Homelessness in America has reached crisis levels and I am determined to do everything in my power to fix the problem as long as it doesn’t involve changing zoning laws or my ability to drive alone to work or, well, changing anything, really. I’m more than happy to give a hungry man a sandwich once a year and then brag to my friends about it as long as he doesn’t sit down anywhere in my line of sight to eat it. Same goes for hungry women because I’m also a feminist. — mcsweeneys.net
A superb piece satirizing the homelessness and housing crises by McSweeney's writer Homa Mojtabai. From a privileged and entitled point of view, Mojtabai highlights extreme issues on how problems are being "solved". This is of course an exaggeration—but by how much?
10 Comments
I'm not finding humor here.
This is not a quantity problem, it is (like hunger) a distribution problem. An economic distribution problem.
There are about 2,500 residential units in my corner of Paradise, about 40% of which are actually occupied. The other 60% are either held as investment, used occasionally by infrequent visitors, or rented out at exorbitant prices to people with too much money and not much else.
Meanwhile we have an "affordable housing crisis" - people who work here cannot afford to live here. Thus the single access highway is choked with traffic year round and grinds to an absolute standstill in the summer, when a 7 mile journey can take an hour or more.
“Distribution problem”. Please explain how this is solved and how much tyranny will be required. Also, please explain why you don’t just move a bunch of homeless people into your house and set an example that we can all learn from.
the 2008 bailout was a bandaid to save late capitalism. The only way to solve housing is a massive new new deal, subordinating industry to a progressive government. That said, I don’t think we should tear down housing to build slightly bigger housing—that’s a waste. Develop empty spaces, and build new cities
Scary that people actually think this way. You are giving an awful lot of power to “progressive government”. Let’s enslave everyone so that everyone gets housing is basically what you are saying? Maybe not directly, but that’s where it leads.
Also, what is “progressive government,” and how do we ensure that your fantasy version of altruistic government stays in power indefinitely? Ban red state voters?
There are about 140m housing units in the US. With a population of 325m that works out to 2.3 people per unit. As the average family size is 2.58 people, there is actually a surplus of close to 17m units.
There is no housing shortage. There is a massive distribution problem.
maybe we should move the housing to where the jobs are?
Plenty of housing here, just not available to the people who need it.
This story, apart from the last bit describes the Urban NIMBY crowd almost to an uncanny level of accuracy.
A solution is only valid if it can manifest within the current economic and political context of the time. Relying on solutions that require a radical overhaul of govt is tantamount to those tabula rasa utopias that never happen. They ignore context and constraints. Good design utilizes context and constraints. This is why political ideologies are stifling architectural progress.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.