The Mises Community
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

Affordable Housing and Key Workers

rated by 0 users
This post has 5 Replies | 5 Followers

Top 500 Contributor
Male
Posts 113
Points 2,020
Remnant Posted: Tue, Sep 2 2008 8:08 AM

 

Hello

My village is talking about the need for more "affordable housing" to house "key workers".  No definitions are given as to what these are, although affordable will mean government subsidies or government planners approving the building of "affordable houses" where they would not normally give permission normal citizens.  "Key workers" are almost always low paid government workers. 

How would you suggest I write a rebuttal to this idea in the newspaper, bearing in mind that many if not most of the readers will be sympathetic to these vague notions of "affordable housing" for "key workers". 

Regards

Remnant.

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 75 Contributor
Male
Posts 472
Points 8,810

You could start by highlighting how "affordable housing" could be detrimental to those readers.

I'm assuming the government plans to use measures like building public housing and/or rent control, both would have the effect of raising accomodation prices for "non-key-workers".

This is what you might expect if you challenge the measures: http://mises.org/story/2991

Austrians do it a priori

Irish Liberty Forum 

 

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Female
Posts 90
Points 1,350

You may want to work in that 'affordable' = SUBSIDIZED - by all the rest of you taxpayers. Doesn't that knock you DOWN on the 'affordable' scale too? BEST of luck on this one - sentiment votes (which costs nothing to do really) while sensibility pays the bills.

Jain

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Male
Posts 15
Points 405

Funnily enough I was going to ask a similar question.

 

Take for example Central London, there is no way a fireman could afford to live there, however as a key worker, they need to - in case of emergencies.

So what is the alternative? Should our important workers i.e. firemen, paramedics, nurses etc live in an area that is miles away from their place of work. Surely it would benefit all of society for these emergency workers to live close to work.

 

Obviously I don't think this principle applies to low level non-emergency government workers.

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 5,196
Points 88,450
Juan replied on Tue, Sep 2 2008 7:48 PM
Take for example Central London, there is no way a fireman could afford to live there, however as a key worker, they need to - in case of emergencies.
Really ? Is that the only possible 'solution' ?

February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church.
Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Male
Posts 55
Points 905

garagemc:

Take for example Central London, there is no way a fireman could afford to live there, however as a key worker, they need to - in case of emergencies.

So what is the alternative?

Like, allowing a free market for those services, so the more something is needed, the better it is provided?

:P

Polish Ludwig von Mises Institute

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (6 items) | RSS

Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528

Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119

contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises

Mises.org sitemap