Should the government build affordable housing?

blackribbon said:

But for the price of a 2 room flat, I could buy a 3 bedroom house in a decent neighborhood.

Click to expand...

In a country area away from major city hubs in the US perhaps. Certainly not in Singapore, where a house on a block of land would cost you perhaps $3,000,000 minimum. Given the price of land, the fact that you can buy a new 2-bedroom flat for 3-400k is pretty amazing.

blackribbon said:

And that money paid by the employer is just pay that you don't get in your paycheck. The same thing can be accomplished by setting aside some of your own pay in a savings account to buy a house. Those who don't use it to buy a house, don't get the benefit of that pay...so they get cheated.

Click to expand...

To a certain extent yes, but CPF (or superannuation in Australia) has generally not come at the expense of wage rises, in other words, it was in addition to what people were getting paid. And even if you never buy a house, that CPF/super becomes your retirement fund, so you benefit from it when you are older.

blackribbon said:

You are also required to live there so many years before you can sell it. I don't want the government that deep in my pocket or my personal life

Click to expand...

That rule is to prevent property speculation - pretty reasonable if you're buying a house subsidised by other tax payers. If you don't want to do that you can buy a condominium privately and do what you want with it.

OldWiseGuy said:

We need both temporary housing and affordable housing. My vision is small subdivisions of small 'builder designed' homes that are rented to low income families, but always owned by the city.

Click to expand...

I think some could work that way (we have a similar system here), or even rent-to-buy schemes that subsidise a home loan for low income families, but with restrictions on the price they can be sold for (to stop people speculating). The advantage there is that the family ultimately gains an asset and has the security of a permanent home.

OldWiseGuy said:

Should the government contract to build affordable housing instead of badgering, or requiring, builders to include low cost housing in their real estate developments? It seems that they can do this quite easily as they have the resources and the zoning authority. As these new neighborhoods would be part of municipal expansion there would be few with reason to oppose the plan. Thoughts?

Click to expand...

We don't need anymore drug ridden, and dilapidated housing projects. That has already been tried thousands of times, it does not work.

If it was handled right market forces will drive housing prices, the solution is deregulation, and reducing the size of government to constitutional mandates.

OldWiseGuy said:

Should the government contract to build affordable housing instead of badgering, or requiring, builders to include low cost housing in their real estate developments? It seems that they can do this quite easily as they have the resources and the zoning authority. As these new neighborhoods would be part of municipal expansion there would be few with reason to oppose the plan. Thoughts?

Click to expand...

So now the government is to build houses for people? Who is going to foot the bill...oh I know the 50% of people who pay all the federal income tax, who will have to also pay for.

-The green new deal
-Medicare for all
-Free college tuition
-Student debt relief
-Slave reparations

Seems a bit unfair to me, how about;

-Reasonable initiatives that are non polluting
-Get the Government completely out of the healthcare business so market forces regulate healthcare cost.
-College should not be free
-People should pay there just debts
-Not paying slave reparations to people who were not slaves.

Government is the problem, not the answer, reduce it to constitutional mandates.

Silverback said:

If it was handled right market forces will drive housing prices, the solution is deregulation, and reducing the size of government to constitutional mandates.

Click to expand...

We tried that for hundreds of years. Urban slums are the result of market forces.

Silverback said:

-Get the Government completely out of the healthcare business so market forces regulate healthcare cost.

Click to expand...

Market forces don't work in health case in many cases. But that's a whole other argument.

Trogdor the Burninator said:

In a country area away from major city hubs in the US perhaps. Certainly not in Singapore, where a house on a block of land would cost you perhaps $3,000,000 minimum. Given the price of land, the fact that you can buy a new 2-bedroom flat for 3-400k is pretty amazing.

Click to expand...

The point of the article was to show where "affordable housing" works. I can live in a large city, in a decent to nice neighborhood, and be able to buy a 3 bedroom house for $150,000 and own the land that the house sits on plus have a yard. I don't find the article as a true example of "affordable" housing. It is middle class America (except in a few extraordinarily expensive places like NYC and California).

As for the projects, people tend to take care of the things they actually own and had to earn. That isn't the definition of one of the projects neighborhoods. Is there actually an example of a projects that is considered a safe, nice place to live after 5 years in? (there may be but none I have ever known).

Capitalism taken to it's extreme, Anarcho Capitailism with their Non Aggression Principle. Loses every time to Socialism. Socialism is effectively a satanic economy, and Capitalism a soulless one.

Lending at interest with not 100% backed money. Leads to inflation, and or collectivisation of assets. Banks lending at more than 20:1 "Too big to fail."

Income Tax is disastrous, in a sane world taxing consumption would make more sense.

-----------------

Matthew 6
12 And forgive us our debts, as we also forgive our debtors.

13 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from [h]evil: for thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory for ever. Amen.
-----------

If population was handled more appropriately. The housing and banking market would implode. With ethnic Germans having less than 1.1 children per couple. Plenty of vacant stock could be purchased at very low prices. In the USA ethnic European settlers less than 1.7