A Misguided Solution

England is, and has been, in the midst of a housing crisis. Actually, the “crisis” has existed since WWII. In fairness, England suffered major damage/destruction to their infrastructure, which led to many shortages in living space. People were forced to live in what Americans would consider little more than closets, it was not unusual for grown children to continue to live with family members, and most of the government’s housing money (that is, the TAXPAYER-PROVIDED money they collected) went to so-called “public housing”, run by local councils.

Eventually, housing for wealthier British subjects was available, although at a much higher percentage of their income. Life for many improved.

But, not for the working class/unemployed class subjects. The “temporary” solution of using government money to build, and run, the council housing continued. Those who like to imagine what a wonderful world it would be, should such a solution be applied in America, should read Theodore Dalyrumple’s books on the inhabitants of such largess. It’s the American experience with ghetto housing, times 100, and on steroids.

Compact Magazine has an explanation of what asset management is, but underplays the downside of such ownership. There is another possibility than either being a government renter, or the hapless victim of a corporate absentee landlord.

It’s to allow the residents to own their own housing. Think of it as the equivalent of the post-WWII starter homes - the Levittowns of that time period.

Some of the hastily-built structures did not age well. But, perhaps remarkably, some of that housing still remains. And, much of it is still looking pretty good.

A lot of that gentle aging is due to the fact that the people who owned it were often relatively handy people, and made improvements that enhanced the value of the homes. Plus, I remember the Parma homes of my family members. Virtually ALL the neighbors were scrupulous about lawn maintenance, planting flowers/vegetables in their gardens, and maintaining the facade. It was a point of pride to have a house that matched the respectable standards of their neighborhood.

The organization that has had the most success with improving/upgrading the housing in neighborhoods is Habitat for Humanity. The program has its detractors, but has consistently been the force for getting low-income former renters a foot in the door of ownership. Here are the criteria for participating.

But, fundamentally, we don’t want this nation to become a country of subsidized owners/renters. We would like the citizens to have some permanence, a stake in the community that comes from paying taxes and caring about the condition of their home/neighborhood, and - ultimately - the ability to sell that home and leave, should better opportunities arise.