Everyone needs a home big time.

I didn't know the United States realized that 50 years ago and didn't act on it yet. This should be big news.

It's because many in this country consider the homeless of deserving what has happened to them. I have been homeless in my life and I can tell anyone who cares to listen that such is NOT the case.

Affordable housing in this country is becoming harder and harder to find. Even in San Francisco, most new housing is reserved or built specifically for mothers and children. The homeless tend to be relegated to shelters (of which there are not nearly enough) or dangerous, filthy transient hotels--or absent those two choices, to simply sleep on the street, no matter the season or how bad the weather may be. The only residence available was for homeless people with dual diagnoses--drug/alcohol abuse and physical or mental disability. Since I have only cerebral palsy and am high-end FAS (fetal alcohol syndrome) I was not eligible.

President-elect Obama and Congress need to address the problem of homelessness as soon as possible. It is a national disgrace that in America, people do not have at least a place to live, no matter how small.

This is an idea, and a great one, but a real solution needs more votes- to put homeless people in derelict houses and have them fix up the homes.

we have the skills and the experience to end homelessness and hunger -- in America and in the world.  what we lack are the resources.  if we all agreed that this was a priority we could end homelessness in this country in 10 years.

First of all, homeless people are not going to fix a house that they do not own.  That just makes me laugh.  Secondly, people in this country have every opportunity to be whatever it is that they want to be, so there is really no excuse to not work.  If you cant afford a house then maybe you should figure out how to make more money.  I have to work long hours to live in my house, you if you can't do it too...well... GET WITH IT!

You know, Ashley, you're living in some little never-never land. I WORKED when homeless until I injured my back. How nice that you CAN afford a home. It just amazes me how smug those who don't care about homelessness or who just go around bashing the homeless are. You remind me of all these dot-com millionaires who derided the homeless and told them to "get a job". Once the dot com boom went bust some of these erstwhile millionaires ended up in shelters. Needless to say, they very quickly changed their tune.

If you haven't noticed, there is a deepening recession in this country. Not everyone is as fortunate as you. If you can't show some compassion and quit spewing the "if the poor are poor, it is their own fault" go to the Rethugs!

@ashley:

Shannon has replied to your comment on her blog:

http://homelessness.change.org/blog/view/rethink_homelessness_america

May I send you to two books which provide important keys to solving our poverty problem and its concommitants, which include homelessness?

Both are by Henry George (b. 1839, Philadelphia; d. 1897, NYC).  With Twain and Edison, he was among the best known figures of his day, but few of us know his ideas now.   But they are the wisest I've yet found on why we have poverty and how we can END it.

The first is "Progress & Poverty."  You can read a new abridgment online at http://www.henrygeorge.org/, or listen to it at http://www.hgchicago.org/audio or order it from Amazon or http://www.schalkenbach.org/.  The unabridged is at http://www.schalkenbach.org/library/george.henry/ppcont.html, or in hardcopy.  It details the reasons why poverty and progress come hand in hand, and how we can undo the connection.  It shows the machine that concentrates wealth and income into the pockets of a relative few, and leaves the rest of us struggling, even in good times.

The second book is "Social Problems," a book of essays written a few years later.  It is online at http://www.schalkenbach.org/library/george.henry/spcont.html.  Start anywhere, and bounce around until you've read them all.

And you might appreciate some of Henry George's speeches, online at http://www.wealthandwant.com/ (linked from the front page).  (They're what first captured my attention; they crystalize his ideas.)

We don't need programs; we need radical and fundamental reform.  Henry George points the way and the why.

I'm impressed by what loan Lightoller had to say. You are amazingly intelligent, loan ( is this really your name?) When I see people that are homeless I know from experience that it's not their fault. Somewhere in their lives they were missing something that others take for granted. I was a foster child growing up, and I ran away from home at a young age. I didn't even realize that I was a statistic. I have struggled to survive my entire life, sometimes finding myself homeless. Because of having children I'm extremely motivated to fight to keep a roof over our heads. But the lack of affordable housing is almost insurmountable in some places. Where I live you can work two jobs and still not be able to afford the rent on a decent apartment. The waiting lists are years long. If people are housed, they can accomplish so much. But without that basic security they are reduced almost to an animal state. I don't see how anyone can consider this a great nation when so many of our citizens, and especially veterans, disabled people and single parents are homeless. Its really quite disgraceful.

Everyone here has the right idea! I'm an RN & a counselor at a homeless shelter. Every day I see...& deal with...the lack of affordable, healthy housing for people dealing with homelessness. A national will to end this untenable situation is what is needed

A top-down approach must be used to eliminate homelessness.  I'm affiliated with a housing organization and offered eleven eleven single family homes at a discount to use for affordable housing for veterans, emergency shelter, etc.  However, no one will assist us in obtaining funds to purchase the homes.  Although we have letters of intent from other nonprofits to use the housing, banks want firm monetary commitments.

Social enterprise is definitely needed for sustainability of nonprofits. I also feel there's a need to identify ways for Federal, State and local governments to improve funding for performing nonprofit organizations.  Enforced oversight for pass-thru funds to grassroot efforts are needed.  There is too much emphasis placed on funding only faith-based, mega churches or only the high profile polictically connected organizations.

Lack of affordable housing is the cause of homelessness and is now a problem for others sectors of the population.  Little has been done over the past 20 years. Let's get going on this!

I know firsthand that there is a need for affordable housing in my community. I find that  the population that needs it the most is teen parents. They are left to live on the streets or take up residence in unsafe environments for themselves and there young children.

My dream is to provide affordable housing to the teens parents, whether it be in a group home or a monitored independent housing units.

There are several vacant homes in my community and even undeveloped land not for from my home just waiting to be put to good use.

I will continue to spread the word about the need in my community until someone helps me make this dream of mine come true. Every child deserves to thrive in a safe, secure, nurturing and healthy home environment.

Dionne S. Fooks
BIG Think'n Dreamer Inc.

Focused on Expanding the Vision!

Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts has just proposed including $10b in the stimulus package to fund stalled affordable housing projects.

http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2008/12/31/frank_seeks_10b_for_affordable_housing/

This proposal would help build thousands of units of affordable housing right now! 

Please write your representatives to ask them to support funding for affordable housing in the economic stimulus package.

First of all, why have only 98 people voted for this idea? Perhaps it's because there are so many people in the country these days that are like Ashley. By which I mean, people who are living in a dream world, people who don't think that this dying economy will ever effect them in any way, people who think that they are untouchable by this nightmare.

Here's what you do, Ashley - go ahead and be happy for the things that you have, but for goodness sake, please be compassionate for people who have less.

To everyone reading: I'm a 26 year old single mom of one child, I make $14.00 an hour, and nearly 45% of my annual income this year has gone to rent - not counting utility bills. HELLO WORLD! I am a poor person! I am BELOW THE POVERTY LINE!

Well, you know what? I know it's hard, I know it's sad, but there are so many more people in the world out there today that are so worse off than I am. I have to say, I am proud that I can do this on my own and survive, and keep myself and my child safe, well-fed, warm, healthy, and happy. I am proud that I have this opportunity of a good job and a safe place to live, even though I do think it is way too expensive and at the same time, still the cheapest I could find.

Unlike a lot of people out there, I know that I am fortunate. Let's give more people the chance to feel the way I feel, and let them be able to afford a place to LIVE - not just a place to put their things and sleep in.

Please help, Mr. Obama.

Great, This is the same crap that got us into this financial mess in the first place.  If you can not afford housing, look to better yourself before asking for the Government to provide for you and steal from someone else.  There are a lots of programs today that ensure that you get adequate housing, is it the worlds greatest housing, no?  But go to Africa and talk to those who live in Huts made of dung before crying foul play.  Don't get me wrong, I would love to have everyone in a house, but not everyone is ready for that responsibility and the ability to generate revenue for your family is one of them.  Its not easy, hell, I'm struggling badly, but I'm not looking for the government to "bail me out."  Life knocks you down, dust yourself up and get back in the ring.  Make a plan and start down the path one step at a time. 

There many reasons that a person may become homeless and when they do it causes many to lose Hope for the American dream,Lfe,Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. As a result many even those with children suffer from this neglect and many lasting social problem are born as a result of this neglect. Local citizens are the ones to ulimatly pay the price for this neglect so it must be us who deal with this issue because the Fed's want they are too busy dealing with the fat cats.

With my Corp we seek to help the working class become homeowners and qualifly them based on income and what they aare paying in rent and will either build a home or purchase a foreclosed property and allow them to take ownership a actually their home in 15yrs. This method help stop future homeless but does not deal with the current homelesness. But we are willing to purchase properties dedicated for the purpose of allowing the homeless to live and use what ever assitance they are receiving to be used for rent but they will still need food,clothing and some retraing to become self sufficent. I am willing to tackle the problem and with your help and suggestion I beleive we can help a lot of needing people. See my website at http://www.axiomcapitalfunding.com 

Best Regards,

Eugene Carter,CEO
Axiom Capital Funding,Inc 

I wish this idea had more votes on change.org.
It is so important.  I voted for it, and I urge others to do the same.
The U.S. should set an example for the world and show what an enlightened democracy can do in creating affordable housing for the poor and eliminating the homelessness problem.  The homeless are perhaps the most powerless group in America and certainly the most disenfranchised.

I was very moved by Cheney Giordano's post.
I was frankly horrified at the mean-spiritedness of a couple of posts here.  How can anyone blame the homeless for their plight?
If you are a Christian, surely you must be aware of what Jesus would do for the homeless.
Even if you don't believe in any religion, common decency would suggest that compassion is in order, not spite and ignorant assumptions that they would not care for their own property.
For shame.

Observation:  Every Habit for Humanity Home built in Memphis, TN as sold by the person it was given to according to a report by the loacl TV station and the local newspaper (to fund cars, drugs, etc.)  ... something for free is not worth much to the recipient ... how about spend taxpayer money for job training and get them working so they can afford their own home and pay back the system via taxes on their new productivity ... America is not a Socialist country ... yet!

I don't think we are talking about free housing here.  We are talking about AFFORDABLE housing.  It is not true that "every" Habitat For Humanity person sold their home for drugs.  I do agree with you, Larry, that we need to get poor people working so that they have decent jobs and can support their families and pay taxes.

And as for America not being a socialist country: we could benefit from some socialism!  Problem is, corporatism is the economic system with the most currency here.  It goes beyond mere capitalism, extending rights to corporations as though they were people and allowing them to exploit poor people worldwide.

"...And as for America not being a socialist country: we could benefit from some socialism..."

True! Well said Suzanne!


I come from what was left of a socially democratic country; and the more we (Australians) follow in the footsteps of America’s form of democracy and Capitalism, the more fucked up Australian society becomes; the working class and lower working class are the first suffer, closely followed by the middle class.


Face it, Capitalism overall is way fucked up, and only dumb arse Americans fall for the propaganda bullshit that having ANY form of socialism is dangerous. Ironically, you do have socialism in this country; you take from the working class taxpayers and give their money to the rich, whilst allowing the top 1% of the wealthiest Americans not to pay any taxes at all! It’s called the trickle up affect (effect?).


In addition, isn’t Medicaid and public schooling a form of socialism? It seems to me that socialism isn’t all that bad, there just isn’t enough of it.


PS


Larry Ledbetter, your level of naiveté is scary bloke, you’d make a good old boy neo-con Republicunt

THE CASE FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING & A NATIONAL BUILDING & ENERGY STANDARD. They must go hand-in-hand.

Certain items are needed for all people to live a decent (modern) life: decent housing, decent (safe) food, clear (safe) water & air; fair wage/job; access to health care.  All other things are possible (for a people) from there.

