Everyone should own their home

and why landlords are antithetical to humanity

Here is a list of the highest and lowest rents in the United States:

These are statewide, so it’s important to remember that New York State has Buffalo, one of the most affordable cities, and New York City, the least affordable city.

I can’t speak to the experience of everyone, but I can speak to mine. I live in Mississippi, where the median rent is $1,249.

Personally, living in a more populated area of the state, I am paying $1,500 a month for a 2 bedroom, 2 bathroom apartment before utilities. In my city, being a college town, these prices make up the majority of the market.

If you have a car, then you are in luck. You’ll be able to live farther from the bus system and pay less. But that wasn’t an option for my situation, and it’s not for many low-income people that come here.

I currently make $48,000 a year, which is more than the median household income in my county (and the majority of them, excluding the rich, primarily white areas).

After tax I am paying over half of my income in rent, and the requirements to leave my lease would cost me over a thousand dollars that I don’t have. Our city lacks professional work outside of the university, meaning the majority of workers are in a similar situation as mine.

Our mayor is a career landlord, with multiple streets named after them with apartments that charge an extra $600 a year for the privilege of washing your clothes inside your own home.

This, in one way or another, is how the majority of young Americans live. Less than 40% of people 34 and younger own their home in the US, with white America making up the vast majority of the percentage of ownership overall.

Our homeownership rate in the United States is carried heavily by white America, who owns the vast majority of homes. The homeownership rate by whites is 15 percent higher than their population.

What we are seeing is that the vast majority of the working poor, especially minorities, may never own a home in their lifetime.

What is the solution?

There is no one size fits all answer, but let’s look at 2 countries, one socialist and one capitalist, that both have some of the highest home ownership rates nationwide.

China - 90% homeownership rate

Through a series of public housing programs and limitations of the amount of rentable housing the country, China has succeeded in bringing long term shelter to the vast majority of their population.

In China, housing is a right, not an investment, and so they subsidize the building of the vast majority of their infrastructure. Their government prioritizing people over profits is one of the main reasons they are powerful nationwide.

But that’s socialism right? Just idealists doing government overreach in a country where the people are suffering secretly…right?

Singapore - 90% homeownership rate

Singapore, a country that is generally known as a capitalist country that is very pro-business, does the exact same program for it’s citizens that China does.

You get a 99 year lease, and the price of the home is based on your income. Over 80% percent of the Singaporean people live in government subsidized housing. The private market is small, and is competing with affordable housing— so it is genuinely competitive.

Why does a “free-market” country do this? Because people having easy access to shelter means that there are no homeless people on the street: instead they are working, adding to the GDP of the country and actually grow businesses because of their security.

Conclusion

In finality, a society that works for humanities interests is one that is more likely to succeed. Even if you don’t believe socialism is the right answer, which I do, housing being treated as a human right has allowed some of the major superpowers in the world to exist without having a massive homeless population.

We can do better than we do now, and that’s why housing should be enshrined as a human right worldwide.