What do you think?
Rate this book
The Projects: A New History of Public Housing
How housing policy failed the people it was designed to help — and how to fix it
As the US struggles to provide affordable housing, millions of Americans live in deteriorating public housing projects, enduring the mistakes of past housing policy. In The Projects, Howard A. Husock explains how we got here, detailing the tragic rise and fall of public housing and the pitfalls of other subsidy programs. He takes us inside a progressive movement led by a group of New York City philanthropists, politicians, and business magnates who first championed public housing as a solution to urban blight. From First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt to the controversial city planner Robert Moses, many well-known historical figures made a convincing case for affordable housing in America.
Despite the movement’s lofty ideals, the creation of the Projects led to the destruction of low-income communities across the country. From the Hill District in Pittsburgh to Black Bottom in Detroit, predominantly Black neighborhoods were judged only by the quality of their housing. Husock looks beyond these neighborhoods’ physical conditions to their uncounted riches, from local artists like August Wilson to vital community institutions. As he shares residents’ stories, he honors what they crafted through their own plans, rather than those of city planners.
Husock traces the history of public housing to contemporary debates on the government’s role in the housing market. Through interviews with residents, he reveals how public housing transformed the lives of Americans and the physical faces of cities and towns. He ultimately critiques "repair and reform" efforts, making policy recommendations that address the core failings of public housing for the people it was once designed to help. Mapping out a better path for policy-makers, he lays a new foundation for upward mobility in America.
As the US struggles to provide affordable housing, millions of Americans live in deteriorating public housing projects, enduring the mistakes of past housing policy. In The Projects, Howard A. Husock explains how we got here, detailing the tragic rise and fall of public housing and the pitfalls of other subsidy programs. He takes us inside a progressive movement led by a group of New York City philanthropists, politicians, and business magnates who first championed public housing as a solution to urban blight. From First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt to the controversial city planner Robert Moses, many well-known historical figures made a convincing case for affordable housing in America.
Despite the movement’s lofty ideals, the creation of the Projects led to the destruction of low-income communities across the country. From the Hill District in Pittsburgh to Black Bottom in Detroit, predominantly Black neighborhoods were judged only by the quality of their housing. Husock looks beyond these neighborhoods’ physical conditions to their uncounted riches, from local artists like August Wilson to vital community institutions. As he shares residents’ stories, he honors what they crafted through their own plans, rather than those of city planners.
Husock traces the history of public housing to contemporary debates on the government’s role in the housing market. Through interviews with residents, he reveals how public housing transformed the lives of Americans and the physical faces of cities and towns. He ultimately critiques "repair and reform" efforts, making policy recommendations that address the core failings of public housing for the people it was once designed to help. Mapping out a better path for policy-makers, he lays a new foundation for upward mobility in America.
240 pages, Hardcover
Published September 9, 2025
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
September 9, 2025
Less a history and more political commentary, Howard Husock's The Projects: A New History of Public Housing narrates the rise, fall and cyclical nature of development and destruction of public housing in the United States from the twentieth century to the present.
First, the author Howard Huscok is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, a 'center-right" think tank located in Washington, D. C. It was founded in 1943 by an industrialist, and it's frequent foci of advocacy is for private enterprise, limited government and democratic capitalism. Thanks to its economic reach, it has played a prominent role in politics without a lot of overlap with influential or highly placed governmental roles(ex. Dick Cheney as VP for Bush). (1) Husock's had a lengthy career in the media, governmental roles, and directors or high positions in institutes or think tanks and his writing has appeared in many major newspapers and magazines.
In The Projects Husock begins with the Museum of Modern Art's 1934 Housing Exhibition, where the main ideas were popularized leading to the passage of the Housing Act of 1937. From there Husock shifts each chapter to focus on a different moment or location, sometimes shifting mid chapter.
Despite looking at almost 100 years of history, the book is a slim 196 pages of actual text, the remaining thirty pages given over to notes, bibliography and the normal back matter. Most of the chapters read as short essays, with some linkage to prior moments, but surprisingly little detail about the actual work to establish and construct the projects. Most of the supporting evidence or details are instead given over to the neighborhoods and areas lost and demolished to construct the projects, 'why' they failed or memories and experiences of the residents. A typical arc is wonder at the new opportunity, declining standards and up keep a few generations later and rampant crime and decay leading to eventual demolition with a possible new model rebirth.