Making a (high end designer) commodity of any of the aforementioned, makes those items inaccessible by lower income people and the poor, and now we see, inaccessible to even the middle class in America. 

Behind affordable health care, Affordable Housing is the largest problem facing our nation.

As a practicing licensed architect, I have seen how the mortgage/banking, real estate and construction industries have artificially jacked up the cost of housing for no reason other than personal profit borne of greed. 

Architects have wanted to build green for decades (and some of us have built green, in spite of obstacles, and before it was called "green".)  It's the construction & development industries that lobbied for weaker energy & building standards much in the way the Big 3 Detroit Car manfs lobbied against fuel efficiency standards  -- not architects.

Right now, taxes, realtors' compensation, contractor's pay, property assessors pay, etc, mortgage company profits are ALL based on the so-called assessed value of a property. 
EVERYONE in the aforementioned occupancies HAS A BUILT IN INCENTIVE to artificially push the cost/selling price higher for a home.

Cities get more in tax revenue if homes are valued higher. (So legislators want high-end homes built in their area.)  Realtors, bankers, contractors make more if the house is valued higher (because they make more money the higher the home selling price.)  Home owners have an asset they can leverage for more credit if their house is valued for more (providing they have equity in the house, etc.) Home Owners are induced into pretending to be more affluent than they are, so they get into an unmanageable debt load.

There is a dis-incentive in our current regulations/laws toward making housing affordable, and that has contributed largely to our current housing crisis. 

Merely making credit (or loans) available to people who can't afford $400-900K homes doesn't solve the housing problem, when people only make $7-20/hour at WalMart (and then also have to pay for their own health care.) 
The supply of affordable, sub $175K homes is shrinking FAST and still out of reach for many WORKING Americans.

As an architect, I can say w/ 1000% certainty, I have seen greedy Developer/Builders build a 2400SF vinyl clad  energy-inefficient home for about $160K, then turn around and collude with Realtors and bankers to sell the very home for $600-800K. 

There is nothing wrong w/ a $800K energy efficient house sold to someone who can afford it. I know what a house costs to build, and it's not $500K for a vinyl clad, vinyl window house with forced air heating, laminate floors and cheap ceramic tile.  Granite counters & stainless steel appliances do not add $200-400K to the cost of a house.   The public has been bamboozled by developers, builders, mortgage brokers and realtors.

THE PROBLEM WITH SELLING A $160K HOUSE for $500-800K is THAT  IT STILL PERFORMS LIKE A $160K HOUSE -- and THAT IS WHY IT IS LOSING VALUE.   People should make a profit on their work, but a 300% premium on housing IS NOT SUSTAINABLE.  We have our current national economic condition as proof.

The homes that are really sold at what they are truly worth, HAVE NOT lost their value by 25-30% (not even in this market.)

We also need a more national (uniform) building code and set of standards, so that pre-fab housing and valuation across the US becomes more uniform, level and fair.  (Although some allowances must be made for climatic and geological differences, i.e. earthquake safety, climate differences, etc.) This means, houses need to be built better, more energy efficient and costs can be controlled better because regional variables are reduced. 
If structures were built to a more National Standard, then a $200K house in St. Louis would be worth about the same as a $200K house in Oregon-- and would not have a wild $200-400K cost difference for the same size, materials and features.

Standardizing building and  zoning laws would go a LONG WAY to standardizing and leveling out fabrication/construction costs.  If health care was affordable for all Americans, the operating COSTs to businesses would also decrease costs to manufacture and build good products-- including affordable houses.

We have to make changes to how we value, build and design structures across the entire country.  Putting the product decision process (and minimum legal standards)  in the hands of the industries that artificially jacked up the prices in the first place, will never make us to a sustainable nation.

Institutions and laws have to change.  We have to de-incintivize the greed factor that lead us to building inefficient, low quality structures, sold to people who couldn't afford an over-priced home.

©S. Grant 2009, shantyworld.com
(reasonable people should feel free to dialogue w/ me..)

