SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
singapore
What We Can Learn From Social Housing in Singapore and Vienna
The housing crisis is threatening to make the American dream impossible. What’s needed is the will and investment necessary to bring social housing—publicly developed homes for residents of mixed incomes—to California.
Oct 05, 2024
California is the epicenter of the national housing shortage. Over half of California renters—and four in ten mortgaged homeowners—are cost-burdened, which means they pay more than 30% of their income on housing. And I am one of them.
Yet of the 120 members of the California State Legislature, I’m one of the only five renters.
In the Bay Area district I represent, home prices average roughly $1.5 million and modest apartments rent for over $2,000 per month. It’s impossible for most working people to afford to buy a home in my district. Too many of my friends and family have been priced out of the communities we grew up in.
To address this urgent crisis, I have tirelessly pursued a policy that has successfully ended housing shortages in jurisdictions around the world: social housing.
Social housing is the public development of housing for residents of mixed incomes. I have introduced the California Social Housing Act every year since I took office. I fought to become Chair of the Select Committee on Social Housing, and I’ve participated in delegations to Vienna, Austria, and Singapore to study their social housing systems.
As that dream becomes impossible for so many Americans, there remains one tool that has realized that dream for millions of people around the world.
Vienna and Singapore have important lessons for us on how social housing can actualize housing as a human right.
In both cities, social housing emerged from crisis. After a crushing defeat in World War I, Vienna saw the collapse of its monarchy and extremely overcrowded living conditions. Singapore experienced destruction during World War II and emerged from both Japanese and British colonization with a severe housing shortage. Squatter settlements were devastated by fire in 1961, leaving about 16,000 people homeless. Today, the two governments are identified with opposite ends of the political spectrum—left-leaning Vienna compared to the more right-leaning Singapore—but both housed their populations through social housing.
- YouTubewww.youtube.com
In Singapore, the Housing and Development Board builds 99-year leasehold flats that it sells to citizens. It has built so many units that roughly 80% of Singapore’s population live in them. Nine out of ten of these residents own their homes. Homeowners have the right to resell them, rent them out, and pass them to their heirs. These condos appreciate in value over time, enabling them to generate wealth. Only citizens and permanent residents may buy these flats, so no private equity firms, corporations, or speculators can game this system.
Vienna—sometimes referred to as the “Renters’ Utopia”—builds social housing for rent with indefinite leases that tenants never need to renew and can even pass down to their children. Over 60 percent of its residents live in social housing. As in Singapore, most residents qualify for social housing under the high income cap that encompasses 75% of the Viennese population. This income limit only applies when the tenant moves in. Without constant eligibility screenings, tenants may remain even if they make more money in the future, enabling socioeconomic integration of social housing neighborhoods. Residents pay about a third less rent than their counterparts in other major European capitals. Even private sector renters enjoy strong tenant protections.
While Singapore and Vienna offer different social housing models, both governments prioritize creating housing for the public good. The foundation of their policies are the finances, land banking powers, and expertise to build housing as a human right.
The result? Both are consistently ranked as the most livable cities in the world.
California today is well positioned to implement what Vienna and Singapore undertook in the past century. What’s needed here is the political will to bring social housing to our state. We can’t afford to wait.
The harsh reality is that California has roughly 30% of all people experiencing homelessness in the nation. The Golden State must build at least 2.5 million more homes by 2030 to end the current shortage. But California built just 85,000 housing units annually from 2018 to 2022.
California today is well positioned to implement what Vienna and Singapore undertook in the past century. What’s needed here is the political will to bring social housing to our state. We can’t afford to wait.
Today’s social housing proposals avoid the mistakes of the past by creating socioeconomically integrated, financially self-sustaining housing. And momentum is building nationwide. In 2023, my social housing bill was approved with two-thirds majorities in both houses of the California Legislature, but was vetoed. In 2023, Seattle voters approved a ballot measure to create a social housing developer. The state of Hawaii has passed legislation to develop social housing. Montgomery County, Maryland, is at the forefront of creating publicly developed, mixed-income housing through the Housing Opportunities Commission. The Commission serves roughly 17,500 renter households and owns more than 9,000 rental units.
Earlier this year, British Columbia, Canada, announced a CAD $4.95 billion (USD $3.67 billion) social housing initiative. Called BC Builds, the plan is to build 8,000 to 10,000 homes over the next five years, which could be the world’s largest new social housing program in decades.
The American dream has long been centered on having your own home. As that dream becomes impossible for so many Americans, there remains one tool that has realized that dream for millions of people around the world.
Let’s learn from our global peers and embrace social housing as a proven tool to solve our housing crisis.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Automakers Poised to Sell 400 Million More Gas-Powered Cars Than Planet Can Handle: Report
Greenpeace, the report's author, argues that internal combustion motor must be phased out, and vehicles must be electrified "to make road transport compatible with the Paris agreement's goal of limiting warming to 1.5degC."
