Inherency- obama has already Solved 3 Harms- other things cause homelessness 5


Links- Housing Assistance/SEVRA hurts the economy



Download 350.73 Kb.
Page15/20
Date28.07.2017
Size350.73 Kb.
#23963
1   ...   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20

Links- Housing Assistance/SEVRA hurts the economy



Housing assistance drives up prices—causes inflation

Glaeser & Gyourko 8 [*Edward L. Glaeser is the Fred and Eleanor Glimp Professor of Economics at Harvard University AND **Joseph Gyourko is the Martin Bucksbaum Professor of Real Estate and Finance at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, “Rethinking Federal Housing Policy,” Dec 08, http://www.aei.org/book/971?action=add&id=971]
Ironically, current subsidies for construction of low-income housing only tie impoverished Americans to areas where they have limited job prospects. These supply subsidies also crowd out private-sector construction and benefit politically-connected developers. Mortgage interest deductions, which are intended to make housing more affordable for the middle class, simply allow families who can already afford a house to purchase a bigger one. In restricted, affluent markets, these deductions increase the amount families can pay for a house, driving up prices even higher.

Glaeser and Gyourko propose a comprehensive overhaul of federal housing policy that takes into account local regulations and economic conditions. Reform of the home mortgage interest deduction would provide incentives to local governments to allow the market to provide more housing, preventing unnecessary price inflation. Federal subsidies for the production of low-income housing should be eliminated and the funds reallocated to increase the scope of federal housing voucher programs which allow poor households to relocate to areas of greater economic promise.

A radical rethinking of policy is needed to allow housing markets to operate freely--and to make housing affordable and plentiful for the middle class and the poor.
Specific link- SEVERA’s costs would snowball as voucher amounts would have to be adjusted for the inflation the plan itself causes, causing a vicious cycle of inflation

Will Fischer and Barbara Sard- researchers for # Center on Budget and Policy Priorities- 2007- Bipartisan Legislation Would Build on Housing Voucher Program's Success - But Worthwhile Reform Bill Holds Risks From Expanded Deregulation Authority- online- http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:TSlBRp1CRTMJ:www.centeronbudget.org/cms/index.cfm%3Ffa%3Dview%26id%3D344+%22section+8%22%22housing%22%22voucher%22%22inflation%22&cd=8&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Tenants in HUD’s rental assistance programs generally are required to pay 30 percent of their income for rent, after certain deductions are applied. SEVRA would streamline several aspects of the process for determining tenants’ incomes and deductions in order to reduce administrative burdens on housing agencies and private owners of subsidized housing.[2] For example, SEVRA would replace a complex set of provisions intended to encourage work among tenants with a simple provision, under which 10 percent of a household’s first $10,000 in earnings would be deducted when determining the household’s income for purposes of calculating its rent. SEVRA also would allow housing agencies to review the incomes of tenants with fixed incomes (such as elderly individuals on SSI) every three years instead of every year and to assume that in the intervening two years, the tenant’s income rose at the rate of inflation. (This reflects the fact that SSI, Social Security, and certain other such benefits are adjusted annually for inflation.) In addition, SEVRA would require agencies to base the rents of working families on actual earnings in the previous year, rather than on anticipated earnings in the coming year. This would minimize the need for subsequent mid-year adjustments in rents.


Links- Social services hurt economy



Social services crush goldilocks economy

Sherk 7 [James Sherk is Bradley Fellow in Labor Policy in the Center for Data Analysis at The Heritage Foundation, “Jobs, Taxes, and the Goldilocks Economy,” Feb 1 http://www.heritage.org/Research/Economy/wm1336.cfm]
The economy is growing steadily. Like Goldilocks's breakfast, the economy is neither too hot nor too cold. It is growing, adding jobs, increasing wages, and staying well away from a recession. Because it is not entering an inflationary boom the Federal Reserve can keep interest rates low. The economy is in a steady expansion.

That is why Congress should not impose a triple whammy of tax hikes on the American workers who are doing so much to keep the economy growing. Three different tax hikes are being discussed in Congress to pay for more spending: the automatic tax hike from the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT); raising the cap on wages that are subject to payroll taxes; and repealing the Bush tax cuts. Each of these tax hikes--and especially all three together--would impose strong disincentives to work, save, and invest. This would be a heavy blow to American workers. The economy is growing at a good pace, and Members of Congress should not do anything to harm that.

Steady Growth

The economy is growing steadily. It increased at a 3.5 percent pace in the fourth quarter of 2006, above expectations and up from 2.0 percent in the third quarter. The economy grew 3.4 percent in 2006, slightly more than in 2005.[1] This growth rate is above historical averages but is still moderate enough to ease fears that the economy could enter an inflation-induced bubble.

