I am a retired senior, and my sole source of income is my monthly Social Security check. I rent an apartment on the South side of town, and I pay probably less than any of the rest of you because I cannot afford to pay much more. But I do not live in low-income housing, and this is NOT a quibble. Low-income housing is government subsidized housing. The reason that I can pay so little to rent my apartment is manifold: I live far from the cultural centers of town, I do not live very close to any big box stores (where I typically shop due to their low prices), I am not close to any hospital, and I have no luxuries. If some low-income housing was less desirable than my apartment, it would cost less to rent than my apartment without a government subsidy. So, by definition, low-income housing – housing that is partly paid for by the government – is more desirable than my place but costs its tenants less than what I pay for my place. Which means, partly, that someone who could afford the rent of a place more desirable than mine is losing out to someone who cannot afford the rent. And that is a solution that no classical economist would favor.
