Incentives could include financial support or tax breaks for developers to build housing that is affordable for low- and middle-income families. Proponents argue that it increases the supply of affordable housing and addresses housing shortages. Opponents argue that it interferes with the housing market and can be costly for taxpayers.
Narrow down which types of responses you would like to see.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Discussions from these authors are shown:
Voting for candidate:
Zipcode:
@B44KQCN 2mos2MO
It should be regulated to a point to where it doesnt interfere with the housing market or become costly for tax payers.
It depends on the neighborhood and the necessity for it, is it going to destroy natural parks and such? Its all contexual
@9ZTQ9XQPeace and Freedom6mos6MO
Yes but don’t have a poorly built housing, it would be nice to have something nice for the renters like really nice houses and apartments
@9ZFRSCQRepublican 7mos7MO
No, this should be incentivized by lower interest rates and cutting regulations for real estate developers.
@9YMFZXX7mos7MO
Yes, however the government should cap out at how much is spending on it. As well as cannot tax those that live there due to financial burdens.
@9WWV7QW7mos7MO
Yes, but only for citizens, permanent residents, and legal immigrants and housing for legal immigrants should be temporary
@9WVF9M27mos7MO
The government should work on filling the vacant houses that were built but are unaffordable before incentivising the construction of new builds
@9WNM69T7mos7MO
Yes. But only as a halfway house option for people taking accountable steps to getting off the streets.
@9WCHWTC7mos7MO
Yes and no because it would become an unsafe place, but for that the government should control that area where the houses would be affordable.
@9W6MPQR7mos7MO
The government should focus on the uncontrolled actions of private entities responsible for the increase in housing costs.
@9VNT4XB8mos8MO
Where is the evidence that this works? The problems that we are seeing right now in regards to affordable housing cannot be fixed with slapping more laws on top of things .
Government should explore and incentivize the repurposing of buildings not in use to help with housing needs.
@9TWGJ4W8mos8MO
Yes and no, since there are enough abandoned houses to help the homeless, there is no need to spend extra money.
@9TJ75K29mos9MO
They need to establish another Works Progress Administration and cut out the greedy developers that are always charging the government twice what they should be. Builders should be paid by the US government under their own management.
@9THDFBX9mos9MO
It depends on a case by case basis. Homes for underpaid workers are important and should be incentivized.
@9S7LGPH10mos10MO
It depends on which area and with the partnership of state, city governments as all as private busiensses.
@B4DWP5P2mos2MO
Yes the government should construct housing to be more affordable but more for graduates and students and senior citizens
@9XM2KW87mos7MO
Depends on the incentive, if it’s a welfare program or weighed down with bureaucracy then no. If it’s a tax break porgram or something that in that vein that enables a business to increase profits then yes
@9SVSKC89mos9MO
Yes, But the government should keep track of how and where the funds are going with immense scrutiny.
@9X3T8S77mos7MO
Current subsidies are not working and regulating them won't fix this issue. We should instead rehabilitate and expand public housing as it locks your rent to your income.
@9H4SFM6 11mos11MO
Yes, but it would be better to seize housing that is being held vacant due to greed and convert it into public housing.
@9W5YJHN7mos7MO
Yes, the government should because reducing greenhouse gas emissions and helping families achieve economic success.
@9Q5C39G 11mos11MO
Yes, if affordable means, "able to pay the rent based on working 20 hours or less at the minimum wage."
Join in on more popular conversations.
