You are on page 1of 4

Erick Bravo

Ms. Rosenberg
English 101/101W
The article The Eviction Economy, Mathew Desmond argues that expanding the
housing voucher program to all eligible low income people would change the face of poverty in
the United States. The first reason why I agree with the author that a universal housing voucher
program would fundamentally change the face of poverty in the United States is because even
though it will cost money, the federal government will also be saving money in other areas like
medical care and homelessness. Another reason why I agree with the author is because if people
who are eligible for vouchers, actually end up getting housing assistance, than they will have
more money to spend on food, clothing, or school supplies, and it will help businesses. The third
reason why I agree with the author is because it will reduce the chance of people feeling
discriminated against. If one out of four people can get housing assistance, than the other three
quarters should get it too.

Every human being should get the same benefits for housing assistance as others. The
government should take a stand on this issue that is leaving people homeless because they did
not get chosen to receive housing assistance. This is a joke; the Government cannot play with
peoples future like this. Desmond states This solution is not as expensive as we might think. If
we did nothing to make the voucher program more cost-effective- and there is much we could do
on this score-expanding housing vouchers to all renting families below the 30th percentile in

median income for their area would likely require an additionally $22.5 billion a year. The actual
figure is likely to be somewhat less, as the estimate does not account for potential savings in the
form of reducing homelessness, lowering healthcare costs and curbing other costly consequences
of the affordable housing crisis, (Desmond A5). People often do not have health insurance and
they dont go to the hospital as a result. It will also reduce homelessness in the country. The
Government and the people who want housing assistance should agree that the only way the
Government to give housing assistance is if people are willing to pay at least 30% of their
income for rent. Elderly people should be able to get housing assistance for free.

When people have enough money for themselves and their families, there is less
suffering. Desmond correctly argues if people receive housing assistance they will have more
money to buy necessities, such as food, clothes and shoes, or even better, it can help them pursue
an education. The author stated Eligible families would dedicate 30 percent of their income to
rent, allowing them to pursue education, start a savings account and buy enough food,
(Desmond A5). The rent in Connecticut is expensive, which leads to families to suffer from
hunger, or to wear the same clothes every day. When people live by themselves, the same thing
can apply. Education is a big key to success and some people just have to stop their education
because they do not have enough money. If they do have some money left after the 30 percent
they had to pay for rent, then they will have money to spend on things they need. It will also help
businesses grow. Daniel Hertz in the article Expanding Housing Assistance to the Poor and
Middle Class Is Actually Easier Than You Think, states that there are a million different housing
assistance programs but all of them are limited. Housing is very different. There are a million of
different housing assistance programs, but all of them are quite limited in scope, (Hertz)

Discriminating against people can lead to people feeling bad. If people of any kind get
housing assistance, meaning people with disabilities, race, color or religious beliefs, everyone
will start to treat everyone else fairly in society. In the article called Public Policy and Legal
Advocacy, the author talked about how people with disabilities often face discrimination when
seeking housing assistance. We need to stop this. The author stated people with disabilities all
too often face discrimination when seeking housing, (Hertz). Why discriminate others instead of
helping them. African Americans have been denied the right to live in certain white
neighborhoods in the past just because they were black.
However, some people would just want to take advantage of the housing voucher
program and would not want to get a job because they know that the Government would provide
them with housing assistance. Another lie they can say is that they do not earn a decent amount
of money in a week. A good background check can be a good solution to make sure people have
a job so they can at least give 30% of their earnings to pay for rent and that way the Government
does not have a problem providing to them housing assistance.
In conclusion, only if the Government accepts to expand the housing voucher program, in
people who are in need of a home will be glad to get one. Even though the voucher program will
cost a lot of money, there is going to be a big raise in the economy. Everyone will learn in some
way to start treating everyone equally as the face of poverty in the United States changes. More
and more people will have money to spend on food, clothing, and other necessities. Finally,
fewer people will feel discriminated against.

Bonus question on Ethos, Pathos, and Logos

Ethos- Mathew Desmond, who is a sociologist at Harvard University, and the author of
Evicted: Poverty and Profit in the American City talked from his own stand point since he also
lived in a trailer once. He stated a fact when he said that one out of four people who are eligible
for housing assistance ends up receiving it. He mentions political people like Hillary Clinton and
Paul Ryan.
Pathos- He tells a sad reality that can make anyone sad. For example, he mentions how
after paying her rent, Larraine was only left with $5.00 for the day. This is sad because it shows
how expensive rent can be for anyone, and sometimes people cant afford to pay the full amount.
The result for people after they pay their rent is people being left with no money at all.
Logos- I think he used logos when he mentions about the history of what happens when
wages are raised and when he talked in the political part. For example, when the author stated
Throughout our history, wage gains won by workers through organized protest were quickly
absorbed by rising rents. As industrial capitalists tried to put down the strikes, landlords cheered
workers on. It is no different today.