Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It seems a fair bet to me to assume the majority is going to get poorer over the next few decades, increase in numbers, and become more uban.
Of course they are gonna need places to live, and there is a seemingly permanent shortage of "low-rent" housing in America as it is.
So what solution works best? Many other foreign cities (especially in Latin America and Asia) house their poor majority in street after street of cement block row houses that are very cheap to build and maintain (though not exactly asthetically pleasing) or massive apartment blocks with hundreds of tiny apartments.
Below that are technically illegal, cobbled-together slums which come with a whole host of problems that are virtually unknown in this country.
Could we see a future where such development becomes commonplace here in America?
Do you have any ideas on better solutions to this problem?
My guess on the future is that single family homes will increasingly house multiple families under 1 roof; especially multi-generational families, though I'm not certain if this is the best solution to the problem or not...
Large suburban lots could provide room for building accesory units that could house families too, if local city codes were changed to allow it.
My guess on the future is that single family homes will increasingly house multiple families under 1 roof; especially multi-generational families...
Just as the not so low income, the higher and the outright high income folks progress upward now...
they will leave in their wake plenty of housing that can will be found suitable... much as it always has been in the past.
Quote:
though I'm not certain if this is the best solution to the problem or not...
Meh. On the whole I'm inclined to think that the less done to 'provide for' the better.
Better for the low income and better for thse who would be expected to pay for it.
A lot of low-income housing was destroyed in the mid-20th century and not replaced, with a predictable end result of massive long-term homelessness. The free-market solution to homelessness is that homelessness is okay, since people are rational actors and anyone sleeping on the streetis doing so by choice. So we'll see tent cities and, as cities lose the ability to police themselves, ad-hoc squatter camps. I think we'll also see "McMansion" housing converted to multi-family homes, a trend already occurring. They may not be zoned for it, but they aren't zoned for pot farms either and they sure get used for that a lot.
Low income housing will be more young people staying home with their parents and more elderly people moving in with the adult (middle-aged) adult children resulting in a multi-generational household under one roof.
[recently built suburban homes are large enough to accomodate this]
I think you'll see some McMansion conversions, just as you see TIC/condo and apartment conversions of the older over-sized housing stock in most urban areas, but most of those McMansions are built in pretty affluent and pretentious areas. I think you'll see more younger people having roommates or returning home to mom and dad.
There's really nothing affordable about affordable housing. It's just housing that someone else pays for, and if the majority is getting poorer, there will be less and less wealth to redistribute to pay for welfare housing. Of course, if you take away some of the welfare dollars, housing costs are going to have to drop if they don't want to sit vacant. There's no shortage of housing in the country as a whole. Same supply and less demand = lower price. Simultaneous to that, demand will also be shifting in ( people have less money = roommates, returning to the nest = less demand) which will further drive housing costs down.
I think you'll see some McMansion conversions, just as you see TIC/condo and apartment conversions of the older over-sized housing stock in most urban areas, but most of those McMansions are built in pretty affluent and pretentious areas. I think you'll see more younger people having roommates or returning home to mom and dad.
There's really nothing affordable about affordable housing. It's just housing that someone else pays for, and if the majority is getting poorer, there will be less and less wealth to redistribute to pay for welfare housing. Of course, if you take away some of the welfare dollars, housing costs are going to have to drop if they don't want to sit vacant. There's no shortage of housing in the country as a whole. Same supply and less demand = lower price. Simultaneous to that, demand will also be shifting in ( people have less money = roommates, returning to the nest = less demand) which will further drive housing costs down.
Not everyone needs fancy housing to survive.. some of us are content to have a roof over our heads and will only pay for that. No affordable housing AND the housing market is flooded? Something doesn't add up here. If that were true, we'd have a situation where there's mass homelessness and a glut of empty houses. This situation won't be sustainable in the long run - eventually the landlords will reduce their prices or find ways to offer more affordable housing to the masses of homeless (i.e. by renting out rooms in their McMansions.)
I think you'll see some McMansion conversions, just as you see TIC/condo and apartment conversions of the older over-sized housing stock in most urban areas, but most of those McMansions are built in pretty affluent and pretentious areas. I think you'll see more younger people having roommates or returning home to mom and dad.
Functionally, these are identical. Plenty of formerly affluent and pretentious areas became the poor part of town: the Stanford and Crocker mansions in Sacramento went from being the homes of the wealthy to being housing for the poor and destitute, as did the neighborhood around them.
Quote:
There's really nothing affordable about affordable housing. It's just housing that someone else pays for, and if the majority is getting poorer, there will be less and less wealth to redistribute to pay for welfare housing. Of course, if you take away some of the welfare dollars, housing costs are going to have to drop if they don't want to sit vacant. There's no shortage of housing in the country as a whole. Same supply and less demand = lower price. Simultaneous to that, demand will also be shifting in ( people have less money = roommates, returning to the nest = less demand) which will further drive housing costs down.
Why should housing costs drop if welfare dollars drop? Isn't housing a relatively inelastic need--or are you assuming that more people will make the rational choice to become homeless if housing remains more expensive than they can afford to pay? There's no shortage of food in the world as a whole either, but a simple abundance of food doesn't feed people who can't pay.
Functionally, these are identical. Plenty of formerly affluent and pretentious areas became the poor part of town: the Stanford and Crocker mansions in Sacramento went from being the homes of the wealthy to being housing for the poor and destitute, as did the neighborhood around them.
Why should housing costs drop if welfare dollars drop? Isn't housing a relatively inelastic need--or are you assuming that more people will make the rational choice to become homeless if housing remains more expensive than they can afford to pay? There's no shortage of food in the world as a whole either, but a simple abundance of food doesn't feed people who can't pay.
Or people will make the cheaper choice to rent rooms and share the house instead of renting the whole house itself.
I'm sure re-purposing of existing structures will play a big part, but what about new building? Could we end up with actual third-world style slums ringing our major cities?
Would it be realistic and useful to take large suburban back yards, build around the property lines and turn them into multifamily "courtyard" homes like many other places in the world have?
Are strict zoning regulations going to make more people homeless in the future than need be?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