Husock, of course, offers his own ways to fix projects and his suggestions line up with the AEI's advocacy areas. Less governmental oversight, private ownership of projects and the more plausible integration in to the local community.
It's not necessarily a bad book, but it feels very misleading in its presentation. It is a clear political work, but is being marketed and described as a history. Read with skepticism, for those looking for more informative studies of American public housing, try Lawrence Vale's(2) Purging the Poorest: Public Housing and the design Politics of Twice-Cleared Communities.
1. Peter Bondarenko. "American Enterprise Institute." Encyclopaedia Britannica. Last updated 9/06/2025. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Amer...
2. Lawrence Vale is Associate Dean and Ford Professor of Urban
Design and Planning at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).
I received a free digital version of this book via NetGalley thanks to the publisher.
First, the author Howard Huscok is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, a 'center-right" think tank located in Washington, D. C. It was founded in 1943 by an industrialist, and it's frequent foci of advocacy is for private enterprise, limited government and democratic capitalism. Thanks to its economic reach, it has played a prominent role in politics without a lot of overlap with influential or highly placed governmental roles(ex. Dick Cheney as VP for Bush). (1) Husock's had a lengthy career in the media, governmental roles, and directors or high positions in institutes or think tanks and his writing has appeared in many major newspapers and magazines.
In The Projects Husock begins with the Museum of Modern Art's 1934 Housing Exhibition, where the main ideas were popularized leading to the passage of the Housing Act of 1937. From there Husock shifts each chapter to focus on a different moment or location, sometimes shifting mid chapter.
Despite looking at almost 100 years of history, the book is a slim 196 pages of actual text, the remaining thirty pages given over to notes, bibliography and the normal back matter. Most of the chapters read as short essays, with some linkage to prior moments, but surprisingly little detail about the actual work to establish and construct the projects. Most of the supporting evidence or details are instead given over to the neighborhoods and areas lost and demolished to construct the projects, 'why' they failed or memories and experiences of the residents. A typical arc is wonder at the new opportunity, declining standards and up keep a few generations later and rampant crime and decay leading to eventual demolition with a possible new model rebirth.
Husock, of course, offers his own ways to fix projects and his suggestions line up with the AEI's advocacy areas. Less governmental oversight, private ownership of projects and the more plausible integration in to the local community.
It's not necessarily a bad book, but it feels very misleading in its presentation. It is a clear political work, but is being marketed and described as a history. Read with skepticism, for those looking for more informative studies of American public housing, try Lawrence Vale's(2) Purging the Poorest: Public Housing and the design Politics of Twice-Cleared Communities.
1. Peter Bondarenko. "American Enterprise Institute." Encyclopaedia Britannica. Last updated 9/06/2025. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Amer...
2. Lawrence Vale is Associate Dean and Ford Professor of Urban
Design and Planning at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).
I received a free digital version of this book via NetGalley thanks to the publisher.
May 8, 2025
Important History That Should Spark Needed Discussion. First up, I fully admit I am *far* from a public housing expert of any kind. I read books like this to learn about issues, not because I already know about them. The closest first hand knowledge I have of any of this is growing up in Exurban Atlanta and being generally aware of the Atlanta news... right as the Atlanta Projects were coming down and being rethought in the late 90s/ early 2000s around the time of the Olympic Games in Atlanta. And even then, even while working with a community service oriented collegiate honor society throughout my college years in this period, while we worked a lot with various "community revitalization" efforts, we never really worked in the Projects. Maybe some other Atlanta chapters did (Georgia Tech, Morehouse, Spelman, etc), but my school just in the suburbs (Kennesaw State) didn't.
All of that tangential personal history dealt with, the actual text here is great for sparking discussion on a few different, yet mostly related, topics... but the text here is also written almost as a textbook. It *feels* like something you would actually take a class on with this as the text and expect to be quizzed and tested about the various people and dates and movements and philosophies and such, yet it isn't as dry and formal as an actual academic paper tends to be. It is one of those University Press (NYU, in this case) titles that seems truly destined to be *most* read as a textbook, very nearly explicitly designed for exactly that... and yet it *should* be read by a much wider audience, particularly among the "leader" / "influencer" / "organizer" set, because it really does have some interesting things to say about the entire history up to 2023 or so - and, somewhat, of the potential future - of public housing in the United States.
