How Britain almost solved the housing crisis
We all know what must be done.
this post was submitted on 27 Dec 2024
415 points (99.3% liked)
News
23667 readers
3569 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Mega corps buying up all the housing properties surely has nothing to do with rising housing costs...
AP News can't even call it unaffordable. Pathetic.
Things won't improve until people take a stand and force change
people always argue against violence, but revolutions don't happen by asking nicely. companies taking your home and driving people to homelessness is "violent".
shit, where i live, even UNaffordable housing is out of reach. there is fucking nothing on the market.
Protip: it's not affordable housing if we can't afford it.
I am really sick and tired of "Affordable Housing" being neoliberal jargon for "subsidized housing." It's an extremely biased framing of the debate that makes it hard to give fair consideration to other means of achieving actual affordability, such as -- just for example -- fixing the motherfucking zoning code so that developers aren't forced to include expensive amenities like parking spaces and are allowed to build stuff that's cheap enough for people to afford at market rate.
Or keep people from buying multiple properties for investment purposes.
Don't forget companies.
But companies are people /s
I never upvote a /s but you're the one exception. Here's your fucking reward.
I’ll take it!!
(This seriously made me chuckle)
This is a rare meme, it's aged well and has been kept in a cask to prevent any jpeg. It's yours now. It was my NFT and I hereby grant you all rights in perpetuity. So say we all.
And I take my upvote back because you don't upvote posts you respond to, which is poor etiquette. Fucking degenerate.
I mean, to effectively have affordable housing without parking lots and screwing traffic, you need real mass transit. Which should really be our focus over the next 15-20 years anyway, besides green energy, of course.
Speaking of which, we need a moderator for !fuckcars. The previous mod has been afk for 2 months. It's like, your normal browsing plus maybe a five minute commitment per month. Are you interested? Message me.
I mean, to effectively have affordable housing without parking lots and screwing traffic, you need real mass transit.
No, you don't -- that's another assumption I'm sick and tired of hearing. You change the zoning rules to allow day-to-day amenities (housing/jobs/shopping/etc.) to exist within walking distance first, then once a bunch of people with that kind of lifestyle move in, they will drive demand for good transit after.
If you try to do it backwards, by maintaining policies that cater to driving until the transit magically appears, you end up building a car-dependent Hellhole that is infeasible to retrofit while never actually getting the damn transit because you can't show any demand for it (fucking obviously, because everybody who lives there is forced to drive!). Or if you do somehow force through transit anyway, over the kicking and screaming of the racists and reactionaries, you'll end up with nobody using it and them screeching "we told you so" because it'll still be worse than driving.
You HAVE to quit subsidizing the entitled driver class FIRST.
I think transit tends to create commercial and residential demand. That demand can, should, and usually does drive zoning for the area.
At least for me, my nimbyism about high density housing is all about not having the transit to support it. Our roads are already past max capacity, and adding just another lane isn't going to last long. Even if the new communities are the 4 over 1 mix housing and commercial.
Probottom: why do we include migrants in our homelessness statistics if we're not offering them social welfare?
Propowerbottom: tax brackets should also be influenced by the number of properties a person owns. Unless a real estate agent and actively trying to sell or reno the property, get penalized for hoarding.
Edit: @[email protected] I'm disappointed in your correction. Now I just look like a fool! I thought we were ride or die!!
Almost like we shouldn't tie human necessities to profit.
Seems like a very similar situation common to many Americans.
But...but...the unemployment rate is so low. They must actually want to be homeless. /s
"The economy is outstanding and Biden is the most effective president in history!"
- reddit liberals
But seriously, it's but hard to see why people think the economy is ass
jfc 18% is a huge increase. What is that compared to historical trends?
That increase comes on top of a 12% increase in 2023, which HUD blamed on soaring rents and the end of pandemic assistance. The 2023 increase also was driven by people experiencing homelessness for the first time.
This is the "economy" that the Democrats ran on being a "good economy."
Two straight years of massive increases in homelessness, but the increases started, shocker, in 2020.
This is from the AP News article that AP themselves references for the 12% increase in 2023:
https://apnews.com/article/homelessness-increase-rent-hud-covid-60bd88687e1aef1b02d25425798bd3b1
The numbers ticked up to about 580,000 in the 2020 count and held relatively steady over the next two years as Congress responded to the COVID-19 pandemic with emergency rental assistance, stimulus payments, aid to states and local governments and a temporary eviction moratorium.
Jeff Olivet, executive director of the U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness, a federal agency, said the extra assistance “held off the rise in homelessness that we are now seeing.” He said numerous factors are behind the problem.
In other words, homelessness was exploding in 2020 and then was hidden for two years because of government assistance that got some people through some hard times. Obviously it wasn't helping enough if homelessness was still growing during 2020-2022.
What policy decisions or laws enacted by the Biden administration do you think caused this?
I want to point out that not everything that happens on the market is caused by policy decisions or laws.
There are also other factors, such as the cost of energy, total inflation, speculation, falling wages, etc...
Politically it doesn't matter. You can't win an election by telling people the economy is great when they're struggling to afford groceries and people they care about are going homeless. Democrats sounded incredibly out of touch this cycle.
None, I think those kind of effects take years to manifest and I think it was actually the Trump admin that undid a large amount of it (I mean remember who he put in charge of Housing?), but it didn't start appearing when he was President due to Trump endlessly juicing the stock market and then during the Pandemic he begrudgingly agreed to assistance. Those things kind of hid how badly he was screwing the pooch.
But even then, I think that this is a six-decade long manifestation of what has been festering in the USA. Republicans tear things down and erode living standards and human rights, and while Democrats are busy trying to preserve or reverse those things which prevents them from working on making things better, Republicans are busy kicking the next thing down, and the cycle continues.
But even then, I think that this is a six-decade long manifestation of what has been festering in the USA. Republicans tear things down and erode living standards and human rights, and while Democrats are busy trying to preserve or reverse those things which prevents them from working on making things better, Republicans are busy kicking the next thing down, and the cycle continues.
Yes, and another big reason Democrats fail to make things better is because they are too often working from fundamentally incorrect assumptions/towards untenable goals and therefore come up with wrong solutions that don't work. (They're often less wrong than Republicans' assumptions/goals/solutions, but still wrong nevertheless.)
For example, even among Democrats (let alone Republicans) the prevailing notion is that we can somehow eat our cake and have it too when it comes to single-family housing in cities, due to a combination of NIMBY entitlement and oil/car industry corrupting influence. Because of that, they insist on keeping car-dependency baked into the zoning code and then delusionally try to paper over the inevitable spiraling costs with subsidized housing, instead of admitting that the physical geometric reality of space dictates that cities must be walkable in order to be affordable because cars simply don't fucking fit!
The sharp increase in the homeless population over the past two years contrasts with success the U.S. had been having for more than a decade.
Going back to the first 2007 survey, the U.S. made steady progress for about a decade in reducing the homeless population as the government focused particularly on increasing investments to get veterans into housing. The number of homeless people dropped from about 637,000 in 2010 to about 554,000 in 2017.
Yikes. That is brutal to see.
I don't want to see percentage increase values for things like these. I'd prefer percent of population, or absolute values.
more than 770,000 people were counted as homeless — a number that misses some people and does not include those staying with friends or family because they do not have a place of their own.
770,000 people were counted as homeless
23 of every 10,000 people in the U.S.
And you would get those of you bothered to read the first three paragraphs of the article.
Then read the article.