Related Articles

One Comment

  1. Alex

    That idea has been tried with some degree of success, certain nycha developments were coops and you also have hfdcsthat were formerly owned by city when landlords defaulted on taxes. However, limitation on the amount of money you can make to “preserve” affordable housing may mean less incentive for upkeep. Second coop maintenance fees may be high and public housing is more like a needs program. Also, If a person needs to use extra electricity and an extra room for a dialysis machine in a coop model the other residents would bear the cost if the person is poor and elderly. It won’t work in a coop model where a large unit has higher maintenance costs regardless of income generally (although maintenance may be reduced by a small amount by say a small break in taxes for elderly by city).

    Also, homeowners don’t always take care of property especially if its foreclosed or they just leave a lifestyle in which they don’t care. Unless your advocating a strict hoa, which you probably are, there are homes in new york city which are dilapated,overgrown grass,trash, with owners often elderly still living in it,often times they may own the home with no mortgage and have the money to fix it. So the renters v. owners is not always true.

    Your supply/demand argument makes sense except loosening rent regulations won’t necessarily work in itself, cities like seattle and boston and among the nations most expensive but have no rent regulation, you could loosen rules and regulation such as zoning but eventually folks will complain about character of neighborhood.

    NYCHA is dependent on federal funding to a large extent so its not something the city can just run as federal law prevails, nycha was successful in the beginning because many working class folks lived there, of course some still do,but a large proportion are elderly/disabled.

    It’s hard to balance welfare because its partisan, republicans want to increase defense spending and give massive tax breaks to the wealthy at your expense, just as folks don’t need/want to spend $5,000 on a cell phone like in the 1980s doesn’t mean that “our military is being deprived if you for instance limited spending on a phone to under 1k or even $100), Democrats on the other hand rail against the wealthy and practice identity politics lumping the 1% with your local primary care physician with outstanding student debt and overhead while lavishing praise on buffet&gates who couldn’t care if their taxes were 90%, also if your european and your parents are from a spanish country your considered “latin” such as argentina, ditto for if your ancestors are from spain as opposed to france or even in some cases brazil/portugal. So then your a minority and hud will make sure you target your resources there, of course if your from cuba,dr,puerto rico your white&black as culture/wiping out of natives occured despite the neo-taino movement, most african americans have some european ancestry in them but if your 1/8th black you qualify. If your a poor white in a rural area you are screwed (unless your grandfather was from spain and migrated to argentina).

    Affordable housing programs are based on income not assets, they could generally care less if retired rich for the most part unless its lihtc. In addition there comes a point where folks will not work hard to save money, want to work on the weekends/nights for a little more pay that disqualifies you from need-based-programs,don’t think so. The 30 percent rule which was actually based on cash strapped public housing in which escalating rents in the 1960s prompted a 25 percent rent cap was raised to 30 percent. However, its before taxes, making 20-30k and pay 10-20% in taxes, a 1/3 rent is not bad, but make 100k and pay 50% then 30% percent is bad. This is why you see “affordable studios asking for rent that is over 2k/month). Couldn’t you make the studio apartment in a suburb and rent it for 1k, yes but the ami would be lower which is stupid, as prime real estate is used for low/high income housing while less prime is used for lower/middle income more expensive housing for families such as 3 bedrooms and further out places in bronx which rent for 1.5k. Since prime real estate i s expensive often times studios can be .5k a month 80/20 housing.

    You can see how this disincentives folks to earn more and work, for its part hpd now this and if you quit your high paying job voluntarily and become an artist/waiter they still count your higher wages in past and they surcharge you less than market if you excess income (only after getting in), but not all programs do this. The GOP would often respond by means testing programs heavily and targeting the working poor and lumping all welfare in one basket (only 4% of americans receive housing assistance) by pretending that all the working poor probably paying market rate for housing and roomates are being dis-incentivized by lumping and pretending that most of them are receiving section 8/public housing which have limited resources and may have been closed in its waiting lists for years. The democrats would then respond as above by doing class warfare (50k v. 100k, 1% includes doctor w debt at 300k,middle class includes two roomates making under 200k each unmarried). The GOP would then try to make phony claims about marriage and its penalties and poverty (idaho/utah have poverty,divorce laws were liberalized so people wouldn’t be stuck/bribed/exploited to get government to divorce,many married folks are higher income and tax hikes are because in-kind support is considered since getting rent/shelter at less cost is sort of like income). The dems would then penalize certain folks who are dual income and married who have save money ie, 250k married vs. 150k unmarried) when medicaid nursing home bills come due and married couples are obligated to support. SS will reward a average 50k inflation adjusted often male person with a ss 2k benefit and 1k for wife who never/hardly worked outside the home, vs. 2k if the couple has 25k average earnings each (nevermind they probably paid the same into ss/more) but a 100k earner gets 15% more despite paying double. GOP will ignore middle class subsidies/credits/deductions/homes/farm/children etc. GOP doesn’t want to punish woman for abortion only doctor of course forgetting they will and they weren’t originally punished because in the early days they weren’t mature enough to be held responsible for their decisions and couldn’t hold property/jobs in certain circumstances. Dems will claims ss claim and suspend is gaming the system while the above 50k v. 0k earning spouse still gets 50% more benefits. If you make 100k and someone mowes your lawn for free you technically owe 50% tax on the market rate service,dems forget. GOP likes free trade/overseas tax for corps, dems hate it and quote effective tax rates forgetting that some pay the highest rate and some lowest so increasing the highest (certain tax exemptions) isn’t fair. GOP will claim too high ignoring exemptions,dems will talk fair trade, but will exempt hippies.yuppies buying cheaper herbs/coffee/crafts from tariffs even though technically it will cost american jobs.

    Anyways this sums up today’s politics.

Comments are closed.

Copyright 2016 Queens Tribune - 150-50 14th Rd., Whitestone, NY 11357 - (718) 357-7400 - Site by Indigo Business Solutions