Real Home Security Includes Affordable Housing

By JASON SIBERT

Does the American government really provide security to its people? nnNo, your average American feels a deep sense of insecurity these days. Affordable housing is a case in point. Housing prices are creeping up everywhere from the nation’s technology hubs to low-cost cities like Nashville, Tenn., and Boise, Idaho. Thousands on the West Coast are homeless. Every 11 seconds someone in America is kicked out of their home and 2.9 million people who work full-time can’t afford a house or apartment. Many live in homeless shelters.

While so many feel a deep sense of economic insecurity, things are booming in the world of defense contracting. In 2016, the Pentagon rewarded $304 billion in contracts to various companies. This was about half of the department’s $600 billion-plus dollar budget that year. Firms like Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, General Dynamics, and Northrop Grumman were the biggest beneficiaries. Citizens’ tax dollars also cover lots of overhead, excessive executive salaries, and cost overruns on weapons systems that don’t operate as planned. In his first year in office, President Donald Trump backed a $54 billion boost in defense spending.

The above companies aren’t so much interested in the defense of our country but are interested in subsides that help their bottom line. The heads of the top five contractors – Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Raytheon, General Dynamics, and Northrop Grumman – made a cumulative $96 million last year. Unlike companies that provide Americans’ goods and services in the consumer market, defense contractors are not dependent on consumer dollars. The salaries of those who work for defense contractors come out of taxpayers’ pockets.

We often hear from elected officials that the money our government spends to help people climb from the ranks of the indigent to the ranks of middle-class is a waste of time. These voices say our government is a threat to our freedom, our economy, and our livelihood. One wouldn’t understand this line of argument if they observe how much we spend on the military — more than all our geo-political competitors combined. The arms industry certainly sports a lot of lobbying power. They’ve spent a billion in lobbying since 2009 and employ anywhere from 700 to 1,000 lobbyists. These types of practices are usually defended with the terms “strong national defense” and “supporting the troops.”

The military-industrial complex receives what it wants out of our political system because it possesses money power. Those who struggle for adequate housing clearly don’t have the money of a Raytheon or a Lockheed Martin and don’t employ lobbyists.

Will the cash-strapped of our country ever make their voices heard? The progressive populist needs a plan for those who don’t have money power, their lives are more in need of change than overpaid executives at defense contracting firms. What would a program to secure adequate housing for Americans look like?

Housing cooperatives are one of the best kept secrets in America for those who are looking for affordable housing. They’re like apartment or townhome communities that are owned by the people who live in them. One pays to purchase a share in the cooperative, which can be anywhere from $3,600 to $10,000, and then pays a monthly carrying cost, like a rent or mortgage, every month. The carrying cost is usually less than rent or mortgage. The owner’s hard-earned money goes to a cooperative that they own, not to a landlord. As owners they possess power, unlike the taxpayer who is taken for his money by defense contractors.

Because co-ops often take the form of a townhome or apartment, it often makes them a more affordable option than traditional home ownership. When Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) served as mayor of Burlington, Vt., he established the country’s first municipally-owned land trust — Burlington Community Land Trust, which paid for the land that small and affordable houses were built on. This made home-ownership more affordable because the trust paid for the ground the houses sit on while the home-owners paid only for the cost of the house.

A national affordable housing plan would funnel federal dollars that are currently being spent on an oversized military to land trusts that would be established by individual cities around the country. The cities would purchase vacant land for affordable housing, some promoting the ownership of houses – like the Burlington example – and the rest would be in housing cooperatives. The cities would be responsible for the construction of housing.

With the right plan, will we see an uprising of the people?

Jason Sibert worked for the Suburban Journals in the St. Louis area for over a decade and is currently executive director of the Peace Economy Project in St. Louis, Mo. Email jasonsibert@hotmail.com.

From The Progressive Populist, September 15, 2018

Populist.com