I think you’ve got a skewed notion of who or what is a “welfare type.” Right now by my sights welfare types include most everyone who works for an investment bank, GM, Chrysler, on a farm, or any of numerous other places where government subsidies are required to keep folks employed. And sure, everyone who is on unemployment.
I think the question of whether home ownership is a societal good in and of itself is still open. Rates of home ownership are generally lower in modern day Europe, and most European countries have less income inequality, a larger middle class, and greater social mobility than the United States. I don’t think there are any serfs in modern day Europe either. At the end of the day houses are not an inherently great investment, although it can make a lot of sense for some folks some times.
I don’t want to see folks out on the street, so I am happy to spend my tax dollars to help them stay off the street. I am not happy to see my tax dollars going to help folks hold on to an asset that could some day appreciate. So I’m fine with a program that lets people who purchased their home below a certain price – say $400,000 or so – and can’t make their mortgage payments now – be allowed to convert to a market rate rental in their same home. And I’d even be OK with a rental subsidy type arrangement, kind of like the Section 8 that we already do in these circumstances. Like I said, I want to take care of folks.
But let’s be clear – these people are on welfare. Personally, I’d rather live in a society where we do more to take care of people.
