According to the article Trends, Patterns, Problems, the author mentioned several housing trends in the United States since World War II, and most obvious trends are 1). There are more households than renters compared to before. 2).More single family homes have been constructed 3). The residential construction has regional characteristics 4). Housing is built with better quality such as air conditioning and with bathroom facilities 5). The housing owned by married white couples take up most of the population who owned the housing. Those trends are the indicator of the wealth and economics of the society behind that period of time. More and more families are able to purchase housing and no longer be a renter; on the other hand there is an even larger gap between rich and poor, richer people become richer while poorer people become poorer. Some people are able to have more than one housing as their personal wealth while there will be more people who cannot afford their own housing expenses. Families with children tend to have higher pressure and only a small proportion of expenses on their income because it costs a lot to raise a child recently. After seeing the above situation, the next steps are to consider solutions to react to those problems. According to the article Trends, Patterns, Problems, a new mindset suggested by the author is that “To view the income in a dynamatic way rather than a static way” and “to consider not only the current income of the owner but also the potential for increased income in the future”. There is a sense of optimism in this point of view that true, the rich people will have the potential to afford more and better housing but the main concern according to this question is not about how many houses that the rich can afford but where those poor live. Since the rise of the price of the market, the goal has become even unachievable. Government regulation can get involved in order to solve this situation, then a qualified standard needs to be set and to help these people indeed. Here are the standards: firstly, for those who are single and do not have a stable job; secondly, for those whose average income is lower than the average income of the society (states and county may vary differently); families with many children or disable are qualified for housing from the government. As for the government perspective, the type of housing that a government provides is supposed to be relatively new, constructed with no safety concerns, and with air conditioning and enough space for each individual in the housing. Those houses provided by the government can either be sold to individuals or rented to people who can afford their housing at a fair price. Families and individuals can line up for applying for those low income housing and as the government it will only charge the basic maintenance fee to help those families and individuals to walk out from their dark period of time. Another point of view from the article is that housing is supposed to be purchasable as a reachable goal for families and individuals for different levels of income. People use those housing for living and are not supposed to be raising the price of the housing as a type of stock. Relatively, rules and regulations are supposed to formulate in order to guarantee the right of the citizens as well as the government.
We are always supposed to learn from what we see and which also applies to the housing aspect as an important indicator in representing the “health economics status” of a society and to guarantee a comfortable and safe living environment for different level of incomes as a life essential.
Citation:
https://rutgers.instructure.com/courses/164511/files/22241506?module_item_id=6055083