Among the discussions relevant here are the Nazi-based origins of public housing as we now know it in the 2020s - literally, the leaders who first proposed the national laws that led to the Projects openly praised Adolf Hitler and many of his acolytes of the late 1920s/ early 1930s - when their antisemitism and violence was already clear, but well before their "final solution" began. How can we openly embrace the freedom and diversity we claim to hold so dear in the US in the 2020s while also advocating for ideas that are in places almost word for word out of Hitler's own mouth?
Another discussion point that Husock actually does a truly phenomenal job of exploring, even if a touch tangentially, is reparations. No, not for slavery - by and large, clear records of that don't exist and the people directly affected by it are long dead. HOWEVER, the black communities whose property was effectively stolen -via so-called "eminent domain", where the government can dictate the price it will pay you for your land - ... this happened in the 1930s and later. We have actual property records of those who owned that land at that time. While many of the owners themselves are now dead, as many of them would have been born around the turn of the 20th century, some of the later ones - the projects built more in the "golden era", as Husock describes it, of the 1950s and early 1960s... some of those original owners *may* still be alive. In either case, it is very likely that direct legal heirs of many of these people - their kids, grandkids, or even great-grandkids - are very much alive today and could be more adequately compensated for what was taken from their near ancestor. In theory, this could be seen as a just remediation for sins that while in the past, are still recent enough to bear accurate justification. Obviously, this would have to be more completely thought through and debated by those with far more knowledge of the specifics than I have, and likely far greater philosophers and ethicists than I will ever begin to approach claiming to be, but I do believe that Husock lays the basic groundwork for such conversations quite well in this text, and it should be read for this if for no other reason.
The final major discussion that Husock leads to here in the text is actually the very original discussion - what, if anything, should be done regarding public housing: Who should fund it, who should manage it, who should benefit from it, *is it possible* to truly benefit from it, under what conditions can it be successful, what is "successful public housing", etc?
Husock makes clear that in certain times and places - even in this Millennium - public housing *has* worked and *can* work - but he also makes equally clear that the realities of public housing have rarely lived up to the ideals and goals of its proponents.
Read this book. Even if you yourself happen to be a public housing expert, you're still likely to learn at leasta few things here. Write your own review of this book. And, perhaps more importantly, write to your governmental "leaders" at every level from your local City Councilman (as Housing Authorities are run by local leaders) all the way through your Congressman and even the President (as Federal policy is set in DC) and let them know your thoughts after reading it. Maybe, just maybe, we can actually get these discussions had in the manner than they are due.
Oh, and the star deduction? The bibliography clocked in at just 11% or so, which is short of even my recently relaxed standard of 15%.
Very much recommended.
All of that tangential personal history dealt with, the actual text here is great for sparking discussion on a few different, yet mostly related, topics... but the text here is also written almost as a textbook. It *feels* like something you would actually take a class on with this as the text and expect to be quizzed and tested about the various people and dates and movements and philosophies and such, yet it isn't as dry and formal as an actual academic paper tends to be. It is one of those University Press (NYU, in this case) titles that seems truly destined to be *most* read as a textbook, very nearly explicitly designed for exactly that... and yet it *should* be read by a much wider audience, particularly among the "leader" / "influencer" / "organizer" set, because it really does have some interesting things to say about the entire history up to 2023 or so - and, somewhat, of the potential future - of public housing in the United States.
Among the discussions relevant here are the Nazi-based origins of public housing as we now know it in the 2020s - literally, the leaders who first proposed the national laws that led to the Projects openly praised Adolf Hitler and many of his acolytes of the late 1920s/ early 1930s - when their antisemitism and violence was already clear, but well before their "final solution" began. How can we openly embrace the freedom and diversity we claim to hold so dear in the US in the 2020s while also advocating for ideas that are in places almost word for word out of Hitler's own mouth?
