Over the years, the issue of low-income housing has sparked controversy among landowners and affordable housing proponents about its negative impact on average property valuation in the majority of states in the United States. However, housing activists say that there have been few academic works addressing the danger faced by low-income housing policies to property values. The federal and state governments are now investing heavily in improving the housing conditions of the people who live in slums and on the streets of most cities and suburbs. The government step to handle the issue of homelessness involves programs to subsidize housing facilities in most cities such as New York. Nonetheless, whether low-income housing facilities can reduce homelessness among the needy individuals remains to be an unsolved question.
Research conducted by Clifford and Osborne found that in January 2014, a single night had approximately 580,000 homeless persons in the streets of the US, with about 5.6 percent of them living in New England (Clifford and Osborne, 07). One of the reports, California Planning Roundtable (1993), affirmed that roughly thirteen out of the fourteen research undertaken had established the dire effects of low-income housing on the value of property and assets (Nguyen, 15). These research concluded that affordable housing facilities had an insignificant influence on the overall value of assets and property in the economy. Consequently, the advocates have been employing the argument to challenge the property owners over the issue of altering the low-income housing to make houses affordable to individuals living under poor conditions (Freedman and Tamara, 806). With this knowledge at hand, there has been a move to alter the low-income housing facilities to make it reasonable and accessible to the less fortunate in the society (Garcia-Diaz, 02).
However, over the last few decade, there have been some studies conducted to assess how the reduction of housing facilities will affect the value of property. The studies established the correlation to be so complex than initially thought by both property owners and advocates. Nonetheless, the government has been on the verge of helping its poor citizens to afford housing facilities even in states where housing facilities and property value is high (Rizvi, 26). The federal and state governments are always working with property owners to drop the cost of housing facilities to help most citizens afford a house.
Additionally, they have also built some low-income housing facilities to make homes available to every individual citizen at relatively low cost. Though, there is one major question that leaves many surprised regarding the move the government has taken to alter low-income housing facilities within the states in America. Some consequences develop as a result of the government effort to create affordable housing facilities in America to help improve the life of its citizens. Therefore, this article will attempt to address the issue on how the government should adjust the low-income housing to help its citizens get affordable houses while considering the objection of the property owners.
The aim of this article will include;
Persuading the federal and state government to take necessary action to reduce the homelessness
Enable readers to consider a new school of thought on matters touching on the low-income
To enable the readers, appreciate some commonly misjudged issues regarding homelessness and low-income housing facilities.
Exploring new concepts of looking at the issue of homelessness
As the 20th century ends, the United States encountered high levels of exceptional economic fortune illustrated by events such as mounting per capita income, booming stock market and low unemployment rates. In the same period, the government faced various challenges such as supplying affordable and adequate housing facilities and social amenities for its ever-growing population (Rizvi, 38). Additionally, there was a rising home price in most cities due to booming, putting extreme stresses on homes at all income levels, particularly those families at the bottom of the socio-economic pyramid.
The inadequate supply of housing facilities was not only the contributor to the housing crisis in America, which has reshaped negatively on the lives of the citizens today. However, the government has attempted to counter the crisis by supplying affordable and accessible housing to the homeless citizens. Despite the government’s effort to create suitable living conditions by altering low-income housing, it should consider the effect on the property owners. Besides, adjusting the low-income housing downwards will adversely affect the quality, construction and design of the structures, changing neighborhood behavior, negative externalities as well as antigrowth. All these concerns expressed by property owners as well as tenants were closely associated with growing fear of falling property value which may never pick up again.
Additionally, most homeowners close to affordable housing sites have complained of falling property values of their assets for the last few years since the recession era.
Making houses affordable to the low-income earners in the country will positively affect their lives as they get accessible and adequate housing facilities. Also, affordable and reasonable housing facilities could allow the government to focus on the provision of other social amenities to the citizens besides, other services. There are some multiple and different types of low-income housing which may include public housing, homeowner assistance, offering subsidies to those owning properties to permit them to provide affordable housing facilities.
Furthermore, the government may give grants to affordable housing tenants to help low-income earners to get accommodation (Clifford and Osborne, 08). However, the nature of the strategy adopted by the government to create affordable housing system may affect the property owners differently. The continuous attempts by the government to develop the low-income housing facilities in the US to allow the poor citizens to have adequate shelter have significantly affected their health and living conditions. Low-income housing in most states come with some impacts on the life of the individuals living in this poor-conditioned houses and areas. These include inadequate access to excellent healthcare facilities as well as preventive utilities, personal behavior and exposure to elements that are noxious to the body commonly associated with poor disposal methods of waste.
Most of the people living in the settings of low-income housing facilities have affirmed that the primary cause of poor health condition in these locations boils down to lack of money. Therefore, most scholars and healthcare experts have criticized the federal and state government of the US of encouraging low-income housing facilities in most states that are already experiencing a shortage of health services. Moreover, economists have blamed the government for building low-income housing facilities in metropolitan cities of the US such as New York, citing that it creates poor living conditions and crowding in these towns. The poor living condition is one of the attributes associated with crowding in most municipalities with poor urban planning and migration of people searching for jobs. Consequently, the government’s effort to build low-income houses in modern cities and towns has reaped several severe impacts on the lives of the people living in these housing facilities. The government, therefore, need to consider other possible alternative strategies to address the issue of homelessness among poor individuals in the US.
