Try the political quiz
+

Filter by type

Narrow down which types of responses you would like to see.

Filter by author

Narrow down the conversation to these participants:

1.4k Replies

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...4mos4MO

Yes, housing is a basic right that should be affordable to anyone

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...4mos4MO

Yes and also ban corporate and foreign investors from purchasing residential real estate

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...4mos4MO

No, reform zoning laws to increase housing supply instead

 @9RVQ9KWIndependent from California  answered…12mos12MO

Housing should already be affordable regardless. There shouldn't be special incentives just to make living affordable,

 @9SXVZP4Republican from California  answered…11mos11MO

Big corporations should be regulated by rules and policies from buying and selling homes, which makes housing more expensive.

 @ISIDEWITHasked…11mos11MO

Have you ever thought about how housing affordability might influence a person’s mental health or well-being?

 @9WX9V4ZDemocrat from California  answered…9mos9MO

Yes because they have to live somewhere that is better for them and in a great neighborhood.

 @9WVWGM8  from Texas  answered…9mos9MO

If someone is stressed about finances it might make their mental health worse.

 @9TS9HV5 from Texas  answered…10mos10MO

Absolutely. Most young people do not believe they will ever be able to buy a home, they believe they are forced to rent for the foreseeable future. This is incredibly stressful and taxing.

 @9XSGQ35 from Idaho  answered…9mos9MO

No, most housing affordability is a function of government subsidization driving up the cost of residences, and people's unwillingness to live uncomfortably.

 @9L4Z23BIndependent  from Pennsylvania  answered…1yr1Y

No, local governments and zoning boards should reform zoning laws to allow higher density building and to help construct more housing than there is demand

 @9ZNL4BHGreen from Texas  answered…8mos8MO

Yes, but the government should focus on renovating unused buildings that are currently wasting valuable space in our cities

 @9L4Z23BIndependent  from Pennsylvania  answered…12mos12MO

No, the government should relax zoning laws to encourage increasing housing supply and stabilize rent

 @9VYDQRC from Washington  answered…10mos10MO

Yes, but they should focus first on incentivizing better wages, parental benefits, and healthcare so that more citizens can afford their rent or mortgage without the need for special housing.

 @9TDXT2Y  from Washington  answered…11mos11MO

Yes, the government should incentivize the construction of affordable housing to help ensure that everyone has access to safe and affordable living conditions.

 @9W6VFM3 from Connecticut  answered…9mos9MO

The government should incentivize the construction of affordable housing and additionally should build social housing.

 @9RPRD7T from Missouri  answered…12mos12MO

Yes, the government should incentivize the construction of more housing in general, not just affordable housing.

 @B33SHXDConstitution from Kentucky  answered…5mos5MO

No, ban corporate and foreign investors from purchasing residential real estate and capitalize the industry

 @B3GDS3V from Arkansas  answered…5mos5MO

Yes, but lower regulation instead of incentives or any financial assistance unless seen as necessary

 @9X4VDKW from Wisconsin  answered…9mos9MO

No, this is too broad and these houses can still be overpriced while developers get cuts by writing these houses off as Low Income

 @9WDTKJ8 from Illinois  answered…9mos9MO

There also needs to be addressing of underlying issues so that it doesn't impact the ability for those to sustain.

 @9TT5ZMT from North Carolina  answered…10mos10MO

Yes but the affordable housing should be well-made! People shouldn’t have to be forced to accept sub-standard housing.

 @9SZ4ZWS from New York  answered…11mos11MO

Yes, but it should only be used to get oneself on their feet. It should not be used as a permanent residence for the rest of one's life, that is until there is enough to support that.

 @9SBYVSYDemocrat from Indiana  answered…11mos11MO

Yes, but we shouldn’t build too much and destroy nature, build homes in designated areas, and have more protection for nature

 @9RSTXRMIndependent  from Washington  answered…12mos12MO

Yes, but have better systems of accountability for landlord/tenant laws so those in lower income housing are not exploited by corrupt management or held hostage by predatory leases.

 @7BRFVBH  from Texas  answered…10hrs10H

No, there is no "housing shortage." What we have in this country are barriers that prevent Americans from acquiring homes that are rightfully theirs. To free this up we must deport every illegal alien and encourage remigration for all foreign residents, freeing up millions of homes. We must also ban corporate and foreign investors from purchasing residential real estate, as well as rooting out corruption and greed within real estate. Another massive factor would be the reduction of interest rates, giving so many the opportunity to borrow with a legitimate chance to pay it back.

