The other day, while scrolling through Reddit, I stumbled upon a mind-boggling video that captivated me from start to finish. It depicted a landlord walking through a property they owned, only to discover the appalling state in which the previous tenants had left it. Broken windows, damaged cupboards, and ruined appliances painted a scene of utter destruction.
Naturally, one might wonder why someone would resort to such destructive behavior. In this particular case, the tenants became infuriated when the landlord informed them that rent payment was necessary or they would have to vacate the premises. It seems reasonable that those who fail to pay for their living space should face eviction. However, is eviction always justified? And just how prevalent is this problem? While eviction might not be a concern for some, it remains a distressing and all-too-common fear for many Americans. I read the list of eviction cases that our local JPs handle on a daily basis and am amazed.
If you seek a deeper understanding of these issues, look no further than Matthew Desmond's book, "Evicted: Poverty and Profit in the American City." This thought-provoking work currently holds the top spot in Amazon's Poverty category, shedding light on a multitude of unimaginable occurrences within this realm.
Allow me to share three eye-opening lessons I gleaned from this book:
Lesson 1: Eviction rates are on the rise due to exorbitant rent prices, inadequate salaries, and unemployment.
Evictions have become alarmingly commonplace in the United States, but this was not always the case. Even during the Great Depression, communities stood their ground, resisting the removal of tenants, as evidenced by a noteworthy incident in the Bronx where people protested against the eviction of three families.
So, what changed to make evictions so prevalent? One major contributing factor is the escalating cost of rent, coupled with stagnant or declining incomes. Research conducted by Harvard University substantiates this claim. According to census data, a significant portion of individuals with lower incomes are forced to allocate 50% of their earnings towards rent, with a quarter of them spending 70% or more. However, for a comfortable standard of living, rent expenses should ideally constitute no more than 30% of one's total income.
Many individuals who struggle to make ends meet resort to desperate measures, such as stealing electricity or selling food stamps, while others rely on the goodwill of others to secure a roof over their heads. Another factor contributing to this pressing issue is the high unemployment rate. In the past, the US boasted an abundance of manufacturing jobs, but many have been outsourced to other countries, leaving countless individuals without a stable income. In Milwaukee, for example, half of all working-age black men are without employment. Compounding the problem is the fact that welfare benefits often fail to provide a livable income, making it easy for emergencies to push individuals further behind on rent, placing them at risk of eviction.
Lesson 2: Families experiencing eviction endure unimaginable stress and hardship.
At present, it may be challenging for you to fathom the notion of being forcibly removed from your current abode. You may not fully grasp the immense burdens faced by those who go through this harrowing experience, from the struggle to find alternative housing to the responsibility of keeping their children clothed and fed. Such experiences place an enormous toll on families, leading to mental health issues and, tragically, even suicide. Approximately half of the mothers who undergo eviction exhibit symptoms of depression, which can drain their happiness and energy for years on end. Moreover, from 2005 to 2010, housing-related suicides doubled alongside skyrocketing rent costs. Psychiatrists now recognize eviction as a "significant precursor to suicide."
Insecure housing situations also pose a substantial threat to individuals' employment, making it even more challenging to make ends meet. Those who experience eviction are 15% more likely to lose their jobs due to the overwhelming stress it imposes, subsequently affecting their performance. As if the challenges surrounding the event of losing one's living space weren't arduous enough, the aftermath brings forth a cascade of difficulties. Hunger and illness are more prevalent within the first year after a family becomes homeless. Additionally, the lack of basic amenities such as a phone, electricity, heat, or even a mailbox further jeopardizes their well-being. For instance, they may miss important benefit letters that are delivered by mail.
Lesson 3: Implementing a housing voucher system could help ensure the basic human right of shelter for all.
It is important to distinguish between a house and a home. While constructing a physical structure can be achieved through structural engineering, creating a home requires much more care and attention, providing safety, learning opportunities, and love. As a society, we inherently recognize the significance of having a place to call home, evident in the way we discuss it. Therefore, shelter should be regarded as a fundamental human right accessible to all.
Homeless individuals struggle to connect with others, and their children often suffer the consequences. Their psychological well-being becomes precarious, and they may be more prone to engaging in criminal activities. This not only jeopardizes the safety of the community but also diminishes the likelihood of people working together harmoniously. In essence, it is in everyone's best interest to care about and strive to improve the conditions faced by those afflicted by eviction.
Perhaps it is time to reevaluate our values by revisiting the principles laid out in the constitution. If life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are deemed inalienable rights, none of these can be truly realized without a place to call home. One potential solution lies in the implementation of a housing voucher system, whereby families below a certain income threshold receive assistance to cover their housing expenses. This assistance could be designed to ensure that housing costs do not exceed 30% of their overall income.
I’m not one for “democratic socialism” or generational welfare, but I do believe we are to help our fellow citizens. I also believe in the “raising a boat in the harbor” metaphor.
Such a system has already proven successful in Great Britain and the Netherlands. While it does have its critics, the majority of studies, with the exception of one, indicate that it does not adversely affect people's motivation to work.
There has to be a solution to this issue. Not just an answer but a real solution that both sides of the aisle could support. I don’t have it yet but I’ll continue to search for it.
Be good to one another.