Another discussion point that Husock actually does a truly phenomenal job of exploring, even if a touch tangentially, is reparations. No, not for slavery - by and large, clear records of that don't exist and the people directly affected by it are long dead. HOWEVER, the black communities whose property was effectively stolen -via so-called "eminent domain", where the government can dictate the price it will pay you for your land - ... this happened in the 1930s and later. We have actual property records of those who owned that land at that time. While many of the owners themselves are now dead, as many of them would have been born around the turn of the 20th century, some of the later ones - the projects built more in the "golden era", as Husock describes it, of the 1950s and early 1960s... some of those original owners *may* still be alive. In either case, it is very likely that direct legal heirs of many of these people - their kids, grandkids, or even great-grandkids - are very much alive today and could be more adequately compensated for what was taken from their near ancestor. In theory, this could be seen as a just remediation for sins that while in the past, are still recent enough to bear accurate justification. Obviously, this would have to be more completely thought through and debated by those with far more knowledge of the specifics than I have, and likely far greater philosophers and ethicists than I will ever begin to approach claiming to be, but I do believe that Husock lays the basic groundwork for such conversations quite well in this text, and it should be read for this if for no other reason.
The final major discussion that Husock leads to here in the text is actually the very original discussion - what, if anything, should be done regarding public housing: Who should fund it, who should manage it, who should benefit from it, *is it possible* to truly benefit from it, under what conditions can it be successful, what is "successful public housing", etc?
Husock makes clear that in certain times and places - even in this Millennium - public housing *has* worked and *can* work - but he also makes equally clear that the realities of public housing have rarely lived up to the ideals and goals of its proponents.
Read this book. Even if you yourself happen to be a public housing expert, you're still likely to learn at leasta few things here. Write your own review of this book. And, perhaps more importantly, write to your governmental "leaders" at every level from your local City Councilman (as Housing Authorities are run by local leaders) all the way through your Congressman and even the President (as Federal policy is set in DC) and let them know your thoughts after reading it. Maybe, just maybe, we can actually get these discussions had in the manner than they are due.
Oh, and the star deduction? The bibliography clocked in at just 11% or so, which is short of even my recently relaxed standard of 15%.
Very much recommended.
December 10, 2025
I am so glad I first discovered Howard Husock and his work through a random podcast, because some of the reviews of this book are completely misleading.
Many of the people accusing him of ideological bias seem to be speaking from their own ideological bias. He acknowledges the original goals of government housing, the successes that did come from it, and the families whose lives genuinely improved. What impressed me most is that he does not shy away from the hard questions.
He writes about places I have personally lived and understands the complicated problems in public housing with surprising accuracy. Even better, he offers thoughtful solutions that are humane, pragmatic, and grounded in lived reality. My interest stayed strong because there is substance here. I have very little patience for books that only complain or posture without offering any realistic path forward. Those often end up in my metaphorical fireplace of frustration.
You can tell he has immersed himself in this field for decades. His knowledge of Jane Jacobs and other major urban thinkers is evident, but he also values the less popular research that connects policy to human outcomes.
I work in public housing and with homeless individuals, and I care deeply about the people impacted. Yet I have always wondered why we keep repeating the same failures. In one community where I worked, they built beautiful new subsidized apartments. The family I supported moved into a clean, well designed apartment in a fantastic location; they were among the first families. They were proud of it and took care of their unit, as well as their shared places, but became disgusted by how disgusting it became.
Within weeks the shared furniture was ruined by burns and urine and had to be thrown away, the computers were gone, and the game room was locked due to a shooting and sexual activity by unsupervised teens. The elevators have poop in them regularly, and litter is everywhere. The city is trying so hard to keep up, and they have huge crews which service it, but I wonder how we can do better.
Also, he is right that these policies often do not help those who need it the most, nor foster independence, which shouldn't be a dirty word due to identity politics these days. As someone who experienced rent-control New York City, I know many people who have spent many decades in these units, despite being among the top income earners in the country. It is a broken system and the people who suffer the most are the poorest.
I have seen this pattern again and again, and no one seems to know how to truly stop it.
Husock does not pretend these problems are simple, but he also refuses to surrender to cynicism. This book asks the tougher questions and searches for answers that respect both the people we serve and the communities they live in.
Many of the people accusing him of ideological bias seem to be speaking from their own ideological bias. He acknowledges the original goals of government housing, the successes that did come from it, and the families whose lives genuinely improved. What impressed me most is that he does not shy away from the hard questions.
He writes about places I have personally lived and understands the complicated problems in public housing with surprising accuracy. Even better, he offers thoughtful solutions that are humane, pragmatic, and grounded in lived reality. My interest stayed strong because there is substance here. I have very little patience for books that only complain or posture without offering any realistic path forward. Those often end up in my metaphorical fireplace of frustration.
You can tell he has immersed himself in this field for decades. His knowledge of Jane Jacobs and other major urban thinkers is evident, but he also values the less popular research that connects policy to human outcomes.
I work in public housing and with homeless individuals, and I care deeply about the people impacted. Yet I have always wondered why we keep repeating the same failures. In one community where I worked, they built beautiful new subsidized apartments. The family I supported moved into a clean, well designed apartment in a fantastic location; they were among the first families. They were proud of it and took care of their unit, as well as their shared places, but became disgusted by how disgusting it became.
Within weeks the shared furniture was ruined by burns and urine and had to be thrown away, the computers were gone, and the game room was locked due to a shooting and sexual activity by unsupervised teens. The elevators have poop in them regularly, and litter is everywhere. The city is trying so hard to keep up, and they have huge crews which service it, but I wonder how we can do better.
Also, he is right that these policies often do not help those who need it the most, nor foster independence, which shouldn't be a dirty word due to identity politics these days. As someone who experienced rent-control New York City, I know many people who have spent many decades in these units, despite being among the top income earners in the country. It is a broken system and the people who suffer the most are the poorest.
I have seen this pattern again and again, and no one seems to know how to truly stop it.
Husock does not pretend these problems are simple, but he also refuses to surrender to cynicism. This book asks the tougher questions and searches for answers that respect both the people we serve and the communities they live in.
May 17, 2025
Book Review: The Projects: A New History of Public Housing by Howard A. Husock
A Nuanced Exploration of Public Housing’s Evolution and Challenges
Howard A. Husock’s The Projects: A New History of Public Housing is a meticulously researched and thought-provoking examination of one of America’s most complex social endeavors. By tracing the history of public housing from its idealistic origins to its current state, Husock sheds light on the unintended consequences, societal shifts, and policy decisions that have shaped this critical aspect of urban life. The result is a narrative that is as much about the people who lived in these projects as it is about the policies that governed them.
Key Strengths
-Historical Depth: Husock’s thorough research provides a rich historical context, making the book an invaluable resource for understanding the evolution of public housing.
-Analytical Insight: The author critically examines the social and economic factors that influenced public housing, offering a balanced perspective on its successes and failures.
-Thematic Relevance: The book resonates with contemporary discussions on affordable housing, urban development, and social welfare, making it highly relevant to current debates.
Potential Considerations
-Pacing: Some readers may find the detailed historical sections slow, though they lay the groundwork for the book’s broader arguments.
-Policy Focus: While Husock provides a comprehensive analysis, some readers might crave more concrete solutions or policy recommendations.
Score Breakdown (Out of 5)
-Historical Insight: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ (5/5) – A masterful excavation of public housing’s past, revealing its complexities.
-Analytical Rigor: ⭐⭐⭐⭐ (4/5) – Husock’s analysis is thorough and thought-provoking.
-Relevance to Contemporary Issues: ⭐⭐⭐⭐✨ (4.5/5) – The book is a timely contribution to ongoing debates.
-Narrative Flow: ⭐⭐⭐✨ (3.5/5) – While informative, some sections feel dense.
Overall: ⭐⭐⭐⭐ (4/5) – A blueprint for understanding the tangled threads of public housing’s history.
Ideal Audience
-Scholars and researchers in urban studies, sociology, and history.
-Policymakers and advocates for affordable housing and urban development and community planning.
-Anyone interested in the complexities of urban America and the role of public housing.
Gratitude
Thank you to NetGalley and Howard A. Husock for the advance review copy. The Projects: A New History of Public Housing is a compelling and insightful work that challenges readers to rethink the narratives surrounding public housing.
Note: Review based on an ARC; minor refinements may appear in the final edition.
A Nuanced Exploration of Public Housing’s Evolution and Challenges
Howard A. Husock’s The Projects: A New History of Public Housing is a meticulously researched and thought-provoking examination of one of America’s most complex social endeavors. By tracing the history of public housing from its idealistic origins to its current state, Husock sheds light on the unintended consequences, societal shifts, and policy decisions that have shaped this critical aspect of urban life. The result is a narrative that is as much about the people who lived in these projects as it is about the policies that governed them.
Key Strengths
-Historical Depth: Husock’s thorough research provides a rich historical context, making the book an invaluable resource for understanding the evolution of public housing.
-Analytical Insight: The author critically examines the social and economic factors that influenced public housing, offering a balanced perspective on its successes and failures.
-Thematic Relevance: The book resonates with contemporary discussions on affordable housing, urban development, and social welfare, making it highly relevant to current debates.
Potential Considerations
-Pacing: Some readers may find the detailed historical sections slow, though they lay the groundwork for the book’s broader arguments.
-Policy Focus: While Husock provides a comprehensive analysis, some readers might crave more concrete solutions or policy recommendations.
Score Breakdown (Out of 5)
-Historical Insight: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ (5/5) – A masterful excavation of public housing’s past, revealing its complexities.
-Analytical Rigor: ⭐⭐⭐⭐ (4/5) – Husock’s analysis is thorough and thought-provoking.
-Relevance to Contemporary Issues: ⭐⭐⭐⭐✨ (4.5/5) – The book is a timely contribution to ongoing debates.
-Narrative Flow: ⭐⭐⭐✨ (3.5/5) – While informative, some sections feel dense.
Overall: ⭐⭐⭐⭐ (4/5) – A blueprint for understanding the tangled threads of public housing’s history.
Ideal Audience
-Scholars and researchers in urban studies, sociology, and history.
-Policymakers and advocates for affordable housing and urban development and community planning.
-Anyone interested in the complexities of urban America and the role of public housing.
Gratitude
Thank you to NetGalley and Howard A. Husock for the advance review copy. The Projects: A New History of Public Housing is a compelling and insightful work that challenges readers to rethink the narratives surrounding public housing.
Note: Review based on an ARC; minor refinements may appear in the final edition.
June 13, 2025
The Projects have come to be known as the home for those in poverty, full of drugs and gangs. However, in this book, Husock discusses the idealistic start of federally-funded housing and the dream of it being a stepping stone for people to launch themselves into a more affluent and financially secure future. Unfortunately, these plans were flawed from the start, as the building of the Projects first meant clearing out the “slums” which included entire families, businesses, churches and social groups. The buildings weren’t well-made or well-maintained, and 50 years after they were built, many of them had already been torn down. What I liked about Husock’s approach to his writing was that he not only discussed the start of the projects, where they ended up and how they got there, but he didn’t lose track of the very real humans that had to navigate losing their homes in the slums and having to start over. Housing is, at its core, a very human-centric issue and we must not forget about the people that live, raise families and try to form a community in this environment.
December 24, 2025
A bit dull but I understand public housing a lot more than I did before. This was a good read to learn a lot quickly but did feel a bit of information overload at times.
November 9, 2025
This is an atrocious book written by an author with malicious intent.
Within just the introduction, I was already in disbelief at the number of factual and grammatical errors. For example, Husock claims that the New York City Housing Authority is the largest landlord in the country with 161k units owned. In reality, the largest landlord is the private equity group Blackstone with over 300k units owned. Of course, this fact does not align with Husock's clear ideological slant. The pro-corporate and conservative biases of the author are impossible to ignore. In the final chapter, he openly reveals his view that "failures [of public housing] can be seen as inherent in the idea of government ownership and management."
As many charlatans do, Husock weaponizes emotionally gripping anecdotes to support his ideological outlook. He simultaneously critiques public housing that was built in areas where cheap private housing was torn down as amounting to forcible relocation, yet critiques public housing built in previously undeveloped areas as "artificial." Husock conveniently fails to mention that the requirements to tear down one unit of private housing for every public housing unit built were put in place at the insistence of private builders. He goes so far as to associate the idea of public housing with Adolf Hitler entirely because one German city planner was included in a 1934 exhibition about public housing. Public housing's origins stretch far before this exhibition, and successful public housing projects have primarily been implemented by social democratic and socialist-led governments. Furthermore, Hitler's sole interest in public housing was to more efficiently segregate Germans along racial and ethnic lines. Ghettos in Warsaw and Lyov, for example, were deliberately build to separate Jews from the rest of the population and ensure horrific living conditions.
Public housing in the U.S. has been stunted since its inception due to severely restricted funding. The corrupt corporate politicians in America are to blame, as we continue to send unlimited funds to private military contractors and innumerable conflicts abroad rather than investing in the American people. Meanwhile, cities like Vienna and Copenhagen consistently rank among the happiest cities in the world, and both have extensively built and maintained public housing. 65% of Vienna's residents live in beautiful public housing units, and the average rent for these residents is between 500 and 600 euros.
Howard A. Husock does not acknowledge the real reasons for the housing affordability crisis in America as he works for the American Enterprise Institute, a corporate and conservative think tank attempting to eliminate all social programs by promoting the cult of private solutions. The American Enterprise Institute is well-known for indoctrinating Americans with the idea that private solutions are always favorable to solve problems of all sorts, despite the obvious failures of private ownership in the fields of housing, medicine, energy, and more.
Some of the AEI's greatest hits:
Pushing for the Iraq War!
https://responsiblestatecraft.org/202...
Shilling for payday lenders!
https://theintercept.com/2015/10/20/r...
Putting Harlan Crow, the Nazi who showered Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas with luxurious gifts, on the board of trustees!
https://www.propublica.org/article/cl...
https://www.aei.org/about/board-of-tr...
Critiquing the military-industrial complex budget as too low, and calling for increased funding for weapons systems built by Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman (both of which fund AEI)!
https://jacobin.com/2023/05/military-...
My suggestions for the author: never write another book, and don't bother publishing this one.
Within just the introduction, I was already in disbelief at the number of factual and grammatical errors. For example, Husock claims that the New York City Housing Authority is the largest landlord in the country with 161k units owned. In reality, the largest landlord is the private equity group Blackstone with over 300k units owned. Of course, this fact does not align with Husock's clear ideological slant. The pro-corporate and conservative biases of the author are impossible to ignore. In the final chapter, he openly reveals his view that "failures [of public housing] can be seen as inherent in the idea of government ownership and management."
As many charlatans do, Husock weaponizes emotionally gripping anecdotes to support his ideological outlook. He simultaneously critiques public housing that was built in areas where cheap private housing was torn down as amounting to forcible relocation, yet critiques public housing built in previously undeveloped areas as "artificial." Husock conveniently fails to mention that the requirements to tear down one unit of private housing for every public housing unit built were put in place at the insistence of private builders. He goes so far as to associate the idea of public housing with Adolf Hitler entirely because one German city planner was included in a 1934 exhibition about public housing. Public housing's origins stretch far before this exhibition, and successful public housing projects have primarily been implemented by social democratic and socialist-led governments. Furthermore, Hitler's sole interest in public housing was to more efficiently segregate Germans along racial and ethnic lines. Ghettos in Warsaw and Lyov, for example, were deliberately build to separate Jews from the rest of the population and ensure horrific living conditions.
Public housing in the U.S. has been stunted since its inception due to severely restricted funding. The corrupt corporate politicians in America are to blame, as we continue to send unlimited funds to private military contractors and innumerable conflicts abroad rather than investing in the American people. Meanwhile, cities like Vienna and Copenhagen consistently rank among the happiest cities in the world, and both have extensively built and maintained public housing. 65% of Vienna's residents live in beautiful public housing units, and the average rent for these residents is between 500 and 600 euros.
Howard A. Husock does not acknowledge the real reasons for the housing affordability crisis in America as he works for the American Enterprise Institute, a corporate and conservative think tank attempting to eliminate all social programs by promoting the cult of private solutions. The American Enterprise Institute is well-known for indoctrinating Americans with the idea that private solutions are always favorable to solve problems of all sorts, despite the obvious failures of private ownership in the fields of housing, medicine, energy, and more.
Some of the AEI's greatest hits:
Pushing for the Iraq War!
https://responsiblestatecraft.org/202...
Shilling for payday lenders!
https://theintercept.com/2015/10/20/r...
Putting Harlan Crow, the Nazi who showered Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas with luxurious gifts, on the board of trustees!
https://www.propublica.org/article/cl...
https://www.aei.org/about/board-of-tr...
Critiquing the military-industrial complex budget as too low, and calling for increased funding for weapons systems built by Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman (both of which fund AEI)!
https://jacobin.com/2023/05/military-...
My suggestions for the author: never write another book, and don't bother publishing this one.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews