You need abundant housing if you really genuinely want your city to be accessible to the middle class. Income-restricted housing is fine and good but it doesn’t get around this reality. - ThreadSky

ohtheurbanity.bsky.social • 13 days ago

You need abundant housing if you really genuinely want your city to be accessible to the middle class. Income-restricted housing is fine and good but it doesn’t get around this reality.

Reposted from

A vision for a city that involves average people being completely priced out and low-income people being able to live in the city only if they win a lottery isn't a vision for an inclusive or affordable city. It is, at best, a vision for integrating a wealthy exclusionary suburb.

Comments

jfrazier.bsky.social•13 days ago

I love "income restricted housing" as a term

avenosten.bsky.social•11 days ago

Exactly. In fact, if you allow an abundance of housing to be built, you don't even need income restricted housing.

In a market where housing is abundant, like that of Dallas or Houston, housing vouchers end up being far more efficient than government built housing. But, lack of supply makes that-

avenosten.bsky.social•11 days ago

-much less useful. In a place like New York City, housing vouchers don't help that much due to the fact that there simply isn't enough housing for the people who want to live there.

ashzachums.bsky.social•13 days ago

It's a classism problem.

There's tons of ways we could build cheap housing. But go look at the comment section of any affordable housing development and you'll see how much Americans HATE affordable housing

ashzachums.bsky.social•13 days ago

This is an example. This a subdivision in mexico with no HOA, no single family zoning restrictions, and no residential restrictions. The houses are 40k USD. They start blank white and can be customized at will

Go find this on tiktok and watch the sheer disgust from commenters.

berkie1.bsky.social•13 days ago

I think this is where inclusionary policies, particularly those implemented with a sledgehammer fail. They stunt the bulk of new housing while widening the gap between haves and have nots in a community, perpetuating growing wealth disparities and perpetuating the lack of overall affordability.

bruce-mastorovich.bsky.social•13 days ago

The long term goal definitely shouldn’t be to get everyone to spend 30% of their income on housing. If we can get back to actual abundance, people should have options to spend even less than that.

bruce-mastorovich.bsky.social•13 days ago

“Even” probably makes it sound like I think the 30% cost burdened guideline is close. “Much” would have been a better word

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply