Director of AIDS Housing Alliance threatens riots
C'mon now! Threatening a riot? Are you kidding me? Housing policy in this city sucks. We all know that. But riots?
AIDS Housing Alliance director Brian Basinger has posted an open letter on BeyondChron today that says "The Mayor's Office has expressed its support for TICs, with the tacit understanding that they are the result of evictions, mostly of vulnerable seniors, disabled and catastrophically ill people."
Are you kidding? TICs are the result of a tight housing market. Sometimes that does involve evictions (which I will remind you I am NOT in favor of), but there is no 'tacit understanding.'
The free market (remember Econ 101, Brian?) will ultimately prevail, unless the city creates housing for people who cannot otherwise survive in such a market. Again, I reiterate that housing is needed at all levels. If there was more market-rate housing, there would be fewer people out there looking to buy into TICs. Nobody 'wants' to buy a TIC. It's 100% a function of supply and demand.
Build more housing, build more housing, build more housing. Can it be any clearer than that?
Brian wraps up his letter by saying "There comes a 'tipping point' when the frustrations of people who are not adequately being served by the market or their government spill over into periods of social unrest. San Francisco has a rich history of such actions: the White Night Riots, the AB 101 Riots, the I-Hotel, etc. We may be approaching the point where we cross the line that leads into such periods."
Sounds like a bit of a threat to me...
posted by Matt Lanning @ 10:32 AM
1 comments
links to this post
1 Comments:
Hi Matt:
Despite your dubious headline, I was not 'threatening' a riot. As a 5th generation Californian and a long-time San Francisco resident, and a homeowner, I was simply making an observation. One only need look at the displacement and dissatisfaction with the government response happening in the wake of Katrina to understand the observation I was making.
Taking our understanding of economics beyond Econ 101, we must also understand economic and political theory that supports the notion that one of the main purposes of the public sector -- for some PhD's, the only purpose of government -- is to step in during times of a 'broken market', characterized as when the free market does not completely meet demand. We are in such a period, as evidenced by the developers only creating housing at the high-end and homeownership being unaffordable to 90% of San Franciscans. This is a classic example of a broken market.
Economists have identified the four main causes of market failure: abuse of power, externalities (such as when the market does not take into account the impact of economic activity on outsiders, like the impacts of displacement on seniors and people with AIDS), assymetric information, and finally the provision of public goods like national defense.
Broken markets are best addressing thru regulation and taxation, which is the entire justification for the use of these anti-property rights parts of the American Democratic System.
Most economists don't really hold that 'the free market will prevail'. Most people with an educated understanding of the American system of democracy don't hold that view.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home