis is about the visible lack of roof. And for many it is the feeling that housing is just “very expensive”, eating too much monthly income. Solving the deep sense of discomfort between policy -making and housing supporters is one thing. The development of policies and solutions for people who are not sure where the rent will come from next month is another. Bad data, inflated tax programs and false hopes of belt bites are not the answer. Instead, a broad approach to housing common sense should characterize our approach to housing for the rest of this decade.
Previous positions this month concern the problems, mainly conceptual and practical, in the way we think, talk and act on housing in the United States. What is the approach to follow? What is the shift of the conceptual framework we have built around housing and how could it lead to real changes for the benefit of people with less money and housing challenges? We should focus on the measures that matter, data that will help us find the real friction on the market of poor people and then target our resources wisely to relieve suffering and create opportunities.
The Price System: Offer and demand
Price is a quantitative measure of supply and demand. When there is a shortage, prices go up. The resulting inflation sends a signal to the market, encouraging more production to meet the growing demand. When the answer is allowed, price overflows can be improved. Mostly, in a functional market, prices go up and down, but the way a provincial road can be waving, not the wild ups and downs of a cylinder. People understand it. But when it comes to housing, people’s frustration and feelings can sometimes push interventions trying to punish people who create a home because they make money or equally bad, add more money to the problem by supplying inflation with subsidies. The first principle should always be that we do not need more affordable housing, but more housing in it is affordable.
Effectiveness is compassionate
Margarita Thatcher said, “No one would remember the good Samaritan if he had only good intentions. Her view was that in order to be compassionate helping people with resources, there must be wealth. Another way to say that it is a society can distribute wealth or can be distributed. Production and therefore inflation. compassionate.
Build the most for the least
There will always be people living in the margins of the economy. The mental illness, addiction and poverty of the generation can be combined to prevent people and families from overcoming trauma and financial disadvantages. To win a place in the economy, some people and households who simply cannot find success in the housing economy, even with cash subsidies, will benefit from building housing with little or no rents and many supportive and integrated services. This is expensive. But the cost is worth investing while keeping people healthier and safer, reducing the cost of society in pain and money. Lost human capital by time is wasting demanding apartment units for all those who are homeless or the insecure roof continues. There must be a continuation of the housing that can meet people where they are, not where we want to be. This means that structured solutions should focus on the hardest to serve most challenges and building codes will have to come back to allow cheap, fast shelter solutions along with more permanent, long -term, constructed solutions.
End Zoning and Lihtc, build more housing, use resources effectively
Anyone who has been confused with a placement knows that there are myriad simple strange assumptions about what to build, where and how. Comes down to “This building makes my edge look big?” Questions about typology, size, shape, height, parking and other requirements that have absolutely nothing to do with utility. If a builder wants to include a parking point for each unit or build Townhomes instead of a house to be allowed. Anything that interferes with a housing buyer and the seller, whether it is sale or rental housing, adds unnecessary friction to the system, pushing costs and therefore prices and rents.
Creating transparency and accountability for Lihtc will begin to shed light on why the costs are so high, to pave the way for reform and finally a transition away from Lihtc to the top tool for creating structured housing solutions. Credit is less than forty years old, and as I have pointed out, if we started again, I doubt that someone will respond to the question: “How should we address housing affordability issues?” With the answer, “Hi, let’s use the tax code!” Similarly, alternatives for the 30 -year mortgage must also be examined and encouraged. Mortgage loans are just one way to finance ownership, not the best.
Finally, the answer is to keep it simple. Poor people need general money, not programs or overseas. Poor people are generally good money managers. It must be. We should trust people’s ability to solve their own problems, not to insist on trying to solve these problems for them. People often need help and we need to organize our systems to catch people when they fall. But when it comes to housing, the best solution is more housing and shelter of all kinds, for people of all levels of income, it can be safely and sustainable everywhere.
