“Cash subsidies provide more flexible housing support at a lower cost. The
current dominant model entails considerable overhead to pay for
government employees and contractors to manage relationships between
landlords and people in need."
Crazy that the most cost effective, and efficacious way of helping low-income people is JUST GIVING THEM MONEY, but we'll do anything but that to solve the problem
(not the first time I've posted that. Or the last.)
Instead Americans equate morality with wealth, so only people that fit this invented, mostly racist idea of "worthiness" deserve help. We'll make a system worthless trying to punish people who don't fit that illusion, and waste billions at the same time.
And that's even before the leeches attach to the system as middle-men and intermediaries, creating layer upon layer of distance between people and real help.
Americans swallowed this bullshit history of "self-made men", "Rugged individualism", and "Exceptionalism", from dime store novels, radio serials and movies, never actually looking at how the US got made, and how you aren't going to be the next Horatio Alger story.
(Also a lot of the Horatio Alger stories the kid didn't get rewarded for hard work, but an already rich guy picked them up out of the gutter. So...think about how likely that is to happen.)
@virtualbri
Same with housing. Studies done in major US (!) cities show that giving people their own space to live reduces municipal costs for intervention services like ERs and such. But we can’t do that. That’s socialism. Well, yeah. Duh. Tax the ones with all the money. They’re not doing anything with it. They won’t even notice it’s gone.
Add comment