BTW, I witnessed (but was not a party to) construction companies charging high-end construction costs to rehab EXISTING public housing. 
The result:  mediocre hosuing built at a crazy (artificially high) price.  In 1995, I saw well connected contractors charge the tax payers over $200 per Square Foot to rehab an EXISTING town home complex.  For that price, you can build new luxury homes w/ granite and stainless steel state-of-the-art kitchen appliances.  I know because as an architect, $200/SF was the cost to build my sibling's home --new from the ground up.  But the tax payers didn't pay for my sibling's home. (And it was a lot nicer than the public housing for the same cost.)

The contractors in this all-too-common example made a mountain of money and the residents of the public housing got a sub-par development.  The tax payers got a bill for 100% more than what the construction was worth.

Merely throwing money and projects at contractors and developers is NOT going to rescue housing nor build affordable housing if laws, building codes, energy codes, & construction costs aren't better regulated.

Dis-incentives have to be created to curb greed in construction & development.

Darren & Suzanne are correct:  we already have SOCIALISM in the USA.

WE PRIVATIZE PROFITS (to individuals and corporations when times and the economy are good). Example: Haliburton's massive war-time profiteering as well as all the no-bid contractors who are benefiting from the current war.

And we SOCIALIZE LOSES for the same corporations and wealthy individuals in bad economic times (or when the corps. make poor decisions.)  Examples: AIG Insurance bailout, Detroit Car Manf  Bailout; Banking, construction/development, &  Financial  Industries that helped create our current economic problem.

So the US Taxpayer gets to PAY for the mistakes of big  corporations and bad money managers (who have lots of wealth) even though the mess was not of the taxpayers doing.  That certainly is a form of socialism.

The kind of poor reasoning the anti-socialism (selfish) crowd shrieks about is a good example of why we need to ALSO support good public education. 

An uninformed population is a dangerous population (doomed to undermine itself.)

That would be losses -- not loses.  My bad.

Very intelligent commentary, S. Grant.
I hope everyone reads your post about housing.  I certainly did not know all the information you as an architect deal with every day.
If only more people would vote for this idea!!!  I can't believe that legalizing marijuana (which I support, but don't think is as important) is still in first place! Where are people's priorities?

Surely affordable housing for everyone is a noble goal.  However, I find it hard to support without a concrete plan because I worry it would be poorly implemented as so many gov't programs are.

We CAN turn this situation around through a simple and just tax reform.   The property tax as we know it (except in parts of Pennsylvania) is actually two taxes yoked together: a tax on land value, and a tax on the value of the buildings and other improvements.

The problem is that these two taxes are very different from each other in their effects and incentives, and if to raise revenue we must increase both of them, we get a worsening mess!  The tax on buildings leads to bad results: poorer maintenance, slower or no redevelopment, obsolete buildings being preserved, underdevelopment of prime downtown sites (a diner where there should be multi-story building with a first-floor coffeeshop, or a single-family home in the middle of a midrise neighborhood), even teardowns of old, if serviceable, buildings to avoid property taxes. 

The other half of the property tax, the tax on land values, however, has a whole different set of incentives.  When we raise it, we nudge landholders to put their land to better use.    The diner may not produce enough revenue to pay the higher land tax, so the owner re-evaluates his business plan, and either sells the land to someone who will redevelop it, with an option to rent its first floor, or redevelops it himself.  His asking price is not outlandish because the property comes with a carrying cost in the form of an annual payment to the community.  So the person who wants to develop it doesn't have to pay the previous owner an arm and a leg and have little left to spend on the development process.

