Socialized medicine, next is socialized housing....

[6SpeedTA95]

Where do you draw the line? Say the US in the coming decade moves to socialized medicine. How long will it be before these same individuals want socialized housing?

Would you ever be in favor of a broad government housing program?

[Jas0n]

Absolutely not. And socialized medicine is a terrible idea too.

[kinggovernor]

Section 8 is already here, what a bunch of bullshit

[7960]

I've vote against anyone who was for either of those.

[6SpeedTA95]

Originally Posted by Jas0n

Absolutely not. And socialized medicine is a terrible idea too.

I agree, but many of those pushing for socialized medicine will turn around and push for socialized housing. Which is scary

[7960]

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

I agree, but many of those pushing for socialized medicine will turn around and push for socialized housing. Which is scary

.....and then, you guessed it, socialized work. I mean why should *EVERYONE* have to go out and get a job? When bill gates makes $1B/year why can't we just demand he hands $50,000 in cash to 20,000 families? I just bought a big TV, I guess that means I make too much money. I should have kept my old TV and given the extra money to a jobless guy. My neighbor has 17 acres of land but he only uses 2. We should require him to give that extra land to people who don't have land so they can build something............

Honestly, I might just kick a guy in the balls if he said those in front of me.

[avsp]

theres quite a lot of reaching for straw men going on, ..., but then thats the perhaps thats in the nature of the thread.

In the UK there is extensive social housing

It grew emnormously after WWII, (urban planning by H Goerring & Assciates etc).

The market was too slow to provide housing for the growing population
Now this sector is decreasing as punters have had the right to buy their home since Thatcher's time, (although, IIUC, this right is being rolled back).

Typically, the local councils, who administered the housing stocks, did so very badly. There was also often poor design of the system-built blocks & they are now having to be pulled down. Combine these factors with continued inward immigration & house prices & rent are climbing fast, along with overcrowding & homelessness.

The market has of course been skewed by the huge number of socialised housing & is now once again slow to adapt to the new problems. This isnt helped by the fact that suitable land is starting to become relatively scarce.

Is there an extensive shortage of housing in the US?
Are more & more children having to live with their parents for longer & longer?

Arent 'projects' state owned? Or is this a false assumption on my part?

Socialised housing need only be provided if the market has not met the needs. Given the abscence of a blitz then surely this should not be the case.

If it is the case then it would imply that the bottom end of the market isnt able to generate the economic demand to command the resources that the high end of the market can, a wouldnt it

[6SpeedTA95]

Originally Posted by avsp

theres quite a lot of reaching for straw men going on, ..., but then thats the perhaps thats in the nature of the thread.

In the UK there is extensive social housing

It grew emnormously after WWII, (urban planning by H Goerring & Assciates etc).

The market was too slow to provide housing for the growing population
Now this sector is decreasing as punters have had the right to buy their home since Thatcher's time, (although, IIUC, this right is being rolled back).

Typically, the local councils, who administered the housing stocks, did so very badly. There was also often poor design of the system-built blocks & they are now having to be pulled down. Combine these factors with continued inward immigration & house prices & rent are climbing fast, along with overcrowding & homelessness.

The market has of course been skewed by the huge number of socialised housing & is now once again slow to adapt to the new problems. This isnt helped by the fact that suitable land is starting to become relatively scarce.

Is there an extensive shortage of housing in the US?
Are more & more children having to live with their parents for longer & longer?

Arent 'projects' state owned? Or is this a false assumption on my part?

Socialised housing need only be provided if the market has not met the needs. Given the abscence of a blitz then surely this should not be the case.

If it is the case then it would imply that the bottom end of the market isnt able to generate the economic demand to command the resources that the high end of the market can, a wouldnt it

There's no shortage of housing in the US. Housing projects are not state owned.

Housing prices have gone up here which has prompted many on the left to start talking about "basic rights to a place to call home"

[Scrum]

Fuck those lazy poor and disabled people.

Let them starve in the streets.

[7960]

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

Housing prices have gone up here which has prompted many on the left to start talking about "basic rights to a place to call home"

The euphemism they're wrapping around this is "living wage." It sounds like they're talking about pay but really living wage means someone gets paid enough to live near where he works so it really ends up being more about housing/location than money. Check out the shit harvard is going through...the janitors want a living wage so they can live near harvard. WTF... janitors! *I* can't afford to live in cambridge, why should a janitor afford to live in cambridge??!?!

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

Fuck those lazy poor and disabled people.

Let them starve in the streets.

I don't believe anyone wants disabled people to starve or be homeless.

Lazy, and consequently poor, though .......... yep, fuck them.

