Low-Income Tenants Evicted to House Homeless

[dualstow]

IN NYC, APARTMENTS EARN MORE AS HOMELESS SHELTERS THAN AS PRIVATE RENTALS

All I can say is oh my.

(NEWSER) – Here's a head-scratcher. New York City's homeless shelters are full. So to find more space for the city's homeless, the city has been renting apartments in low-income neighborhoods. Only the city pays above market rate, which means the actual tenants of these apartments are being pushed out, and now they're facing homelessness, WNYC reports

http://www.newser.com/story/172436/low- ... eless.html

[Pointedstick]

Rendering people homeless to house the homeless? What a perfect example of a zero-sum game.

[moda0306]

Rendering people homeless to house the homeless? What a perfect example of a zero-sum game.

Probably a very negative sum game when all is said and done.

[Libertarian666]

Rendering people homeless to house the homeless? What a perfect example of a zero-sum game.

Probably a very negative sum game when all is said and done.

Well, of course it is impossible to add up different people's subjective gains and losses. All we can know is:

1. Some people are harmed and others are helped; and
2. The government has interfered with the market.

[AdamA]

Is this really so bad? 

NYC has A LOT of homeless people.  I think not housing them might cause the city more problems than paying to house them.

I mean, it's probably better economically for the City to put them up in studio apartments in SoHo or Chinatown or Hell's Kitchen than to have them sleeping on doorsteps on the Upper West Side.

[Pointedstick]

Is this really so bad? 

NYC has A LOT of homeless people.  I think not housing them might cause the city more problems than paying to house them.

I mean, it's probably better economically for the City to put them up in studio apartments in SoHo or Chinatown or Hell's Kitchen than to have them sleeping on doorsteps on the Upper West Side.

But they're rendering other people homeless in the process, thereby at best failing to alleviate the problem by simply making different people homeless, and at worst, worsening it by increasing the number of homeless people.

And of course all of this is done at taxpayer expense, resulting in higher future taxes. Also, the above-market rates will push up rents, further pushing out even more low-income tenants.

NYC needs to put most of the homeless people back in the mental institutions they came from. I've never seen such a place with so many crazy homeless people. At least in San Francisco, most of the homeless are sane.

[dualstow]

Yes, Adam, it's really so bad.

Not only are they creating homeless, they are punishing the working poor and rewarding the non-working. Not to blame the homeless for being homeless, and not to say that there aren't some working homeless, but in general the above is true.

And of course all of this is done at taxpayer expense, resulting in higher future taxes

True. As the article states at the end, the 40-year-old pays $700 to live in the building, but:

Ironically, if she ends up on the street, she could move back into the building—it would cost her nothing and taxpayers $3,000.

[AdamA]

Is this really so bad? 

NYC has A LOT of homeless people.  I think not housing them might cause the city more problems than paying to house them.

I mean, it's probably better economically for the City to put them up in studio apartments in SoHo or Chinatown or Hell's Kitchen than to have them sleeping on doorsteps on the Upper West Side.

But they're rendering other people homeless in the process, thereby at best failing to alleviate the problem by simply making different people homeless, and at worst, worsening it by increasing the number of homeless people.

And of course all of this is done at taxpayer expense, resulting in higher future taxes. Also, the above-market rates will push up rents, further pushing out even more low-income tenants.

NYC needs to put most of the homeless people back in the mental institutions they came from. I've never seen such a place with so many crazy homeless people. At least in San Francisco, most of the homeless are sane.

I just read the article more closely.  I didn't realize they were talking about Flatbush (Brooklyn)!

[Jan Van]

Not only are they creating homeless, they are punishing the working poor and rewarding the non-working.

So maybe increase the minimum wage so the "working poor" will become "working not poor" and move out to slightly better housing, which will push down the rates for their current rental so that renting it for homeless people gets cheaper. More tax income too, which can fund mental care.

minimum wage http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbuJYhX3prc

[Jan Van]

http://www.americanprogressaction.org/i ... is-high-2/

[Libertarian666]

http://www.americanprogressaction.org/i ... is-high-2/

I think they should raise it to $100/hr then. Or why not $1000/hr? Then we could all be rich!!!!

[MediumTex]

I'm not sure why they don't just put the homeless on buses and drop them off in New Jersey.

Problem solved.

[dualstow]

I'm not sure why they don't just put the homeless on buses and drop them off in New Jersey.

Problem solved.

Canada literally used to do that some decades ago, except they bused them to Manitoba. Not kidding.
When I visited Banff (beautiful) with my family, we stopped in Calgary on the way home. Not to sound too cold-hearted, but Calgary could have used some outgoing buses.

[Jan Van]

http://www.americanprogressaction.org/i ... is-high-2/

While this simple analysis does not have the rigorous controls required of full-blown academic research,

advocacy organization dedicated to improving the lives of Americans through ideas and action. We are creating a long-term, progressive* vision for America—

not exactly unbiased or founded on economics.

*emphasis mine

I'll try to find a YouTube clip next time.

i just wasn't sure if you realized you picked a page with a bias and an agenda.
i tend to agree with the reasoning in the cartoon (and found the presentation funny) but i will listen to sound counter arguments. why will people hire more low income people if it costs more? why not just automate or make due with fewer employes, or raise prices?

[notsheigetz]

Isn't the solution to the homeless problem in America to require every citizen to either own or rent a home - or face a fine from the IRS? Those who can't afford it can, of course, apply for subsidies to be financed by fees on the homeowners who can afford it.

And I have a perfect name for the legislation - the Affordable Housing Act (unless that name has already been taken which is quite possible). We already know it would pass muster with the Supreme Court - the precedent having been set recently.

[Libertarian666]

Isn't the solution to the homeless problem in America to require every citizen to either own or rent a home - or face a fine from the IRS? Those who can't afford it can, of course, apply for subsidies to be financed by fees on the homeowners who can afford it.

And I have a perfect name for the legislation - the Affordable Housing Act (unless that name has already been taken which is quite possible). We already know it would pass muster with the Supreme Court - the precedent having been set recently.

That wouldn't surprise me a bit.