Despite what others may say about ten noosing program, Puddle Health Totals Delve Tanat noosing does affect Neal Public health officials see housing as direct and indirect (hard or soft) which can effect the health of those provided housing. “Hard” ways are explained as how housing can impact ones health. “Soft” factors stress the importance of housing. Location and availability of services is what public health officials research to conclude the benefits of the housing program (Shaw, 2004, p. 397). In the urban dwelling, most housing was in unbelievable housing conditions.
Not too different from England, the U. S. Also was guilty with the housing of the low class. From the book The Condition of the Working Class in England  described the conditions of housing of the low class: … E must admit that 350,000 working people of Manchester and its environs live, almost all of them, in wretched, damp, filthy cottages, that the streets which surround them are usually in the most miserable and filthy condition, laid out without the slightest reference to ventilations, with reference solely to the profit secured by the contractor.
In a word, we must confess that in the working men’s dwellings of Manchester, no cleanliness, no convenience, and consequently no comfortable family life is possible; that in such dwellings only a physically degenerate race, robbed of all humanity, degraded, reduced morally and physically o bestiality, could feel comfortable and at home (Shaw, 2004, p. 399). In the United States, urban areas that were critiqued were not cottages but overcrowded unwept apartment buildings.
The unsanitary conditions of the apartment buildings help spread disease. Studies show that respiratory disease is highly significant in poor housing conditions. Dampness due to lack of properly ventilated areas form mold and fungi that leads to asthma, headaches, fever, and aches and pain. A case-control study shows that children who are exposed to damp conditions mentioned above are more likely to develop asthmatic problems (Shaw, 004, p. 403).
Affordable housing has been politically argued of its importance since the federal government has aided the poor for public housing. A few people view public housing as an assistance program that has, ” sustainability but at what price? ” (Restrung, 2011, p. 2). The government spends 69. 4 Billion dollars in 201 LIFO housing assistance. During the Presidential Debate of 2004, President Bush claimed that “Tax relief has left Americans with more money to put towards buying a home.. “(Bogart, 2004, p. ) and he did not support increasing the public housing program. Others, such as Tracy Morrison, a troubled American voices his opinion by writing: The welfare system was never created so Americans could live off of benefits provided by Federal and State government services in lieu of getting productive Jobs and being self supporting, As stated before, the Welfare system was originally designed for woman, children and destitute families effected by the depression, It has since gone on to help support the country’s needy in times of hardship.
It was not instituted so young people, not even old enough to drive a car, graduate from high school or even consent to sex in the first place(depending on the local state saws) to get pregnant, have a child with no means of support so they can simply “get a check”. This is a phrase that can easily incite anger and very heated discussions about the millions that are knowingly draining the benefit system as tenet own personal AIM (Morrison z Some people believe that the safety net is too easy to access and needs more regulation.
This has been an on-going debate since the housing programs began. Others believe that there definitely is a market for affordable housing, but it is very demanding (Regal, 2006, p. 19). Today, working hard does not mean that you will be able to afford “The American Dream” of owning your own home. “More than 14 million spend more than half their income Just keeping the roof over their head. Another 17 million spent 30-50 percent” (Elevate & Lingerer , 2005, p. 43). The poor is no longer necessarily Jobless. Work wages have failed to keep up with the rising housing costs .
In California, over 60 percent of g renters bayed more than 50 percent of their income earnings (Elevate & Lingerer ,2005, p. 43). With the never ended increase in house costs, the working class is forced to settle with public or affordable housing. Struggle in California in 1998, shows that 80 percent of home-care workers were poor or near poor and could not afford the housing costs living in Los Angles. Though in opinion, many believe that affordable housing is abused by people who do not need aid, there is evidence that there are those who do need it.
People who have worked their whole lives, and reach retirement age, dwindle their resources down because they are on a set income such as pensions, social security, or annuities. A Harvard University report stated that in 2002, 21 million of the elderly earn income less than $10, 500 a year (Libidos 2005, p. ). It is predicted that by 2030 the elderly population will increase from 35 million to 70 million due to the baby boomers aging. 1. 3 million affordable housing complexes are occupied by the elderly(Libidos 2005, p. L).
On the other side of the spectrum, we have the homeless in America. In 1999, 700,000 Americans were homeless (Hanson-Harding 2000, p. 7). The homeless are perceived to society as drug addicts or mentally ill, but in reality 30% have insufficient income, 24% have no Job, 11% can’t find suitable housing, 26% other, and only 9% have an addiction (Hanson-Harding 2000, p. 9). CONCLUSION In conclusion, affordable housing has changed the lives of a large proportion of the population. Income is a direct correlation with housing. Preservation of affordable housing is critical for those in need.
We cannot afford to lose programs such as affordable housing for the community. The vulnerable can be anyone from the working class to the elderly. Making sure that all affordable housing units are under the program and none are market rate, will preserve the housing program. Brining in more investors and owners to help build these units can benefit the community and be an investment. The federal tax credit program has a financial strategy because of the grant the state must provide to the investors. Investors pay no property taxes on the property.