top of page
Search

Safe Homes Are Scarce Homes: The Story Behind the Housing Shortage


THROUGH A COMBINATION OF POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC FACTORS. HOMEOWNERSHIP IS OUT OF REACH FOR MANY
THROUGH A COMBINATION OF POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC FACTORS. HOMEOWNERSHIP IS OUT OF REACH FOR MANY

In the United States, housing has long been a cornerstone of economic security and upward mobility. Homeownership has historically provided families with stability, equity, and a tangible stake in their communities. But today, as rent skyrockets and waitlists for public housing stretch for years, the American dream of a safe, affordable home is slipping out of reach for millions. The common refrain is that this is a market failure—a consequence of insufficient building, rising construction costs, and burdensome regulation. But beneath the surface, something more insidious is at play. The modern housing crisis has evolved from a business challenge into a calculated system of social engineering—one that strategically anchors low-income populations in geographic zones favorable to the political left, creating a permanent class of rent-dependent voters.


From Market Function to Political Tool


On the surface, America’s housing shortage appears to be a failure of supply and demand. Cities like Chicago, Detroit, and Milwaukee have tens of thousands of vacant homes—Chicago alone has approximately 128,796 vacant housing units, about 10.2% of its total housing stock[^1]. Detroit has made progress, yet thousands of its abandoned homes remain unsold or under repair[^2]. Milwaukee still holds over 6,300 vacant properties[^3]. At the same time, rent prices continue to surge in desirable metro areas, and homeownership rates among young adults and low-income families remain historically low.


So why, with tens of thousands of properties sitting empty, do housing authorities and city governments fail to restore them for use by struggling families? The answer lies not just in economics but in ideology and control. Rather than pursue the logical, fiscally sound strategy of purchasing and rehabilitating distressed homes, many municipal governments leave them to decay—or allow politically favored developers to cherry-pick the most profitable blocks. The result is not just housing scarcity but the creation of artificially dependent populations, locked in place by the state.


The Rise of Corporate Slumlords


Fueling this crisis is the growing influence of Wall Street-backed real estate entities such as BlackRock, Invitation Homes, and Pretium Partners. These firms now own tens of thousands of single-family homes in working-class and sunbelt cities. Their business model relies not on vibrant communities, but on maximizing profit through rent extraction, minimal maintenance, and evictions at scale. In some areas of Atlanta, institutional landlords control over 20% of rental housing[^4]. In Phoenix, Charlotte, and Las Vegas, these firms bought homes en masse post-2008 and again during the COVID-19 pandemic, often outbidding ordinary families and letting properties rot until values rebounded.


This isn’t just bad management—it’s a deliberate strategy. Neglected homes depress neighborhood values, prompting sales by struggling owners and inviting further corporate acquisition. Over time, these companies achieve monopolistic control, setting rental prices and lobbying local governments to prevent zoning or tax policies that might promote homeownership. Their neglect becomes a tool to create scarcity, and scarcity ensures permanent rent dependency.


Government Complicity and Electoral Engineering


Local and federal housing authorities could counteract this with decisive action: buying and rehabilitating low-cost homes for use in Section 8 or transitional housing. Yet most do not. Bureaucratic inertia, restrictive HUD guidelines, and political favoritism mean cities often prefer working with large developers or politically connected nonprofits. These entities build high-density housing projects that centralize low-income populations—populations who become geographically anchored and electorally reliable.


This is not coincidence. It is geography-based voter engineering. The same cities that leave vacant homes to rot also resist expanding voucher portability or promoting ownership for the working poor. Instead, they warehouse them—in areas with reliable bus routes, left-wing community organizations, and voting blocs that preserve the local political status quo.


A Perfect Storm of Dependency


The combined effect of corporate greed and political design has created a two-tiered housing system. On one level, we have artificially inflated rental markets controlled by hedge funds and insulated by lobbying. On the other, we have crumbling neighborhoods left in decay by governments that use poverty as a political resource. Meanwhile, families who might otherwise become homeowners are locked out by both forces.


The numbers speak clearly. In 2024, the median home price in Detroit was just $95,000[^5]—but many of those homes are off-market, tied up in land banks, or in disrepair. In Milwaukee, homes average $215,000[^6]—a steep climb from prior years, pushed by investor competition. In Chicago, $340,000 puts a home well beyond reach for the average working family[^7], especially with rising property taxes and stagnant wages.


Conclusion: The Politics of Scarcity


The modern housing crisis is no longer about construction costs or zoning codes alone. It is about political control. Homeownership represents autonomy, mobility, and independence—qualities the managerial state, allied with corporate landlords, increasingly views as threats. By tying people to one place through public housing dependency and high rent, the state ensures a fixed, compliant voter base. And by refusing to rehabilitate homes or curb corporate hoarding, they protect that strategy.

Safe homes are scarce homes because scarcity now serves a purpose. It is not just a failure of governance. It is a strategy of rule.


Bibliography


Comentarios

FLVictory2.fw.png

Florida Conservative

The South

bottom of page