 @B6CH39X from Nevada  answered…11hrs11H

If there's a program like section 8 take all their money and make them work. And save all the money for 5 years get them a house worth 70 to 80,000 they don't have to pay for rent

 @B6B2B8Jfrom Maine  answered…1 day1D

Yes but do it in collaboration with the market (on a lower scale) and also repeal zoning laws and cut taxes for realters

 @B699PVS from Texas  answered…2 days2D

Yes, but don’t take people’s homes or land to do it without their permission or without even offering them compensation.

 @B67BTZ6 from Texas  answered…2 days2D

Yes, but access to housing shouldn't be based on your income; it should be a basic right for anyone.

 @B65W7W3 from Maryland  answered…3 days3D

i think the increase in construction of affordable housing would be highly beneficial, but it boils down to what KIND of housing we're constructing, i believe Houses are typically more of a better option rather than the construction of apartments and other forms of complexes, Houses are more of a single-family one to two owner kind of situation, where it's a lot easier to manage things like, getting a hold of a single person, and not to mention, with more houses around in general, more people will buy Houses off of the sheer increase of Houses alone, so that would be more money in…  Read more

 @B65SZ4T from Texas  answered…3 days3D

Yes, but not just incentivize, but build and provide housing as a right, rather than injecting money into the same developers that are responsible for this crisis

 @B654BS5 from Texas  answered…5 days5D

Yes, but the government should be providing the housing itself, not merely incentivizing private capital to address the dehumanization of our poor it has inflicted through its own mechanisms

 @B64RSLYfrom Maine  answered…6 days6D

Yes, but prioritise rennovating abandoned buildings rather than building new houses that could destroy nature

 @B64HYPZ from Idaho  answered…7 days7D

Just don’t allow foreign buyers of residential property. Increase investment in existing infrastructure, and subsidize starter homes.

 @B63SJQ7 from New York  answered…1wk1W

Aren’t there so much houses out there that maybe are horribly ugly as in small and nasty, it should be upkeept if permition to do so and be actually a nice house weather in a apartment or a house

 @B63KTYL from Arizona  answered…2wks2W

Maybe there's a reason the government has to step in maybe the regulations make it not a profitable decision so its not a priority we do live in a capitalst society if it does make money it doesn't happen fund out why the moneys not there and there's your answer we have to work with what we got

 @B63FGJL from Texas  answered…2wks2W

Yes, but only to a certain extent as this may distrubt economic and increase population by too much in certain areas.

 @B637TX5 from California  answered…2wks2W

I lived in section 8 so what make housing affordable an give better pay for those that work hard I guess

 @9CLR7CLDemocrat  from Utah  answered…3wks3W

In a manner of speaking, yes. The government can incentivize this by relaxing zoning laws to encourage increasing housing supply and stabilize rent

 @B62HPJPWomen’s Equality from Texas  answered…3wks3W

I believe that if the construction company is local, it should receive the incentives, since local firms usually don’t have the budget for such projects. This could create more jobs and opportunities within the community.

 @B62CR5DGreen from Pennsylvania  answered…3wks3W

Yes, but there should also be incentives to reuse existing houses, structures etc to be repurposed into housing

 @9L4Z23BIndependent  from Pennsylvania  answered…3wks3W

At the local level I would support P3s to increase the supply of public housing, and loan guarantees to increase affordable housing on market housing projects

 @B5Z8D2FWorking Family from Maryland  answered…4wks4W

No, but corporate and foreign investors should be banned from purchasing real estate and HOAs should have restrictions.

 Deletedanswered…4wks4W

YES... if the incentives are explicitly designed to ensure enduring affordability, structural equity, environmental sustainability, community integration, and measurable impact.

 @B5XPL73 from Arizona  answered…1mo1MO

There shouldn't be new housing developments until every house that is currently vacant is occupied. As well, corporate investors shouldn't be allowed to own housing.

 @B5SW4PY from Iowa  answered…2mos2MO

Yes but, Work with private construction companies and give them tax breaks for a set goal and an incentive goal for a desired set of homes to dive down the cost of rent.

 @B537GFJ from New York  answered…3mos3MO

Yes because everyone should be able to live, Everyone. But with that being said if they are given this house and are taking advantage and not doing what they are supposed to it is right to take it away because there are others in need.

  @bionicle381 from Texas  answered…3mos3MO

This is better left to private companies and the free market that better allocates supply and demand, and reform zoning laws.