Job creation is also steady. Entrepreneurs and businesses created 111,000 new jobs in January, most of those in professional and business services, education, and health.[2] Revisions to earlier figures also revealed that employers created over 400,000 more jobs in 2006 than the government had previously estimated.[3] That is good job growth, but not excessive.

The unemployment rate increased a statistically insignificant 0.1 percent to 4.6 percent in January.[4] Again, this is low but not excessively so. The unemployment rate was lower in the late 1990s, but that proved unsustainable when the tech bubble collapsed in 2000. Aside from the tech bubble, unemployment has not been as low as 4.6 percent since the mid-1970s. The economy is doing well but is not growing so quickly as to raise concerns of an illusory bubble.

Average wages are also growing, rising 0.2 percent in January to $17.09 an hour. Over the past year, wages have risen 4.0 percent.[5] This solid growth means that American workers are seeing their paychecks rise and that American families are better off than they were last year. But this growth is not so rapid as to raise concerns that it is a sign of rising inflation.

From economic growth to job creation to unemployment to wages, the economy is growing steadily. Workers are doing better and businesses are creating new jobs. Yet there are no signs that America is in a bubble or that the Federal Reserve needs to clamp down on rising inflation. That is why the Federal Reserve left interest rates unchanged for the fifth straight time when it met in Washington last week.

Congress Should Not Hit Workers with a Triple Whammy

When the economy is doing well, Congress should stay out of the way. Unfortunately, some ideas being floated on Capitol Hill would impose a heavy blow on the American workers who have created this "Goldilocks" strong economy. With the reinstatement of pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) budgeting and pledges to end deficit spending, new spending--especially on entitlements--must be paid for with either spending cuts or tax increases. Because Congress is reluctant to cut spending, three tax hikes may be in the works for American workers: the AMT, which will ensnare millions more taxpayers; an increase in the Social Security wage cap; and the repeal of some of the Bush tax cuts.
2NC Link Wall—Social Services [1/2]
Now is key—increased social services will exacerbate debt

The Spectrum 6/18/09 [“Excessive government spending paves the way to ruin,” http://www.thespectrum.com/article/20090618/OPINION/906180317/-1/CEDARCITY/Excessive+government+spending+paves+the+way+to+ruin]
Until now, the change has been insidious. Social Security instituted during a crisis became accepted as retirement income planning for many. The "war on poverty" allowed us to believe welfare was an entitlement. As we added Medicare and Medicaid, health care became a right for the poor and elderly. Part D made the population responsible for drug costs for retirees.

We clearly cannot afford this largesse. The U.S. government has been living beyond its means for years. By some accounts inflation-adjusted tax receipts have risen 40 percent in the last 39 years while government spending increased 2,600 percent. How is this possible? Foreign governments fund our tremendous government debt. When we account for Social Security and Medicare, this year alone we will more than double the national debt.

More than just the financial burden we are placing on future generations, the state is taking over our personal responsibilities: child care, care of the elderly and now health care. When asked about a socialist society, most would cite Sweden, where state spending accounts for 54 percent of Gross Domestic Product. We have recently moved to the 40 percent level, and I believe are on a path very European-like. It is more than just the cost. It is the loss of American individual responsibility, things our families and churches used to do routinely.



Social programs crush currency stability and economic growth

Behreandt 7 [Denise L. Behreandt, a freelance writer in Wisconsin, studied economics at Ripon College, “The specter of inflation: entitlement programs have created huge debts, and one Federal Reserve official thinks that the government's answer to the problem could send the economy into a tailspin,” Aug 6 http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-32729857_ITM]
The problem comes from massive wealth transfer programs that promise more than we--meaning the government--can pay over the long-term future. This suggests that the government will come under tremendous pressure to find a solution when constituencies expect those pay-outs. The pressure, says Fisher, will be on the Fed to monetize the debt (print new money to pay the liabilities). "When fiscal policy gets out of whack, monetary authorities face pressure to monetize the debt," Fisher warned in April. The number of Americans expecting entitlements is growing, and there is not enough monetary compensation to cover this shortfall. But is monetizing the debt the solution? Not to Fisher. It is "a cardinal sin in my mind," he said. Although monetization may seem to provide the simplest solution to covering the unfunded liabilities to social programs, it would vastly increase the money supply, causing an inflationary catastrophe.



Download 350.73 Kb.

Share with your friends:
1   ...   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20




The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2024
send message

    Main page