3 ms·

> If eviction rates are “approaching pre-pandemic levels” then isn’t the real shocking headline that eviction rates are lower than before the pandemic despite t

> If eviction rates are “approaching pre-pandemic levels” then isn’t the real shocking headline that eviction rates are lower than before the pandemic despite the eviction moratorium? What am I missing? Home is the only shelter many people have from contracting COVID. Evicting people into situations such as homelessness and overcrowding, where infection is more rampant, is a great way to spike infection rates potentially more than both temporary shelter/housing systems as well as healthcare systems are prepared to handle. That's the concern with restoring evictions to pre-pandemic norms. There's not enough capacity in a reduced-crowding scenario such as the one we're currently in.

AnthonyMouse 5y ago
Landlords don't generally evict people because they want their properties to be empty. Evicting a tenant and taking in a different one has no effect on the number of people with housing. If you actually want to reduce crowding, build more housing.
- eganist 5y ago
  > Landlords don't evict people because they want their properties to be empty. Evicting a tenant and taking in a different one has no effect on the number of people with housing. I'm not sure where I made the impression that landlords want empty properties. They're evicting so that they can bring in paying tenants, but those tenants are often housed elsewhere anyway, not coming out of unhoused or underhoused groups. So the point stands: people who lost their means of paying are being evicted into the abyss in order to make room for people who never had a housing challenge.
  - AnthonyMouse 5y ago
    People getting evicted from a two bedroom apartment aren't going to a homeless shelter, they're going to a studio apartment that costs half as much. People getting evicted from a studio apartment aren't getting replaced by Jeff Bezos, they're getting replaced by someone else who can only afford a studio apartment and might have otherwise been homeless. Increasing the number of units on the market will tend to reduce rents and allow more people to afford housing.
    - eganist 5y ago
      > People getting evicted from a two bedroom apartment aren't going to a homeless shelter, they're going to a studio apartment that costs half as much. Why are we certain that a family getting evicted from a 2 bedroom apartment can afford a studio? They're getting evicted, presumably for nonpayment e.g arising from joblessness, which would suggest they're likewise also unable to pay for a studio. > People getting evicted from a studio apartment aren't getting replaced by Jeff Bezos, they're getting replaced by someone else who can only afford a studio apartment and might have otherwise been homeless. And where are the people getting evicted from a studio going? > Increasing the number of units on the market will tend to reduce rents and allow more people to afford housing. City/NIMBY bottlenecks are preventing this from happening, and though I agree with the premise, joblessness won't help when it comes to people looking for housing that needs payment.
      - AnthonyMouse 5y ago
        > Why are we certain that a family getting evicted from a 2 bedroom apartment can afford a studio? Because we're talking about averages. Two income couple loses one income, can now only afford a smaller place. You can find someone who went from a two bedroom apartment to homeless because they lost all their income, but you can also find someone who went from a studio to a two bedroom because it came onto the market, and then the studio went to someone who had been homeless. > And where are the people getting evicted from a studio going? The same place the people moving into the studio came from. > City/NIMBY bottlenecks are preventing this from happening City/NIMBY bottlenecks stand in the way of building new housing, and should be removed. But the point is that putting the existing units back on the market will tend to reduce rents, so that existing people who need new housing don't have to be in a bidding war over a smaller number of available units. Consider which is more fair: Six low income people, enough housing for five and those five each pay $800 in rent; or four of them have to pay $1000 because the one who would have been homeless is living rent-free where the one who could afford $800 but not $1000 would have been, making that person homeless. The only real solution is still to build housing for the sixth person.
    - jcrawfordor 5y ago

AnthonyMouse 5y ago

Landlords don't generally evict people because they want their properties to be empty. Evicting a tenant and taking in a different one has no effect on the number of people with housing. If you actually want to reduce crowding, build more housing.

eganist 5y ago
> Landlords don't evict people because they want their properties to be empty. Evicting a tenant and taking in a different one has no effect on the number of people with housing. I'm not sure where I made the impression that landlords want empty properties. They're evicting so that they can bring in paying tenants, but those tenants are often housed elsewhere anyway, not coming out of unhoused or underhoused groups. So the point stands: people who lost their means of paying are being evicted into the abyss in order to make room for people who never had a housing challenge.
- AnthonyMouse 5y ago
  People getting evicted from a two bedroom apartment aren't going to a homeless shelter, they're going to a studio apartment that costs half as much. People getting evicted from a studio apartment aren't getting replaced by Jeff Bezos, they're getting replaced by someone else who can only afford a studio apartment and might have otherwise been homeless. Increasing the number of units on the market will tend to reduce rents and allow more people to afford housing.
  - eganist 5y ago
    > People getting evicted from a two bedroom apartment aren't going to a homeless shelter, they're going to a studio apartment that costs half as much. Why are we certain that a family getting evicted from a 2 bedroom apartment can afford a studio? They're getting evicted, presumably for nonpayment e.g arising from joblessness, which would suggest they're likewise also unable to pay for a studio. > People getting evicted from a studio apartment aren't getting replaced by Jeff Bezos, they're getting replaced by someone else who can only afford a studio apartment and might have otherwise been homeless. And where are the people getting evicted from a studio going? > Increasing the number of units on the market will tend to reduce rents and allow more people to afford housing. City/NIMBY bottlenecks are preventing this from happening, and though I agree with the premise, joblessness won't help when it comes to people looking for housing that needs payment.
    - AnthonyMouse 5y ago
      > Why are we certain that a family getting evicted from a 2 bedroom apartment can afford a studio? Because we're talking about averages. Two income couple loses one income, can now only afford a smaller place. You can find someone who went from a two bedroom apartment to homeless because they lost all their income, but you can also find someone who went from a studio to a two bedroom because it came onto the market, and then the studio went to someone who had been homeless. > And where are the people getting evicted from a studio going? The same place the people moving into the studio came from. > City/NIMBY bottlenecks are preventing this from happening City/NIMBY bottlenecks stand in the way of building new housing, and should be removed. But the point is that putting the existing units back on the market will tend to reduce rents, so that existing people who need new housing don't have to be in a bidding war over a smaller number of available units. Consider which is more fair: Six low income people, enough housing for five and those five each pay $800 in rent; or four of them have to pay $1000 because the one who would have been homeless is living rent-free where the one who could afford $800 but not $1000 would have been, making that person homeless. The only real solution is still to build housing for the sixth person.
  - jcrawfordor 5y ago