 @B5322YG from Utah  answered…3mos3MO

Although I agree that housing should be set at more affordable pricing, I do not want the government to interfere with the free market more than they have to.

 @B52PCZL from Oregon  answered…3mos3MO

No, Instead the church should do it to prove there better at supporting and supplying people what they need rather than the government.

 @B52GDRS from California  answered…3mos3MO

Yes, and the current high housing prices are a result of the government's constant creation of inflation and the legal restrictions placed on capital entering the real estate market. From the perspective of capital return, it's easy to see that the housing construction market is seriously distorted. Despite the ongoing inflation, the construction cost of affordable housing is only about $100 per square foot, while the market price of houses is generally above $400 per square foot.

 @B52DNZK from Texas  answered…3mos3MO

No because the government spends too much money, but societally we should construct affordable housing

 @B525DQD from Texas  answered…3mos3MO

Yes but only for the none wealthy the rich can rot and be just like the none wealthy so then everyone lives in an equal society under one people.

 @B4ZV67DLibertarian from Florida  answered…3mos3MO

No, housing should be made affordable and secure. A pile of plywood that was stapled together within two months should not cost 500,000 dollars.

 @B4Z6D6Q from South Carolina  answered…3mos3MO

As someone who want's to become a housing investor some day, I believe that the housing market is considered a fair game. You, as well as anyone else can do the same things that the corporate investors are doing. With that being said, the government should incentivize new home owners to purchase property, and ditch the stigma of renting becoming the societal norm.

 @B4YHNKN from Utah  answered…3mos3MO

We need to pass laws that big agencies like Black Rock can't come in and buy all the residential properties making it difficult to buy a house.

 @B4YDKZ5Republican from Texas  answered…3mos3MO

I think that the government should instead help people homeless people get jobs, rather than giving and catering to them.

 @B4XC288from Virgin Islands  answered…3mos3MO

A most sustainable optional, both in environmental and financial terms, is to redistirbute hosting by taxation or expropriation

 @B4WRZP6 from Pennsylvania  answered…3mos3MO

The government should incentivize construction by deregulating and making it easier to build affordable homes.

 @B4VZR82 from Pennsylvania  answered…3mos3MO

I want to add affordable housing, but reduce the amount of housing, for it is decreasing forest areas.

 @B4VW66DRepublican from Utah  answered…3mos3MO

Yes and no, affordable housing with inflation right now would be like 8 feet wide houses so we still need quality, standards, and hard workers

 @B4TCXMJ from Pennsylvania  answered…3mos3MO

No but existing houses should be incentivized to be made/kept livable in an affordable way as to not waste materials

 @B4S7GBZ from New York  answered…3mos3MO

I feel something should be done, we have slum lords charging crazy amounts but never updating or fixing or putting into the home for what you pay, then nice apartments and such being built that people have no respect for and trash them. There has to be something to teeter totter this better.

 @B4RJHF7 from South Dakota  answered…3mos3MO

No because affordable housing may be poorly and quickly constructed just to gain the government incentive dollars.

 @B4QR6M5Democrat from Oregon  answered…3mos3MO

Yes, if the houses are still made with good quality materials and made to withstand natural disasters

 @B4QKY4Q from Louisiana  answered…3mos3MO

Yes but they need to increase the safety of section 80 government houses while still being able to keep it cheap.

 @B4QFQDQ from Georgia  answered…3mos3MO

No, it can effet on the way our economy works, by applying affordable housing, it can lower money for other people.

 @B4Q6PLT from Utah  answered…3mos3MO

There should be more opportunities to build upon what is already built or repurpose buildings etc. people should all be able to have shelter. Or do low rent and more opportunities.

 @B4PT39CRepublican from South Dakota  answered…3mos3MO

it shouldn't be fully the government, while they can support it and help others be able to build affordable housing, I don't think it is fully the government's responsibility

 @B4NVCWQ from Pennsylvania  answered…4mos4MO

I think the government should support affordable housing, but need to take into account how much this will increase the taxpayers cost

 @B4MLZLP from Colorado  answered…4mos4MO

Reform zoning laws so existing building can be retrofitted to support multi use properties and aid in constructions for more micro communities like corner stores and other walkable areas.

 @B4M8W5X from New Jersey  answered…4mos4MO

Yes and also ban ban corporate and foreign investors from purchasing residential real estate and also reform zoning laws

 @B4M6W8TReform from Illinois  answered…4mos4MO

Yes, they should help give incentives to local real estate developers and re-enact the homestead act.

