The Rich Won
May. 26th, 2023 01:22 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ndrosenThere was an article/interview in The Atlantic, saying that we declared war on poverty and the rich won (playing off Ronald Reagan’s “Poverty Won”). I find various points to agree with, but, as many times before, I find myself thinking that as a Georgist, I understand what’s going on, while other concerned people do not. I have seen the cat.
Mr. Desmond says that middle class homeowners are doing well enough, broadly speaking, while tenants, mostly poorer, are not, but he doesn’t quite see it in terms of land rents. He talks about the distress of people being evicted from their apartments, but he doesn’t seem to realize that if evicting tenants who don’t pay, or seriously bother their neighbors or destroy the landlord’s property, becomes too difficult, then there won’t be many apartments for rent, especially to people who aren’t rich and don’t have extensive records of being good tenants.
He favors more public housing, and claims that in Europe, public housing is not synonymous with projects in the slums, and that the poor and the rather well-off live together harmoniously in public housing. Maybe, although I have heard of Council housing in Great Britain also being ruined by folks with underclass attitudes and behavior. If the American government (federal or local) tries to create public housing that decent non-desperate people want to live in, what are they going to do about the slobs, the druggies, and the hoodlums? Are they going to thoroughly police the lives of everyone living there? Are they going to evict any troublemakers, without much due process of law? Are they going to let underclass ruin the projects for other people? Also, government projects tend to be more expensive than private sector alternatives.
These are reasons why I prefer reforming the tax code to make housing more available and affordable.
Mr. Desmond says that middle class homeowners are doing well enough, broadly speaking, while tenants, mostly poorer, are not, but he doesn’t quite see it in terms of land rents. He talks about the distress of people being evicted from their apartments, but he doesn’t seem to realize that if evicting tenants who don’t pay, or seriously bother their neighbors or destroy the landlord’s property, becomes too difficult, then there won’t be many apartments for rent, especially to people who aren’t rich and don’t have extensive records of being good tenants.
He favors more public housing, and claims that in Europe, public housing is not synonymous with projects in the slums, and that the poor and the rather well-off live together harmoniously in public housing. Maybe, although I have heard of Council housing in Great Britain also being ruined by folks with underclass attitudes and behavior. If the American government (federal or local) tries to create public housing that decent non-desperate people want to live in, what are they going to do about the slobs, the druggies, and the hoodlums? Are they going to thoroughly police the lives of everyone living there? Are they going to evict any troublemakers, without much due process of law? Are they going to let underclass ruin the projects for other people? Also, government projects tend to be more expensive than private sector alternatives.
These are reasons why I prefer reforming the tax code to make housing more available and affordable.