The problems that people living in low-income housing have also risen the cases of major stress-associated health complications such as stroke, diabetes, emotional conditions or heart diseases. Therapists and psychologists have reported that most of their clients are those from low-income houses who undergo psychological and mental problem of living in this regions. Additionally, the inhabitants of these houses have complained of ever-deteriorating health conditions since moving into these government-initiated facilities. They also cite overcrowding to be a major problem encouraging immorality and behaviors such as alcoholism, prostitution among other vices. Local law enforcement officials have quoted the poor living conditions, lack of money for sustenance among other problems to be the primary reason for engaging in these immoral social activities.
The concentration of low-income houses in a given place in the impoverished neighborhoods serves to attract crime such as armed robbery who may want to steal from the homes. However, the crime rate in these poor-conditioned regions can also diminish as a consequence of the construction of the low-income housing amenities. People who move to these newly built structures have noted comfort and security as a result of the facilities provided in the houses. For instance, parents can allow their kids to play with no worries that they may get involved in gun shooting events during gang violence in the impoverished area. Therefore, this is a clear indication that federal government’s efforts to improve the living conditions of their citizens by building affordable houses is a problem in itself. The constant problems experienced by the population of residents living in low-income housing facilities should be an indication enough for the government to look for a more feasible way to address the issue of homelessness.
One of the greatest on-going debates in the US media among the socialist is whether building affordable housing facilities will reduce the homelessness rate in the states. The correlation between affordable or subsidized housing facilities is almost difficult to measure. But research conducted by Clifford and Osborne reveals that low-cost housing facilities significantly reduce the rate of homelessness among poor citizens. However, the government needs to assess the impact of subsidizing houses in line with the problems that most of these individuals encounter in their daily life. Affordable housing has been the primary cause of degrading infrastructure in most metropolitan cities in the US.
Low-income housing facilities are a government initiative to improve the living conditions of poor Americans. Nonetheless, the challenging health conditions of life experienced by these people are themselves worse than living in the streets. Therefore, the federal government needs to put up strategies and policies that will likely to address the problem of homelessness among the low-income families. The alteration of the low-income housing by the government should consider the effects that the falling value of accommodation facilities have on the economy especially properties such as land. The government should reduce the value of houses to make them affordable and not pushing the value of properties low as to bring turmoil among property owners.
Affordable houses should not be accessible to everyone as to make the rental houses lose value. Besides, the government can fairly alter the low-income housing facilities so it does not become affordable to all. Substantial subsidizing of houses will also reduce overcrowding leading to impoverishment. Through these strategies, the government can heavily monitor the number of people gaining access to these facilities thus reducing overcrowding and poor living conditions. The poor living condition has been one of the greatest challenges encountered by the population living in government-subsidized houses.
The government should, therefore, put up fit and well-conditioned houses in a bid to reduce problems associated with a poor living condition. Besides, provide adequate healthcare facilities and utilities that will improve the life of those in these areas. Low-income housing reduces crowding and enables more household available to pay for healthy foods, health care thus leading to better health outcomes for individuals. Further, the low-income housing also promotes mental health by limiting stressors that have to do with a financial burden as well as frequent moves and providing an escape from various abusive environments.
In a summary, low-income housing facilities have significantly affected the American economy as well as the lives of citizens. The federal and state governments are currently spending a substantial sum of money to elevate the lifestyle of the poor living in the slums and streets of most cities and towns. The US government has done a lot in curbing the issue of homelessness among poor citizens by subsidizing low-income housing facilities. The insufficient supply of housing facilities is not only the contributor to the housing crisis in America, which has reshaped negatively the lives of the citizens today (Rizvi, 27). Nevertheless, the government has attempted to counter the predicament by providing affordable and accessible housing to the homeless citizens. The underprivileged condition has remained as one of the utmost obstacles faced by the residents living in government-subsidized facilities. The government should, therefore, put up fit and well-conditioned houses in a bid to reduce problems associated with a poor living condition.
Notwithstanding the government’s effort to offer suitable living conditions by modifying low-income housing, it should consider the influence on the property owners. The concentration of low-income houses in a given place in the underprivileged neighborhoods serves to attract crime such as armed robbery who may want to steal from the homes. However, the crime rate in these poor-conditioned regions can also diminish as a consequence of the construction of the low-income housing amenities. People who move to these newly built structures have noted comfort and security as a result of the amenities provided in these houses.
Low-income housing facilities are a government initiative to improve the living conditions of poor Americans. Nevertheless, the challenging health conditions of life experienced by these people are themselves worse than living in the streets. Therefore, the federal government needs to put up schemes and policies to address the problem of homelessness among the low-income families. The modification of the low-income housing by the government should consider the effects that the falling value of accommodation facilities have on the economy particularly properties such as land.
Clifford, Robert and Osborne Jackson. “Can Subsidized Housing Help Address Homelessness in New England?” Communities & Banking, vol. 27, no. 4, Fall2016, pp. 7-9.
Freedman, Matthew and Tamara McGavock. “Low-Income Housing Development, Poverty Concentration, and Neighborhood Inequality.” Journal of Policy Analysis & Management, vol. 34, no. 4, Fall2015, pp. 805-834.
Garcia-Diaz, Daniel. “Low-Income Housing Tax Credit: The Role of Syndicators.” GAO Reports, 3/1/2017, pp. 1-24.
Nguyen, Mai Thai. “Does Affordable Housing Detrimentally Affect Property Values? A Review of the Literature. Journal of Planning Literature. 2005. Vol. 20, No. 1. 15-26.
Rizvi, Zaigham M. “Population Growth, Urbanization and Slums: Challenges for Developing Low-Income Affordable Housing.” Housing Finance International, Spring2016, pp. 37-41.
Rizvi, Zaigham M. “Pro-Poor Housing and Energy Poverty.” Housing Finance International, Winter2016, pp. 26-28.