Crime in the...Suburbs?

Study by Brookings showing overall trends of crime in metro areas, showing that crime rates are falling in core cities and inner-ring suburbs while increasing in the outer suburbs.  Although the city crime rates are still higher, the gap between the suburban and city crime rates have narrowed. 

In general, the nation’s largest metropolitan areas are much safer today than they were in years past. Within metropolitan areas, older, more urbanized, poorer, and more minority communities have benefited the most from these trends, narrowing the disparities between cities and suburbs and underscoring that crime is not a uniquely urban issue, but a metropolitan one.

I'm sure that's reflected in reporting by the media, right?

Victory of Computers is Inevitable

If there was one thing that I counted on in all possible Terminator-style scenarios, it was that computers couldn't possibly read anything not specifically written in computer language (yeah, I'm ignoring the fact that in the original, the Terminator read a phone book).  Furtively passed paper notes and sprayed graffiti were how we were going to beat them.

But even that small comfort is gone.

Man Plans, Gods laugh, Housing-Style

I remember a saying, "Men make plans and the gods laugh." In 2008, after years of hard work and endless advocacy, the National Housing Trust Fund passed the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 and signed by President Bush.  By law, it would serve the lowest income category-75% of the funding going to units for those under 30% of Area Median Income.  It initially was meant to be funded through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  Apparently this is when the laughing began.

Shortly after the Trust Fund was signed into law, the housing market collapsed, putting an end to any thoughts of a portion of the profit from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac going into the Trust Fund.  Hilarious.

So a new search began for a new funding source.  That was the topic of a webinar hosted by the National Low-Income Housing Coalition (NLIHC).  President Obama's 2012 budget request includes $1 billion in the HUD budget to capitalize the Trust Fund.  Bills HR 1477 and S489, both primarily bills aimed at the foreclosure crisis, also includes $1 billion for the Trust Fund.  Those are one-time requests, with the funding in the Congressional bills coming from the sale of TARP warrants (I look at it as the sale of stocks in banks & companies that were given to the government in exchange for stimulus money.  Or, rather, sale of the right to buy those stocks at a specific price.). 

But again, that'd be just one-time funding, which means a permanent ongoing source of revenue is needed.  A possibility is a change to the home mortgage interest deduction subsidy that given mostly to the well-off; Only 25% of taxpayers benefit from it, and the top 32% of those taxpayers receive 72% of the benefits.  As a housing subsidy, it's remarkably ill-designed, in 2009 costing over $80 billion, or 2% of federal spending,  according to this article. 

There are already proposals to modify or remove the deduction, and NLIHC is saying that a slice of this should go to the Trust Fund-particularly since the Trust Fund, when originally proposed, included this funding source.

NLIHC supports a proposal that includes the following:

• Reduce the size of eligible mortgages from $1 million to $500,000.  Keep in mind that if your mortgage is $500,001, you'd still see a benefit on that first $500,000-that extra $1 won't qualify for the deduction.  This has the benefit of ensuring that the $1 million home is not subsidized needlessly.
• Convert the deduction to a non-refundable tax credit (15%) available to everyone.  Basically this reduces the taxpayer's tax bill-no matter if you're a renter or an owner.  Hard to argue against that-reduce ineffective subsidies benefiting mostly the well-off and lowering everyone's tax bill.

NLIHC estimates that those the proposal can save $30 billion a year, if wholly directed to the Trust Fund, would provide enough housing units for every person with extremely low income.  3.5 million housing units over the next 10 year-imagine the number of jobs that'd create and the boost to the economy!

Of course, there's always someone who has to play the spoilsport.  Rep. Royce (R-CA) is proposing to eliminate the Trust Fund.  He believes it'll be a "slush fund" for special interest groups. 

As NLIHC notes from a recent hearing on the issue:

In his opening statement, Mr. Royce said that the NHTF should be abolished in order to ensure that funds do not flow “to activist organizations who dabble in housing and rental assistance as well as dabble in political activism.” The NHTF statue prohibits the use of NHTF dollars for political activities, lobbying, counseling, outreach, and project administration. Mr. Royce did not stay to hear Ms. Crowley’s testimony.

Don't let facts confuse ya, Royce!

Couples Negotiations-Washington Style

As the debt ceiling looms, both sides are still far apart in negotiating an agreement on raising the debt ceiling.  Keep in mind the debt ceiling isn't for future bills, but for bills already incurred by the United States that will need to be paid.

Some politicans are fond of comparing the federal budget-both the deficit and the national debt-to budgets faced by families.  Running a deficit, or having a debt, they declare, is clearly a sign of irresponsible planning.  Never mind that it's exactly what many households do.  Households take out mortgages, take out car loans, charge stuff to the credit card, use installment plans, etc.

But let's take the negotiations metaphor all the way.

My wife and I have an anniversary coming up in a few months.  She's a vegetarian, while I enjoy a nice juicy steak.  Obviously this presents some difficulties in choosing a restaurant.

Rational negotiations might look something like this:

Mrs. Max:  Honey, you know we have our special anniversary coming up soon, right?
Max Max:  Huh? Already? Uhhh, yes, sure, I knew that.  Where would you like to go for dinner, dear?
Mrs. Max:  How about that new Italian restaurant?  I hear they have a nice eggplant pasta dish.
Max Max:  Let me look at the menu online...sure, they have a fabulous crocodile steak. (I'm more adventuresome in my imagination.)
Mrs. Max:  Good, it's settled.

Easy, right?  Maybe we might go through two or three restaurants before finding the right place that's good for the both of us.

But let's look at it again, copying what's happening in Washington.

Mrs. Max: Honey, you know we have our special anniversary coming up soon, right?
Max Max:  Huh?  Sure, I knew that.  Why don't we go to that House of Prime Rib?
Mrs. Max:  Seriously?  That place is all meat, they don't have anything for me.  How about Olive Garden?  They have some nice meat dishes.
Max Max:  I'll give you my veggies at the House of Prime Rib.
Mrs. Max:  Oh, come on-I'm asking for a nice place for the both of us-maybe something like Applebee's?
Max Max:  No, it's House of Prime Rib or nothing else.

Obviously, I'm going to look like an unreasonable jerk. 

But let's take it a step further.

Mrs. Max : Fine, we'll go to that stupid place.  I'll have a side salad & some steamed veggies.
Max Max:  No, I want to go to Raw Bloody Steaks 'r Us.
Mrs. Max:  What?  But you wanted House moments ago?!?
Max Max:  No, I didn't.
Mrs. Max:  Yes, you did!  Look, here's the texts from you earlier!
Max Max:  Don't believe what I text.

I'm beyond being a jerk, right?

So how is this any better?