It is psychologically advantegous for bourgeois bohemians (rich people who profess liberal or leftist political views) to find a way to magnanimously allow a fe

It is psychologically advantegous for bourgeois bohemians (rich people who profess liberal or leftist political views) to find a way to magnanimously allow a few poor people to live nearby, so they can disingenuously convince themselves that they are part of the solution rather than part of the problem. Voting for housing subsidies is an easy moral balm with no downside; it lets them not feel like total hypocrites for living a high income lifestyle despite professing a profound sympathy for the poor and disadvantaged. Otherwise, they might have to give up their biannual $3,000 laptop upgrades and join the Peace Corps. In that regard, it should be noted that San Francisco's much lauded Below Market Rate (BMR) housing program actually accepts only a tiny fraction of the many eligible applicants, by lottery.[1] The actual impact on the poor at large, or on the social composition of the city, are both marginal. It's a lottery. Running a lottery undoubtedly helps the few winners, but it's not a strategy for helping any significant number of people; it's a strategy for making people feel good about themselves for seeming to help people. [1] For example, the recent Natoma Family Apartments had 60 units available, and 2,800 eligible applicants. If anything, this is an unusually high ratio for San Francisco BMR projects. http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Affordable-housing-in-S-F-Depends-on-whom-you-5321064.php http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Affordable-housing-in-...