Substandard Housing In The United States

Housing starts for single family homes have been gradually recovering to an annual construction rate of 800K since the Great Recession, but they remain substantially below the 1.2 million peak level that prevailed during the previous expansion. Rising prices should seemingly encourage higher levels of homebuilding activity. The apparent lack of

Many large cities are experiencing skyrocketing rental/housing price because of the excessive demand and more importantly, the scarcity of land. San Francisco, as one of the most important financial centers in the world, is facing a serious dilemma due to its inflated rental/housing prices; people’s dissatisfaction over the government grow as they are excluded from the access to proper housing. San Francisco has the highest rents of any large city in the United States, which makes people, especially from low and medium income group, hard to acquire housing near their workplaces and force to commute from other regions of Bay area into the city. In other words, the high housing prices are pushing people as well as the productive industry out of the city. While people are accusing the government of being responsible for the failure of housing since it underestimates the rate of population growth, which leads to a shortage in the housing market. However, statistic shows that San Francisco actually built more than 30 percent more housing units per capita than New York City and Los Angeles in 2014. (Henry Grabar, 2015) It is because such shortage is artificially created by the policy makers to constraint land use, hence, increasing the supply of housing does not efficiently decrease the housing. The fundamental cause of this imbalanced housing market is the poor allocation of land use.

In 1979 under Thatcher 's reign, the conservative government published its housing bill promising with it the Right to buy. A popular demand at the time as people living in social houses aspired to finally own their home. At the time a blessing, however 30 years later we find that the bill promised the current generation housing at a discounted price. however, only at the expense of the next. The bill forbade local authorities from replacing the council houses sold in the right to buy system. Due to the nature of the right to buy properties, the houses sold were not empty nor was it available, many of the properties were already inhabited. Over the course of 30 years, over 2 million social houses were sold; as a result, there was a large demand for social housing which the local authorities could not meet. Subsequently due to heavily discounted prices of the houses, used to ensure that those vulnerable families are able to become home owners; not enough income was being generated in order to build a replacement home. Since local authorities could not replace them themselves, social landlords struggled to build enough to replace those sold through the right to buy. The bill also opened made way for private companies to abuse the bill and make profit out of properties previously owned by the local authority.

It seems hard to believe that over ten years have elapsed since the peak of the US housing market in the previous economic expansion. Residential construction as a percentage of real GDP reached a zenith of 6.2% in 2005 Q3. The ensuing contraction saw this share decline -60% to trough at 2.5% of GDP in 2010 Q3. The current economic expansion began in 2009 Q3, but the sheer magnitude of the collapse made it virtually impossible for any subsequent housing recovery to impart the same outsized contributions to headline GDP growth compared to the previous cycle. This has consequently played a significant role in restricting the ability of the economy to shift into a higher gear of growth during the current

The most successful, long term, low-income housing projects are those that use sustainable design and address the social, cultural, and economic needs of residents. Traditionally built low-income housing projects are associated with high crime rates and high mortality rates among the residents who live in them. They do not provide for the needs of residents, resulting in many of the problems these low-income housing projects face today. These problems range from endangerment of human life, psychological afflictions due to the high stresses that are endured by residents, disease epidemics caused by overcrowding and unsanitary living conditions (in combination with a substandard public

Presently, low-income occupiers are in deeper poverty because of the dislodgment caused by gentrification. Furthermore, a lack of resources plagues low-incomes families and forces them into shelters. Current actions taken by city officials are a step in the right direction. Nevertheless, by including more voices in urbanization of cities in the future, the advancement of cities can include all members rather than just the wealthy.

Public housing has the dubious legacy of being one of the biggest, most enduring and farthest-reaching failures in the history of American public policy. High-rise public housing projects like the Robert Taylor Homes and Cabrini-Green have become synonymous with poverty, violence, out-of-wedlock childbirth, welfare dependency, and a myriad of other social ills in the minds of most Americans. Although most have now been demolished, these towering high-rises became looming monuments to this epic policy failure—gargantuan symbols of the demoralizing and debilitating conditions that were forced upon society’s poorest and most vulnerable members.

People in California, as well as the rest of the nation for the most part, are in a state of panic and are waving the flag for a state of emergency reprieve. The real estate market has been blown to smithereens in a post-bubble economy. Buyers are straining to find a home they can afford, bidding against multiple other buyers for the same houses and wondering how they are going to make the mortgage payment. Affordable housing is becoming a thing of the past in a market where sellers are giving away incentives but aren 't willing to slash their prices. Homes are sitting empty and dark as their lawns grow high and turn into eyesores that embarrass the neighbors because their out of town owners can 't find a buyer. In some markets, houses are taking a lot longer to sell than they did a year ago. It is said that in California houses are selling in 54 days instead of the 30 day it took last year but as a resident of the golden state I would say that 's a nice rumor. There are four out of eleven houses in my cul-de-sac up for sale and have been on the market for over a year. One of them has been on the market three times in the last 3 years by different owners. ...Nothing is selling! There are stories of sellers throwing in a vacation packages; cash back offers, free decorating and cars as a way of luring prospective buyers to attend open houses and make their bids quickly. Contractors have advertised upgrades on fancy counter tops, rounded corners, landscaping and roofing

