3 ms·

> what they should do is assess this on a case-by-case basis and pay the rent for people in genuine need. I theorize this is infeasible in the US at the nation

> what they should do is assess this on a case-by-case basis and pay the rent for people in genuine need. I theorize this is infeasible in the US at the national level because there are probably regions in the US with insufficient manpower to do this manual review (though someone might correct me on this). It's easier to throw money at the problem by giving money to those who don't need it than it is to hire and maintain headcount. I suspect this because this is far from a new problem. People have long abused welfare in the US who don't actually need it because the review process is incredibly lax (which in turn perpetuates the idea among the American right that government welfare is a waste of resources). Though aside, I'm always wary of believing stories I read on the internet that paint the political situation in a certain light even if they're allegedly from individuals. But I've personally known people in real life who bragged about abusing welfare before, so I know that's a thing (though I don't recommend you take my word for it).

cletus 5y ago
I don't believe it's infeasible because we already do it to a large degree. At the Federal level there is a Section 8 housing. At the state level there are various rent assistance programs. Most people are also W2 employees so their income is tied to their SSN so a lot of this can be automated by simply looking at your actual monthly income. The fact that you'd need to apply for this would also discourage some people from abusing the system. Lastly, I don't really care if the system isn't perfect and some people get assistance they don't need. It doesn't have to be perfect. It just has to be "good enough". At an ethical level, I'd rather give people the benefit of the doubt and not make them homeless than worry about them abusing welfare some of the time. > People have long abused welfare in the US who don't actually need it I'm always skeptical of claims like this because they're used as a political tool to attack poor people for being poor. OMB's estimate [1] put this at "5.6 to 7.2%". In a country that spends a trillion dollars a year on the military, that's a literal rounding error that I don't care about at all. [1]: https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/briefing-room/2021/12/30/updated-data-on-improper-payments/#:~:text=An%20improper%20payment%20is%20a,the%20relevant%20statute%20or%20regulation https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/briefing-room/2021/12/30/upda....

cletus 5y ago

I don't believe it's infeasible because we already do it to a large degree. At the Federal level there is a Section 8 housing. At the state level there are various rent assistance programs. Most people are also W2 employees so their income is tied to their SSN so a lot of this can be automated by simply looking at your actual monthly income. The fact that you'd need to apply for this would also discourage some people from abusing the system. Lastly, I don't really care if the system isn't perfect and some people get assistance they don't need. It doesn't have to be perfect. It just has to be "good enough". At an ethical level, I'd rather give people the benefit of the doubt and not make them homeless than worry about them abusing welfare some of the time. > People have long abused welfare in the US who don't actually need it I'm always skeptical of claims like this because they're used as a political tool to attack poor people for being poor. OMB's estimate [1] put this at "5.6 to 7.2%". In a country that spends a trillion dollars a year on the military, that's a literal rounding error that I don't care about at all. [1]: https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/briefing-room/2021/12/30/updated-data-on-improper-payments/#:~:text=An%20improper%20payment%20is%20a,the%20relevant%20statute%20or%20regulation https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/briefing-room/2021/12/30/upda....