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by avsp

In the UK there is extensive social housing

Consider that the UK also has problems beyond that of the US in many social aspects.

[avsp]

If theres no shortage why have house prices risen? Presumably percieved low interest rates has encouraged borrowing?

The problem is that this market by its nature has a long lead time

There also exists the possibility that lots of people with little money are not able to compete effectively for land & building resources against a relatively few people with very much greater money & thus greater economic demand. Its a question of distribution & typically one sees it in developing countries,favellas, shanty towns etc.

In developed economies typically buildinmg regulations are many & enforced so that shanty towns cant develop & so social housing may be required if the market is unable to provide for the populace. The alternative is lots of homeless poor people & greater social unrest, ..., usually resulting in the election of those promising social housing

It seems as if 'the left' (boo! hiss!, they're behind you, oh no they're not! etc) fear that the US is moving into such a situation.

Surely the US is so large that its not possible to make any such a generalisation? Any such prroblem would, I suppose, be a local one.

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by avsp

If theres no shortage why have house prices risen? Presumably percieved low interest rates has encouraged borrowing?

Demand has risen.

Also consider that in most recent months, the demand has slowed, and so the prices have fallen.

[avsp]

Originally Posted by 7960

The euphemism they're wrapping around this is "living wage." It sounds like they're talking about pay but really living wage means someone gets paid enough to live near where he works so it really ends up being more about housing/location than money. Check out the shit harvard is going through...the janitors want a living wage so they can live near harvard. WTF... janitors! *I* can't afford to live in cambridge, why should a janitor afford to live in cambridge??!?!

I don't believe anyone wants disabled people to starve or be homeless.

Lazy, and consequently poor, though .......... yep, fuck them.

There exists a trade off in the cost of living in cambridge & the cost of travelling there

Travel costs (including pollution etc) are likely to be seen as likely to rise.

The UK state has to promote the provision of cheap housing for nurses, policemen & other essential & relatively low paid workers (bus drivers, dustmen) just to ensure that the larger metropolitian areas function

[avsp]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

Demand has risen.

Also consider that in most recent months, the demand has slowed, and so the prices have fallen.

the short term volatility of the housing market is one of the things that mean that it can, sometimes, be slow to meet the needs of the populace

[7960]

Originally Posted by avsp

Surely the US is so large that its not possible to make any such a generalisation? Any such prroblem would, I suppose, be a local one.

See my post above... there is no "problem." The "problem" is being created by people who are pissed that they can't afford to live where they want to live. Fuck them........ *I* can't afford to live where I want to live.

[avsp]

In a way I'm surprised that a institution like Harvard doesnt provide housing for its staff, ..., just shows how faulty my assumptions are.

So thank to 6speed for the 'projects' clarification

[7960]

Originally Posted by avsp

There exists a trade off in the cost of living in cambridge & the cost of travelling there

That's the person's problem, not mine.

The UK state has to promote the provision of cheap housing for nurses, policemen & other essential & relatively low paid workers (bus drivers, dustmen) just to ensure that the larger metropolitian areas function

They are city or essential service employees, though, so I can see where offering them subsidized housing might make sense. It's cheaper to give them a fantastic loan rate than it is to give them raises to the point where they can afford the house at normal rates. But if harvard wants to pay janitors min wage then I'm all for it. They won't be able to find people to fill the jobs and harvard campus will look like shit and it'll reflect badly on the university. There's no reason to legislate a "living wage."

Originally Posted by avsp

In a way I'm surprised that a institution like Harvard doesnt provide housing for its staff, ..., just shows how faulty my assumptions are.

So thank to 6speed for the 'projects' clarification

it does for some........ but I don't imagine they'd consider janitorial staff "essential."

[avsp]

Originally Posted by 7960

See my post above... there is no "problem." The "problem" is being created by people who are pissed that they can't afford to live where they want to live. Fuck them........ *I* can't afford to live where I want to live.

I think that this is a valid concern for the worker. Leaving aside their own travel costs there is the social cost of commuter congestion & the huge amount of time that it can take to travel to & from work, ..., this can cut into time spent with ones kids for example, which may have a further 'social' cost.

In my experience the problem with socialised housing is the temptation by the parties to undercharge rent to curry favour with voters.

Even without this source of under funding the housing stock the state may not be the bestt organisation to run it.

Further there is ample scope for corruption in the concstruction

Worst still, poorly designed buildings give rise to all kinds of crap. The very first thing Thatcher did on elkection in '79, prior even to lifting exachange controls, was to exempt the original builders of the countries social housing stock from being sued for the design flaws, shoddy work etc.