The housing crisis of the late 2000s rocked the economy and changed the landscape of the real estate business for years to come. Decades of people purchasing houses unfordable houses and properties with lenient loans policies led to a collective housing bubble. When the banking system faltered and the economy wilted, interest rates were raised, mortgages increased, and people lost their jobs amidst the chaos. This all culminated in tens of thousands of American losing their houses to foreclosures and short sales, as they could no longer afford the mortgage payments on their homes. The United States entered a recession and homeownership no longer appeared to be a feasible goal as many questioned whether the country could continue to support a middle-class. Former home owners became renters and in some cases homeless as the American Dream was delayed with no foreseeable return. While the future of the economy looked bleak, conditions gradually improved. American citizens regained their jobs, the United States government bailed out the banking industry, and regulations were put in place to deter such events as the mortgage crash from ever taking place again. The path to homeowner ship has been forever altered, as loans in general are now more difficult to acquire and can be accompanied by a substantial down payment.

As urban development progressively changes people’s living behaviors, gentrification has created new urban movements for everyone to follow. It refers to the special migration in population who is seeking either a better living space and/or a better employment environment through an intra-city moving. As many studies have discovered, the future global population growth will only take place in the urban area. It is projected to be a 70% of the 9 billion future populations to live in cities in 2050. (Maarten Hajer 61) As the observable trend along with the major bus routes in San Francisco and Oakland, it makes people believe that gentrification will become an unpreventable force to

On the 9th of December of 2014, I attended a San Jose City Council meeting in the council chambers in the San Jose City Hall. The topic of discussion was the issue of affordable housing in San Jose. There are nearly 5,000 homeless people in San Jose. There are thousands more on waiting lists for affordable housing, some using more than 50 percent of their daily income for rent, or in danger of losing their homes. Homelessness impacts our community, our environment, and our homeless neighbors. Addressing the issue of homelessness is a constant battle between respecting the rights and also meeting the needs of the homeless individuals. This was continuously brought up during the City Council meeting. The members were discussing the

Urbanization is likely to be one of the defining phenomena of the 21st Century for Latin America as well as the rest of the developing world. The world as a whole became more urban than rural sometime in 2007, a demographic change that was driven by rapid urbanization in the developing countries. For the Latin American region, this

New York City, with over eight million inhabitants, is one of the largest cities in the world. With such a vast population, it inevitably suffers from an acute housing shortage. Property is extremely expensive to buy, so ordinary people have to live in rented apartments. Such apartments, however, are in short supply. One reason for this is the system of strict rent stabilization which was intended to protect poor tenants from unscrupulous landlords, but has instead reduced the supply of low-cost housing. Landlords, faced with rising maintenance costs which they are not permitted to pass on to the tenants, frequently allow their buildings to become derelict and abandon them. When the official tenants leave, squatters move in and occupy the tenements

The lack of affordable housing in the United States is a problem that doesn 't receive nearly the attention that it necessitates. This absence of affordable housing became especially prevalent following World War II when suburbanization spread across the country like wildfire. Although the sheer number of homes increased, Jim Crow segregation influenced housing policy, meaning that white institutions prevented blacks from obtaining the mortgages needed to afford such homes. Therefore, rather than accept subprime loans, which often result in foreclosure, many black people have been pigeonholed into paying exorbitant rates for dilapidated rental properties located in inner-cities, thereby creating the affordable housing problem. Although the situation seems bleak, with careful planning and execution, we can solve the affordable housing problem. Specifically, my proposal involves the following two components: the government must first revise and draft three forms of legislation that create strict yet concise standards that landlords must follow, and then allocate federal funding to health and wellness programs within poor communities. By examining the contributing societal factors to the lack of affordable housing in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and then implementing the proposal mentioned above, one could potentially solve the affordable housing problem there and transpose the plan to other impoverished cities across the country.

Urbanization causes financial problems to the overwhelming majority of the people. This is because problems with money are widespread in urban areas. First of all, urbanization leads to the extreme growth of unemployment. For instance, as reported by the International Labour Organization, International unemployment rose to 210 million people in 2010 (David & Vicente 2012, p.154). According to David & Vicente (2012, p.156) vast amounts of unemployment results in human resources not being used efficiently across cities which cause social inequality. This evidence shows that urbanization causes unemployment. Urbanization leads to significant overpopulation in the central cities, which causes high competition and as a result lower job opportunities for most people in the labor market. As businesses and governments cannot produce enough jobs to meet the demand of a fast-growing population, a lot of individuals are faced with a shortage of employment and deprived of a vital source of income. As a result, lack of revenue leads to inequality in society. Secondly, urbanization leads to a lack of affordable housing for the overwhelming majority of urban people. According to Gan (et al., 2017, p.427) in the forthcoming future, the global urban population will reach around 6.3 billion people in 2050, and about 94% of them will be in developing countries. Furthermore, approximately 828 million people from developing countries currently live in inadequate housing and this number will rise