Cohousing-L Mailing List: Elitist lifestyle or public good?

[K. Collins & friends (greenmac]

Rob said:

>....affordable housing. It is not a problem caused by cohousing.
> Home ownership will NEVER be available to
>everyone in America. Never has been before, can't imagine it ever will be.

That doesn't sound right to me, and it seems odd  to hear it coming from
you, Rob. It is easy enough to agree with the statement, if you mean that a
home for everyone seems impossible, or is impossilbe within the world as it
is now organized. But such impossiblities are the grist of the movement to
transform daily life. If affordable housing is impossilbe then so is
universal health insurance, and practically everything else we hope for.
With a reordering of priorities, couldn't we, collectively, solve the
housing crisis for everyone? Would the problem never yield to our effort?

Rob continues:

>A  very key and very understated defining characteristic of cohousing is that
>there is individual ownership of homes. (or shares).  I think if you remove
>this, you will first lose bank support, then you will lose most public
>support. The number of people that have hundreds of thousands of dollars to
>give away to communities are pretty small, like I can count them on the
>fingers of one hand.
>
>I do agree that cohousing movement should support efforts by groups that want
>to make home ownership available to those who are close but not quite
>available. That's pretty much been accomplished in some places. To try and
>make it a goal of the movement to solve the affordable housing problems of
>America would doom cohousing faster than you can say equity building.

I contend that the moment you attempt to be a community, you undertake all
the dreams of humanity. You may decide, for tactical reasons, to put those
dreams aside. But they are still there, and they will not go away. They
have certainly persisted on this list! Cohousing is not a single movement,
alone against the world. It is part of a larger movement, and there are
many strands, such as the movement for cooperative work (cowork?) and
sustainable development. Somewhere these strands will combine to offer a
more holistic, practical alternative to the current practice of cohousing.
That does not detract from the present moment when cohousing has the
support of the existing banking system and begins to build somethng that is
recognisable as community, however partial.

If cohousing and cowork combine would this not be a significant step toward
affordability? Then an individual would not be left totally to his or her
own devices to get a bank loan. There might come a day when there is a
powerful banking force under the control of the cooperative movement.  If
the defense budget is dismantled (and this will have to happen eventually)
perhaps government itself will care enough to help create housing and
cooperative communities for everyone.

We are, of course, talking about more than a little change in attitude by
those who are governed. But that is what bothers me about your statement,
Rob. It is too accepting of the real politic, the prevailing attitudes
which limit our options so much. That is not the feeling I get form most of
your posts. Do you believe that this insufferable ogranization of society
will continue indefinitely? If so, even cohousing is a pathetic whimper in
the midst of an endless nightmare.

king



King Collins
296 Gardens Ave.
Ukiah, CA 95482
Phone 707 463-5517 or 707 462-4543
Fax: 707  462-6873
email: greenmac [at] pacific.net