3 ms·

Places like Manhattan and SF need restaurant workers, teachers, daycare workers, janitors, etc. Jobs that don't pay anywhere near enough for them to afford to l

Places like Manhattan and SF need restaurant workers, teachers, daycare workers, janitors, etc. Jobs that don't pay anywhere near enough for them to afford to live anywhere near them. Somehow we need to provide these workers with housing that they can afford so they can do the work that needs doing in those areas.

chii 4y ago
or, those workers migrate to another city where the cost of living is lower (and thus they would make more money in that new city). The lack of workers in NY/SF will mean those worker's wages there would increase - at some point the increase matches the cost of living for them to remain. Affordable housing might patch over the problem of high cost of living - but it's yet another bandaid, isnt it? If it costs taxpayer money to subsidize housing to make it affordable, then you'd just be subsidising the wage costs for businesses indirectly. If affordable housing could be built privately without state subsidy, i would imagine the private sector would already have done it (let's disregard the NIMBYism for now). The fact that this currently doesn't happen, but that expensive ("unaffordable") housing does still get built means that affordable housing is not profitable. So what would make it profitable? Density - aka, fix the NIMBY problem, or lower cost of material/labour. Unfortunately, i dont see any of these problems getting solved in the near/medium term at all.
- UncleOxidant 4y ago
  > If it costs taxpayer money to subsidize housing to make it affordable, then you'd just be subsidising the wage costs for businesses indirectly I'm generally not referring to subsidized housing. Yes, certain incentives for building less expensive housing are needed. As you suggest, currently the incentives are towards building more high end, unaffordable housing. Some of it could come down to changing zoning to allow higher density or conversion of office space into housing space. Other ideas would be to create units that share some kind of central kitchen, for example - this would probably require a change in building codes. > or, those workers migrate to another city where the cost of living is lower Sure, some of that could happen and likely has. But people on the lower end of the income strata also tend not to be able to afford to move very far. Also, if you compare places with lower cost of living they tend to also have less amenities like restaurants so it could be that those workers don't move there because the jobs aren't there. Looking back a hundred years or so it seemed we had more options for people on the lower end of the income scale: boarding houses, longterm hotels (which were affordable for people like artists who didn't make much - lots of writers who later became famous lived in longterm hotels), even places like the Y(MCA) (which apparently still exist, but now are more like exercise/activity centers that don't seem to offer any housing options)
  - donclark 4y ago
    Are boarding houses a possible solution? Why are there not more of these today? Very low fee for rent, providing an option of meals, and social connections. Dreaming of a better life, many individuals were inspired to make the harsh trek westward at the turn of the 19th century without the assurance of home and family. The rise of boarding houses presented a solution to this insecurity while challenging social and cultural conventions of gender, race, and class; and at one point housed one third of Americans. Discover how the adaptable nature of boarding houses like the Astor House, Hotel Jerome, and the Peck House allowed for their survival despite mining busts and the end of railroads. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBzQXv5PNIQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBzQXv5PNIQ Examples of the bad side - Caged Men - https://y.com.sb/watch?v=8YbjKxdfE8Q https://y.com.sb/watch?v=8YbjKxdfE8Q, or watch Sunshine Hotel

chii 4y ago

or, those workers migrate to another city where the cost of living is lower (and thus they would make more money in that new city). The lack of workers in NY/SF will mean those worker's wages there would increase - at some point the increase matches the cost of living for them to remain. Affordable housing might patch over the problem of high cost of living - but it's yet another bandaid, isnt it? If it costs taxpayer money to subsidize housing to make it affordable, then you'd just be subsidising the wage costs for businesses indirectly. If affordable housing could be built privately without state subsidy, i would imagine the private sector would already have done it (let's disregard the NIMBYism for now). The fact that this currently doesn't happen, but that expensive ("unaffordable") housing does still get built means that affordable housing is not profitable. So what would make it profitable? Density - aka, fix the NIMBY problem, or lower cost of material/labour. Unfortunately, i dont see any of these problems getting solved in the near/medium term at all.

UncleOxidant 4y ago
> If it costs taxpayer money to subsidize housing to make it affordable, then you'd just be subsidising the wage costs for businesses indirectly I'm generally not referring to subsidized housing. Yes, certain incentives for building less expensive housing are needed. As you suggest, currently the incentives are towards building more high end, unaffordable housing. Some of it could come down to changing zoning to allow higher density or conversion of office space into housing space. Other ideas would be to create units that share some kind of central kitchen, for example - this would probably require a change in building codes. > or, those workers migrate to another city where the cost of living is lower Sure, some of that could happen and likely has. But people on the lower end of the income strata also tend not to be able to afford to move very far. Also, if you compare places with lower cost of living they tend to also have less amenities like restaurants so it could be that those workers don't move there because the jobs aren't there. Looking back a hundred years or so it seemed we had more options for people on the lower end of the income scale: boarding houses, longterm hotels (which were affordable for people like artists who didn't make much - lots of writers who later became famous lived in longterm hotels), even places like the Y(MCA) (which apparently still exist, but now are more like exercise/activity centers that don't seem to offer any housing options)
- donclark 4y ago
  Are boarding houses a possible solution? Why are there not more of these today? Very low fee for rent, providing an option of meals, and social connections. Dreaming of a better life, many individuals were inspired to make the harsh trek westward at the turn of the 19th century without the assurance of home and family. The rise of boarding houses presented a solution to this insecurity while challenging social and cultural conventions of gender, race, and class; and at one point housed one third of Americans. Discover how the adaptable nature of boarding houses like the Astor House, Hotel Jerome, and the Peck House allowed for their survival despite mining busts and the end of railroads. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBzQXv5PNIQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBzQXv5PNIQ Examples of the bad side - Caged Men - https://y.com.sb/watch?v=8YbjKxdfE8Q https://y.com.sb/watch?v=8YbjKxdfE8Q, or watch Sunshine Hotel