It's all connected: why affordable housing discourse damages the environment and economy

Why did Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac accumulate more than 50% of America's housing debt? Skimming a number of sources, the answer brightly stands out; both organizations extensively lobbied congress, keeping opponents at bay with the carrot of political contributions and the stick of affordable housing discourse (if congressmen called for greater oversight and scrutiny they obviously opposed the American dream). Uncontrolled lending, driven by financial institutions and the housing industry, put us in this precarious position. It reenforces the basic principle that there is no such thing as a free lunch; these institutions, and our government as well, fed on and powered themselves with blind greed and irresponsible American dreams that stand in almost unquestioned respect. Government bailouts have only exacerbated the issue, pouring more dollars into the economy, and further weakening our currency.

Why must home ownership be so strongly attached to the "American dream"? This zealousness parrallels, intersects, and walks hand-in-hand with the worst aspects of our culture and economy, unhindered, unstoppable, limitless consumption and expansion, so called "growth" guided by the hand of capitalism; in due time it will all balance itself out, right? Sure, when New Jersey is totally built-out, we'll knock down a few dilapidated developments and reproduce soil from thin air. Many organizations that lobby for affordable housing, particularly in New Jersey, seem to ignore these limits. They may be a thorn in the side of the housing industry at times, but as New Jersey's new COAH rules show, their relationship can also be symbiotic.

This post ends with another list of lofty, fantastical solutions from a powerless individual. The slow growth of the housing industry today should not be viewed as negative, it should be viewed as a god-send. Rather than construct more "developments" we should preserve farm land, we should have a more open (or at least something close to that ideal) and centrally guided land-use policy, we should invest in renewable energy sources, which would ultimately restructure much of our domestic manufacturing and blue collar jobs and, for the time being, replace those lost in the shrinking housing market. But most importantly, I view the American dream as intrinsically flawed and detrimental to our longterm existence. It over-emphasizes individuality and downplays the importance of community. However, this is culture, not governmental policy, policy can only influence culture to an extent or vice-versa. I prefer the latter.