Nov 10, 2022
The world's automakers are on track to sell roughly 400 million more gasoline and diesel-powered vehicles than would align with the Paris climate agreement's objective of limiting global heating to 1.5degC above preindustrial levels, according to a report published Thursday by Greenpeace Germany.
"If traditional automakers fail to electrify, they will lose out to newer, all-electric competitors."
The paper--entitled The Internal Combustion Engine Bubble--argues that "current auto industry planning is not aligned with a 1.5degC-compatible carbon budget and might result in millions of vehicles manufacturers can't sell."
"The internal combustion engine (ICE) needs to be phased out, and the vehicle fleet needs to be electrified to make road transport compatible with the Paris agreement's goal of limiting warming to 1.5degC," the publication states. "However, just how fast this transition must happen, what it means for the auto industry, and whether the companies' planning delivers what is needed to comply with the 1.5degC goal remains unclear."
Benjamin Stephan, climate campaigner at Greenpeace Germany, said in a statement that "leading auto manufacturers, including Toyota, Volkswagen, and Hyundai, are transitioning far too slowly to zero-emission vehicles, which has dangerous consequences for our planet."
\u201cTo prevent the worst impacts of the climate crisis, we must rethink our usage of cars.\n \nTransport has the highest reliance on fossil fuels of any sector. We must reduce the number of vehicles to reduce CO2 emissions & harmful air pollution\u2014 and to cut our reliance on oil.\u201d— Greenpeace (@Greenpeace) 1668051900
"As the climate crisis intensifies, governments from New York to Singapore are enacting stricter bans on diesel and petrol vehicles," Stephan added. "If traditional automakers fail to electrify, they will lose out to newer, all-electric competitors and risk stranded assets. Toyota, Volkswagen, and other leading automakers are on a collision course with the climate."
The new report "defines the number of ICE vehicles that could still be sold within a 1.5degC carbon trajectory and projects the auto industry's ICE sales based on the assessment of four major manufacturers' plans--Toyota, Volkswagen, Hyundai/Kia, and General Motors--and quantifies the overshoot."
Greenpeace urges automakers to "immediately end investment in internal combustion engine technology and phase out the sale of new petrol and diesel cars and vans in Europe by 2028 and across the rest of the world no later than 2030," while calling on governments to "eliminate subsidies for petrol and diesel cars and fossil fuels."
Last month, the European Union lawmakers and member nations agreed to ban the sale of new gasoline and diesel cars and vans by 2035, following similar moves by places including Singapore, Canada, and the U.S. states of California, Washington, and New York earlier this year.
The new report comes days after members of the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen protested what they called Toyota's "slow-walking of electric vehicles" by hiring a plane trailing a banner reading "Want exciting? Drive electric. Want boring? Drive Toyota" at the NASCAR Cup Series Championship race at the Phoenix Raceway in Arizona.
Keep ReadingShow Less
UN Experts Say Abolishing Death Penalty 'Is the Only Viable Path'
"Despite more than 170 states having repealed the death penalty or adopted moratoriums, there was a reported 20% increase in the number of executions last year."
Oct 10, 2022
A pair of United Nations experts joined people across the globe on Monday in marking the 20th World Day Against the Death Penalty by calling for an end to capital punishment.
"A growing trend of imposing the death penalty on those exercising their right to peaceful political protest is deeply worrying."
"Abolition of the death penalty is the only viable path," asserted Alice Edwards, the U.N. special rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment, and Morris Tidball-Binz, and the special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary, or arbitrary executions.
"The death row phenomenon has long been characterized as a form of inhuman treatment, as has the near total isolation of those convicted of capital crimes and often held in unlawful solitary confinement," said Edwards and Tidball-Binz in a joint statement.
The experts pointed out that "a number of states continue to impose the death penalty for nonviolent crimes such as blasphemy, adultery, and drug-related offenses, which fail the 'most serious crime' standard for the application of capital punishment under international law."
"A growing trend of imposing the death penalty on those exercising their right to peaceful political protest is deeply worrying," Edwards and Tidball-Binz noted. "Furthermore, increasingly methods of execution have been found to be incompatible with the obligations to refrain from torture and ill-treatment, for inflicting severe pain and suffering."
"Despite more than 170 states having repealed the death penalty or adopted moratoriums, there was a reported 20% increase in the number of executions last year," they continued. "States that retain the death penalty are urged to scrupulously apply exceptions for persons with intellectual disabilities, pregnant women, and children."
\u201cThe death penalty does little to serve victims or deter crime. \n\nThe vast majority of countries around the world have either abolished the death penalty or introduced a moratorium on its use. \n\nMore on Monday's World Day against the Death Penalty: https://t.co/6g5ectJ4wW\u201d— United Nations (@United Nations) 1665363780
The pair also urged all countries to consider ratifying an optional protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) that focuses on the abolition of the death penalty.
In a joint statement Monday to "firmly reiterate their unequivocal opposition to the death penalty at all times, in all places, and in all circumstances," the European Union and the Council of Europe praised Kazakhstan for having ratified that ICCPR protocol.
