Religion And The Housing Crisis

The economic forces acting on us are often unseen until we are deep in a hole. The housing crisis of 2010 saw the rather harmless practice of lending money for houses drive millions into financial trouble.

Trouble is brewing in cities. Cities exist because packing people closely to one another lowers the cost of living. People can only be packed closely if fewer people drive automobiles. Parking and wider streets force jobs and housing further from each other.  Add to that the myth that “happiness” is a single family country-like home in the suburbs and you have cities that don’t work.

To make themselves work, cities are struggling to pack more people in their boundaries instead of scattering them across the suburbs. Understandably, those who already live in single family neighborhoods do not want multiple family buildings going up beside them. The biggest reason is that apartment people own lots of cars and crowd neighborhoods. Without cars, objections would be fewer.

The population of the U.S. is still growing. Added people will compete for housing in cities. Rising rent and zoning restrictions make for a confrontation. Someone earning $10 and hour makes $20,800/yr. Rents in large cities can be $1,600/mo or $19,200/yr.

When religions persuade the faithful they should not practice birth control or abortion, they increase population and contribute to this problem. These groups would help offset the problem they create by advocating fewer cars and more dense urban development.

Advocating alternatives to automobiles would compliment anti birth control and abortion politics.

6 Responses

  1. 1. There is no housing crisis.

    2. Free markets choose what housing options win, not your government forced utopia.

    3. Happiness is subjective. Some like living in Manhattan. Others like living on a ranch.

    4. Christianity teaches and preaches love and respect for life. Killing a baby is not a solution to ANY perceived problem.

    5. Big families are a blessing.

    1. Schurkey

      1–3 are completely or ideally true. For my part, I favor single-family housing because living in a hive is for insects. The “free market” however has been distorted by “housing assistance” and forcing people who are paying for their own housing, to pay for the housing of strangers. Similarly, we’re subsidizing the construction of hive housing so that “the disadvantaged” (who typically already have too many children) don’t have to get an additional job, or curb their reproduction. In fact, the more irresponsible they are about reproduction, the more goodies they receive.

      4 & 5 are about as mistaken as it gets. Overpopulation is functionally “THE” source of ecological problems, and too much a part of our economic, and military issues.

      How many of the “aborted” babies would have been on tax-funded “assistance” including incarceration? How many of their kids would have been on “assistance”? Society groans under the load of supporting the parasites we have already.

      1. It doesn’t matter how many aborted babies would have been on welfare or ended up in prison. Just like it doesn’t matter which rich kids would have ended up on welfare or in prison. In this country, one is innocent until proven guilty. In the case of abortion, there is none more innocent, and helpless, than the baby. Your argument smells of racism and classism.

        If you don’t like welfare, advocate for its end. That is valid. But don’t advocate for killing those who might go on welfare. I didn’t hear you say you wanted to kill those ALREADY on welfare. Or perhaps you do?

        1. Schurkey

          Not racism, not classism. I think of it as “deadbeat-ism”, or simply refusing to accept unlimited procreation by people who can’t/won’t afford to feed/clothe/house their own kids.

          There is NO excuse for people to conceive kids they can’t afford. Everyone in a household receiving SNAP or other “assistance” should be getting mandatory birth control of some form that can’t be “forgotten”. Injections and IUDs work for women. I don’t know what works for men.

          Yes, I have advocated for reduction/elimination of both individual and Corporate welfare. Of course, I’m talking to the wind. Welfare (both kinds) buys votes, and votes get/keep corrupt politicians in office.

  2. Concerning (over) population.
    In the United States, the American citizens are not reproducing enough.
    The US doesn’t meet “replacement” levels of the future generations.
    We are well and truly screwed if we do not have more that 2 children in every family.
    Just saying…..

    (((PS: We need to boink more.)))

    1. Kevin: You echo what I have been saying. The only reason the US population is increasing is legal and illegal immigration.

      Jon, the great moralizer, wants to have religions preach contraception and abortion to solve the myth of a housing crisis. Kill a baby and make housing affordable, or something like that.

Comments are closed.