Based on my scientific guess that apartments in Houston seem to cost the same as subsidized apartments in San Jose and it least to me it seems Houston is at least as crowded.

Then of course we say dangerous poor people who can only afford housing that middle class people can afford else where oughtnt be let to move in.
OK by me but i think thats a side issue.

1. “Affordable” subsidized housing is an inefficient way of providing welfare to the recipients. In the case of the firefighter, the police officer or the cleaners that are hired by householders in wealthy areas, you’ll need to offer a large enough wage to persuade these people to commute in from wherever they can afford to live. If you don’t offer enough, you won’t get decent workers. That’s the market in action.

2. I have nothing but contempt for the sort of person who doesn’t want a poorer family moving next door because they drive an older car or whatever, and that will “lower the tone” of the neighborhood.

2b. This isn’t the same as the legitimate concern as to whether the new neighbours will be quiet, tidy and honest. I agree that there tends to be a correlation between people who will make desirable neighbors and people who have saved to be able to afford their home, and agree that it may be hard to tell the differene between 2 and 2b in practice.

3. There is nothing to stop a group of local residents building a house to rent at a subsidised rent to a desirable worker, or to sell to such a worker at a reduced rate, with some restrictve covenants applied, or to engage in some kind of shared housing scheme with the desirable but low-paid worker. In the case of places like Aspen, this is obviously the way to attract employees who wouldn’t otherwise be able to come, and it appears to be exactly what the town has done.

When this is done on a voluntary basis by local people, I’m absolutely fine with it (obviously). When it’s done by local government, I might just about support it in the case of somewhere like Aspen, but not otherwise (and I would far rather a voluntary association of Aspen businesses did it). It’s certainly not the kind of meddling that counties or states should even think about attempting.

check out this site:

http://www.state.nj.us/dca/coah

The issue of affordable housing is more than having “those people” (e.g. the bastard-spawning-Shaquandas which you allude to) live in affluent communities. It’s part of sound planning practices that link employment centers to residential areas. More and more professionals are being relegated to the “those people” category due to the simple fact that they (myself included!) cannot afford to live in most parts of the country.

Just curious, are you against the FHA/GI loans issued to military families?

Government regulation and human nature should clear up your mistaken impression of my view of “affordable housing.” – Admin

When life in California became impossible to afford (in my view) I moved to Ohio where the salaries are certainly lower but I can work one job and live comfortably on that lower salary.

What I’m driving at is that we all make choices. If living near the beach is all important to me, then I need to be willing to make whatever efforts are necessary to achieve the finances to do that. If having time with my friends and family is what matters to me, then I choose to work 1 job and live on that income.

So many people I have seen who are unable to find an above-average paying position are unwilling to do the hard work necessary to qualify themselves for that better job. I work in law firms and there are frequently people applying for jobs as secretaries in the firm who know that legal secretaries are exceptionally well paid. Of course these people have not polished their computer or typing skills to the level required to earn that higher pay, they haven’t learned the court system in depth, they aren’t able to spell or punctuate or even speak the English language coherently (frequently DESPITE being born here) and without expletives. But they think life is unfair because they cannot get or keep these higher paying jobs. No – not true.

In a society that is visibly populated by “I want what I want when I want it” types, it’s difficult to preach patience and diligence to young people, by these are virtues they really need to have so that they can legitimately afford to live in Marin County – around the most boring humans on Planet Earth!

Do you think that teachers are an asset to a community? What about nurses? How about car mechanics? What about the garbage men?

Once you open the door to subsidizing the homes of those one deems to be “an asset”, you cannot close that door again. You can bet that arbitrary decisions will be made and there will be differences of opinion. Naturally, it will become enormously expensive. At the end of the day, it is more practical to simply pay folks what they are worth.

Suppose we decided to start subsidizing fireman who are married to doctor’s, for example. Are we then going to subsidize wealthy families? If not, are we going to give some fireman a home and not give other fireman a home, thus making their pay disparate for the same work?

If we really need fireman and we simply do not have enough of them, their salaries should go up because they will have to be paid enough to get them to work in an area.

I agree with Jennifer:
As to the firefighter having his subsidized home vs. a single mom, its a no brainer. The firefighter is an asset to the community and without subsidies cannot live in expensive neighborhoods, even though he is needed. Education, skills, and money often grant us allowances that others may covet, but the truth is this is the way it is.
In otherwords he EARNED it.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9406E4DD1F3BF93AA25750C0A9669C8B63

The system of property rights and real estate that we have in the United States feeds these large urban slums. Today they are becoming sub-urban slums as Liberty City in Miami migrates to south to Homestead. Liberty City was relatively small and I know a lot of people who have escaped. Unfortunately the slums in south Dade county are big, and the problems bigger.

I am a card carrying Republican (actually, I don’t have a card), and I believe strongly in the American Dream. I don’t know what the answer to this problem is, but these big slums are bad, and our society has an interest in controlling their growth. Grouping of housing by income is a problem in our society. I wish there was more discussion of this problem and less of affirmative action.

I guess the natural solution is that these towns would go under for lack of services and the rich people would pull out, but they won’t allow that of course.

Moscow Mayor terms gay parade "Satanic." via Drudge.Why married people don’t want sex. Dr. HelenLaShawn reminds us of an important piece by Walter Williams – Bogus RightsColor photos from the Depression Era. Very cool. (h/t, Done with Mirror…

What does it matter if people have to commute? I had a first grade teacher who commuted from another state (which was actually about 35 miles away). I have Canadian coworkers who commute straight from Canada everyday. They don’t whine, and they actually need passports to get to work. Heck, they come here to shop for food, too. So not everyone can afford to live in certain places. And? People are obliged to care because? Let them get jobs and save money. It’s not that challenging.

Like the FHA loans which many people don’t complain about but will complain about things like affordable housing for teachers, policemen, firemen, etc.

If certain professions are truly scarce, their monetary worth goes up and if they are not, then it does not make sense to force taxpayers to pay them more than their market value dictates.

That doesn’t work with the government model. In fact, the low pay of police, firemen, and teachers is a prime example.

Additionally, even though software engineers are in need, and they are available, major parts of the private sector are outsourcing to other countries to reduce cost. The economic model you are referencing is in need of some tweeks.