"We also commend Papua New Guinea, Central African Republic, and Equatorial Guinea for having abolished the death penalty this year," the organizations said. They also called on Armenia and Azerbaijan to embrace Protocol 13 to the European Convention on Human Rights.
\u201cOn World Day against the Death Penalty, we call for the universal abolition of the use of capital punishment.\n\nIt is a cruel practice that violates human rights. There is no evidence that it deters crime or contributes to a safer society.\n\n#ThisIsTheEU #AbolishDeathPenalty\u201d— European Commission \ud83c\uddea\ud83c\uddfa (@European Commission \ud83c\uddea\ud83c\uddfa) 1665412200
The statement continued:
The E.U. and the Council of Europe strongly condemn the death sentences recently issued in the occupied Ukrainian city of Donetsk. We stress that these sentences were incompatible with both European human rights law and international law, including the Geneva Conventions and welcome with relief the release of the sentenced individuals. Equally, we deplore the politically motivated amendment of the Criminal Code of Belarus--extending capital punishment to "attempted terrorist acts," with the eventual aim of targeting political dissents--and we urge the authorities to reverse this decision. We also call on Singapore, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and other countries that have recently increased the number of executions to join the worldwide trend and abandon the use of this inhuman punishment.
Citing a May report from Amnesty International, Al Jazeera on Monday showed in a series of infographics that as of the end of 2021, 108 nations had abolished capital punishment for all crimes, and eight had ended it for crimes not committed during times of war.
Another 28 countries still officially had the death penalty but had not executed anyone in the past decade while 55 nations retained the policy and continued to kill people.
\u201cIn 2\ufe0f\u20e30\ufe0f\u20e32\ufe0f\u20e31\ufe0f\u20e3, 28 countries still retained the death penalty but had not executed anyone over the past 10 years.\n\nCapital punishment explained: https://t.co/p1l82DzTot\u201d— Al Jazeera English (@Al Jazeera English) 1665413999
Like the U.N. experts, Al Jazeera also highlighted the 20% jump in executions last year. Specifically, at least 579 people were killed by 18 countries that used four methods: beheading, hanging, lethal injection, and shooting.
As the outlet noted:
Three countries accounted for 80% of all known executions in 2021: Iran (at least 314), Egypt (at least 83), and Saudi Arabia (65).
The recorded global totals do not include the thousands of executions that Amnesty International believes were carried out in China, where data on the death penalty are classified as a state secret.
Amnesty on Monday chose to focus on Saudi Arabia, pointing out that at least three young men "are at imminent risk of execution after an appeal court confirmed their sentences between June and October," after an official claimed in February that the kingdom had halted executions of individuals for "crimes committed by minors" and commuted all relevant death sentences.
Diana Semaan, Amnesty's acting deputy director for the Middle East and North Africa, stressed that "sentencing people to death for crimes that occurred when they were under the age of 18 is a clear violation of international human rights law."
"The Saudi Arabian authorities have promised to end the use of the death penalty in such cases, yet the brutal reality is that these young men are facing an abbreviated existence," Semaan said. "The king should not ratify these death sentences and should immediately halt all imminent executions and order retrials that must be fully consistent with international fair trial standards, without recourse to the death penalty."
\u201c\u270a On #WorldDayAgainstDeathPenalty, we call on @KingSalman to not ratify these death sentences and immediately halt all imminent executions and order re-trials fully consistent with international fair standards, with no recourse to the death penalty. \nhttps://t.co/3f1a2WB35y\u201d— Amnesty MENA (@Amnesty MENA) 1665413374
Meanwhile, the U.S.-based Human Rights Watch (HRW) and Bahrain Institute for Rights and Democracy on Monday released a report revealing that "Bahraini courts have convicted and sentenced defendants to death following manifestly unfair trials, based solely or primarily on confessions allegedly coerced through torture and ill-treatment."
HRW deputy Middle East director Michael Page declared that "the many human rights violations that underlie these death sentences reflect not a justice system but a pattern of injustice."
Joshua Colangelo-Bryan, an HRW consultant and primary author of the report, urged the country's king to "commute all death sentences immediately and the government should reinstate the de facto moratorium on executions."
\u201cTo mark the World Day Against the Death Penalty, we call on King Hamad to:\n\n\ud83d\udea9Commute the death sentences for all individuals \n\ud83d\udea9Reimpose a moratorium on death sentences and executions in #Bahrain.\n\n#WorldDayAgainstTheDeathPenalty #EndDeathPenalty\u201d— Joey Shea (@Joey Shea) 1665396868
Sayed Ahmed Alwadaei, advocacy director at the Bahrain Institute for Rights and Democracy, called for action by the country's allies, saying that "in particular the U.S. and U.K. should take decisive steps to stand with these victims before it is too late."
U.S. President Joe Biden is also under pressure from rights groups and other death penalty opponents to make good on his campaign pledge to work on outlawing capital punishment across the United States. While his administration has instituted a moratorium on federal executions, they still occur at the state level; ending those killings would require action by Congress.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular