In the Henry George podcast, guest Shane Phillips talks about the woes of renting and owning alike, and proposes a change in how renting is conducted. Currently, renting is seen merely as a stepping stone to owning a home, as if owning a home should be the ultimate goal for all people (implying that if you own a home, you have “arrived”, and anything else is invalid or unworthy). In today’s world, owning a home may be a goal for some people, but ultimately, it’s impractical for many young professionals, growing families, and everything in between. Renting provides the flexibility of moving when necessary, but the problem is that a person really isn’t able to use their rent for ongoing investment, the way homeowners are. Phillips’ proposal is a public-ownership system, where the public would invest in a collection of properties. This would allow each household the flexibility of moving within that network, while still accruing equity and building wealth. As Phillips states in his Atlantic article, “The benefit could be transferred to any publicly owned apartment, allowing tenants to build wealth without being locked in place.” This idea makes so much sense to me, as a homeowner, because as much as I love my home, I would love having the option of moving without having to go through the process of selling a house, and going through the application and approval process.
In the Lloyd Alter article “Green Building Isn’t Enough; We Need Green Zoning”, I was surprised to read that zoning was such a huge factor in our carbon footprint. I very much align with the idea of “everything in moderation”, and the Goldilocks Density is a great example of that. High density is good because it shortens the distance between things, yet density that is too high means building up, which requires a lot of materials that are not environmentally friendly. A big problem in zoning is that we can’t build apartments in single-family home neighborhoods. Large apartments are usually built in high-industrial zones, where there is a lot of air and noise pollution which is unpleasant to residents, and shows an obvious bias towards people who can afford to live in a single-family residence. Rezoning would lower that bias and allow more options for those who can’t (or don’t wish to) live in a large house.
The google book was unfortunately behind a paywall so I only had access to the first twenty pages. I was really interested in the chapter about taxing house flippers at a higher rate, however. I didn’t get to read that chapter, so I don’t know what he said, but I do have big feelings about this whole practice. I think that the idea that people who can afford to buy houses at a lower price, flip them with some cheap shiplap and “farmhouse” sinks, then turn around and sell them at a much higher price are a giant problem, as are those who buy properties for the sole purpose of renting them out on AirBnb. Affordable housing should be available to everyone, and those homes are being taken off the market by a niche group of people who essentially “have the money to make money”. Phillips’ policy proposal about Oversight/Accountability included creating rental registries. This is a really great idea because it makes this information available to others and increases accountability. I think this would curb a lot of the “increasing rent because the landlord thought of a higher number” practices.
The video on Earthships was neat. I love Earthships.
For those of you who don’t have access to The Atlantic, I found another website to read Phillips’ article here:
Hi Sarah – Interestedly enough and before I become a homeowner in Norman, I had written off homeownership completely because I had found a pretty decently sized one-bedroom rent-stabilized apartment in Harlem, NY. It was close to all the the ‘amenities’ I looked for in NYC affordable housing (affordable for me at least) – close to transportation, an newly transformed and trendy Key Food, lots of unique spaces and food options within walking distance, etc.
But as time passed I felt the strain of having zero equity and zero wealth generation over a decade – even further felt when I visited my family with their forever appreciating houses AND land in Oklahoma and Texas.
Fast forward and now as a homeowner I feel myself at times yearning for the convenience of my rental while in larger community of other renters 🙂 The home owner subsidies and tax breaks help, but speaking from a privileged point of view, my home gives me a LOT of headaches and I absolutely do not have the flexibility to move – no matter how urgent.
Currently subsidies favor homeownership and discourage renting, even in cases where renting might be more economically rational for individuals. Reforming these subsidies to a more neutral tax policy could allow for a healthier balance between renting and buying. This type of subsidy reform, tax policy and the public-ownership system that you refer to (i.e giving each household the flexibility of moving within that network, while still accruing equity and building wealth) could then encourage more renting.
I wish that there would have been something even remotely similar to this across the US. Perhaps I would have never looked negatively at renting.
Creating a more neutral tax policy that balances the interests of renters and homeowners involves adjusting the existing tax incentives so that neither renting nor buying is disproportionately favored. In my opinion, this approach aims to make the housing market more equitable and efficient, allowing individuals to make housing decisions based on their personal and financial circumstances rather than tax considerations.
Response: Aisha S. Owusu
Week 12
Hey Sara,
Encouraging high density and mixed used does not only reduce travelling distance but also encourage the use of active transportation such as walking ad cycling. For example, new urbanism and transit-oriented development encourage compact and high-density development walkability. People do not need to drive to access services because the transportation system has been integrated with residential, commercial and other land uses, thus creating vibrant and livable communities. Moreover, these types of developments improve housing supply making it more affordable.
However, many people prefer to live in single family homes and wouldn’t want high density apartments in their neighborhoods because they perceive them to be nuisance. If we are to focus on improving the quality of lives and enhancing sustainability, I think we should encourage high density development.
Iman