 @B4LWDKJLibertarian from Ohio  answered…4mos4MO

I see the word "affordable" and this leads me to believe that cheaper materials would be used and I can't help but think about how reliable these houses are going to be.

 @B4LV8QX from Utah  answered…4mos4MO

Yes, but continue to allow the housing market to be a competitive market, and ban foreign investors from purchasing residential real estate.

 @B4LPHP6 from New York  answered…4mos4MO

Yes, but only in areas that lack housing and be incredibly selective with who is chosen. Not to be used for large families or unemployed individuals. Or criminals/people with drug problems. Should be for retired folks or single people who work part time. No more than 2 people can live in an apartment. And hike up the income requirements.

 @B4LK7LX from Ohio  answered…4mos4MO

No, the government should not be the one incentivizing the market. The market itself should do that.

 @B4LCM3N from North Carolina  answered…4mos4MO

I think there is 20 times as many empty homes as homeless people, and that homes already vacant should be prioritized

 @B4LCDQ2 from Mississippi  answered…4mos4MO

I think the government should keep building government housing at the rate that they are. But i do not think that they should increase because that is money out of our pockets for people who had the same opportunities and just did not take advantage. There is few exceptions.

 @B4KXRS5 from Pennsylvania  answered…4mos4MO

Actually, no. More housing isn't the problem. There's various homes that require fixing rather than building

 @B4KTZ3PLibertarian from Maryland  answered…4mos4MO

we shouldn't be building anything new. we need to get more effective infrastructure to fit more people and utilize abandoned buildings etc

 @B4KLCSB from California  answered…4mos4MO

yes but inhabitants of a city must approve of the measure to allow affordable housing in their city limits

 @B4KKX4HIndependent from North Carolina  answered…4mos4MO

For the most part yes but allow citizens to retain control of the markets, as this directly impacts a republic

 @B4JRNLG from Missouri  answered…4mos4MO

I think everyone should have a place to live, but I do not think it should not be free. I think it should be paid back at a reasonable rate.

 @B4JPCLD from Utah  answered…4mos4MO

if it excludes large banks and corporations that buy a lot of homes and make the price what they want

 @B48NXFT from North Dakota  answered…4mos4MO

I think a budget should be given and taxpayers can figure out a way where its not to costly but enough quality to last

 @B48MBLNRepublican from Iowa  answered…4mos4MO

We loose so much land due to expanding, and building more housing. Instead we could reuse old facilities or property that serves no purpose to build affordable housing.

 @B48LD7DDemocrat from Kansas  answered…4mos4MO

Constructing affordable housing will likely only lead to more cheaply-built houses, which would not be the best to live in long-term and we would need to construct more houses sooner than we want to.

 @B48DC6X from Wisconsin  answered…4mos4MO

Housing should go through a review to determine if it even is "luxury" housing, and the government should incentivize the construction of affordable housing, and apartments should have mixed affordabilities to limit class segregation

 @B48CRD6 from Ohio  answered…4mos4MO

They should try to use houses that are already constructed but abandoned or at least use the land they are built on to build new affordable houses so we aren't using more space.

 @B48BWCW from Minnesota  answered…4mos4MO

Yes the government could allow it and support but just make sure the homes are safe and cheap and low quality

 @B4885X4 from Michigan  answered…4mos4MO

The housing crisis needs to be addressed, and there are multiple layers - but also plenty of solutions to the problem. We have the money, just not the right people caring.

 @B482Q3B from Georgia  answered…4mos4MO

yes by reducing tariffs and taxes on imports and purchases relating to home building materials. In short, lumber is expensive due to taxation.

 @B47ZXWC from Georgia  answered…4mos4MO

Instead of contructing more affordable housing, the government should focus on what is already present instead of taking up even more space. Appreciate what is present instead of being greedy for more. Contructing more "affordable" housing is indirectly dismissing those that cannot afford to look for another home.

 @B47Y74C from New York  answered…4mos4MO

Yes they should it is a large net work with funding that goes untouched of funding that has gone heavily miss used .

 @B47X42MLibertarian from Connecticut  answered…4mos4MO

The government should not incentivize it. If there is a demand, companies and businesses will naturally start producing them. there should be no support or hindrances for affordable housing.

 @B47MSVK from Arkansas  answered…4mos4MO

Not the federal government. Any incentivizing for "affordable" housing should be a function of state and local governments.

Demographics

Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion

Loading data...