2 ms·
Based on my (very limited) understanding of inner city housing projects in the USA, then yes. AFAIK those planning such projects did not themselves live in soc
by chriswarbo 6y ago
Based on my (very limited) understanding of inner city housing projects in the USA, then yes.
AFAIK those planning such projects did not themselves live in social housing (unlike, say, many soviet officials), hence there's still an element of hypocrisy there (note that I never claimed otherwise; I specifically chose the word "this" in the sentence you've quoted. I'll also re-re-state that I've not made any argument for or against home ownership or renting)
- kQq9oHeAz6wLLS 6y agoThe problem is, the housing projects ended up being a major contributor to gangs in the cities. Growing up, "the projects" was a common euphemism for gang-infested ghettos, even though that likely was only true for a small portion of the projects. See here, for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsidized_housing_in_the_United_States#Social_issues https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsidized_housing_in_the_Unit...
- chriswarbo 6y agoYes, there are pros and cons; hence why I haven't argued for or against any approach to housing (although I have been arguing against the hypocricy of someone advocating for an approach that they don't themselves follow, like non-renting landlords having renters)