Developing the land creates jobs, and that's great for the local economy in the short run.  But the more lasting effect is the buildings that the incentives create: they're downtown, where there is already plenty of infrastructure (city water, sewer, stormwater runoff, schools, emergency services from the public sector; shopping, culture, restaurants, etc., from the private sector) and suddenly the existing private sector has customers: new residents and new workers; new employees.  And we-the-people have places to live.  This gets housing built.  Yes, the luxury sector will probably be built first; likely it already has.  But when landholders are scratching their heads and trying to figure out how they're going to pay their somewhat higher land value tax, they're going to be more interested in what the market wants!  Middle-class housing.  Yes.  Housing for seniors, to meet their special needs.  Yes.  Working class housing.  Yes.   And those of us who dream of being entrepreneurs, but whose business plan depends on having a decent site, not on the fringe but near the center of things, will be able to afford such a place.  Maybe our plan will work, and maybe it won't -- but we'll have had a decent shot at it.

We don't need government programs; we need tax structures that reward initiative and align our incentives with our goals as a society.  That beats another program every day!  Programs can only serve a tiny portion of the demand, and they usually aren't affordable on a large scale; they tend to be a lottery, serving a few and leaving the rest out in the cold.   

A budget is a moral document, and that goes not just for how we spend our revenue, but also importantly for how we collect it.  And collecting it through taxes that align our incentives with where we want to go is vastly superior to taxes which do not, and taxes which tax productive activity and reward speculation! 

Larry Ledbetter - what a wanker!  Of course we're a socialist country, like so many other European socialist democracies, only I think the term democracy is a bit overused and under supported.  As long as we labor under the electoral college system, I hardly think we can call ourselves a democracy.  

About the biggest difference between our socialist programs and those of other countries is that we don't have socialized medicine, and a few other programs that make life a little easier and more secure for all.  

But let's take a look at the socialist programs we do have, some of which I definitely do NOT approve (as in corporate welfare, and those programs which are designed to manipulate commodity prices):  public education, social security, medicare, social welfare, corporate welfare (bailouts, handouts, de-regulation), farm subsidies (typically given to large, wealthy, and multinational "farmers," which makes it harder for the small family farmer to compete), unemployment benefits, disability benefits, etc.
Just curious Larry Ledbelly - were you to lose your job or health, and find yourself potentially on the streets, would you refuse these forms of government help on the grounds that they're dreaded forms of socialism?  Somehow I think not.

But the real question is do you still think we're not a socialized country?  And so what if we are?  I'm sick to death of the absurd notion that a free market will cure all ills (may you rot in hell, Milton Friedman).  Socialism is NOT communism, and even communism may well have worked if not for the power-hungry, ego-maniacal and sadistic bastards who always seem to run these governments.  Come to think of it, what differentiates our heads of state from the communist ones?  Is it not greed, power and religious-like adherence to an ideology (think Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al) that define these so-called leaders and their policies as well?


Maybe we should be asking ourselves why it is that the people in power are always mucked up in the head.  Is it only evil people that are attracted to positions of power?  I've certainly noticed this on a smaller scale, as in corporate heads and those who are eagerly trying to climb the ladder as they stab those less motivated in the back.  

What is it about the human species that reads a constant history of a sheep-like majority always willing to fall in behind chupacabra-like leaders until they eventually realize their folly, only to repeat the same mistakes over and over and over again?

The problem with government is not necessarily the ideology behind it, although pure, unfettered capitalism certainly ranks as one of the most evil in my mind; the problem is with the human species, and it always will be.  Until we change on a fundamental level, and on a mass scale, nothing will ever get better, and I fear it's simply too late in the game for that much of a shift to happen.

Some things OUGHT to be socialized.  Other things OUGHT to be privatized. 

I think that what ought to be socialized is that which nature provides us, particularly that which is fixed in supply (the value of land, of spectrum, of non-renewable resources) and that which is created by public investment.  And at the same, I think we ought to privatize things which are the result of individuals' labor and private investment AFTER the user fees on the socialized resources have been paid.

Henry George laid out the mechanism, in "Progress & Poverty."  And his later book of essays, "Social Problems" amplified parts of that.  You can now read the latter at http://www.wealthandwant.com/, along with several of his speeches which are relatively succinct summaries of his thought.  I commend it to your attention, along with an excellent essay called "Henry George and the Reconstruction of Capitalism," linked from the same page.