Free Market Solutions to the Housing Crisis: The Moral Case

In this series, we have examined many of the practical issues regarding the housing crisis. We have seen how market-oriented solutions can address many of the problems associated with that crisis. And while the free market is eminently practical when it comes to producing the values that humans want and need, the free market is also moral.

Morally, each individual is responsible for sustaining his own life. He must produce the values that his life requires. If he doesn’t produce those values and he chooses to continue living, he must obtain values produced by others. He can depend on charity or he can resort to crime. He can rely on the voluntary donations of others, or he can forcibly seize the values produced by others. This is true of every value that life requires, including housing.

When individuals disagree on a course of action, they have two alternatives. They can use persuasion to try to convince others to change their mind, or they can resort to force. They can use reason, or they can use a gun. They can respect others’ freedom of choice, or they can render the choices of others irrelevant.

In a free market, each individual is free to produce and trade the values of his choosing without government restrictions and controls. Developers are free to build a luxury apartment complex, a block of townhomes, or a single-family home. Individuals are free to accept a job at any wage they find acceptable. Individuals are free to enter the profession of their choosing. In respecting and protecting an individual’s freedom to act as he thinks best, a free market enables an individual to take responsibility for his own life. A free market protects an individual’s freedom to be moral.

Each of the solutions proposed in this series are founded on the premise that an individual should be free to choose the values he desires and the means for attaining those values, so long as he respects the freedom of others to do the same. The individual, not the group, is the standard of value.

The topics that we have examined are not isolated issues. They are a part of a broader context. Consequently, the proposed solutions are integrated—they take into account the full context.

Housing advocates place the group as the standard of value. The individual is subordinate to the group, and he must sacrifice his values and desires to the group. And those who do not do so willingly are forced to do so. Every proposal put forth by housing advocates ultimately resorts to forcing individuals to act contrary to their own judgment and choices.

If we truly want to help low-income families attain decent and affordable housing, then we must identify and promote policies that protect the freedom of individuals to pursue their own personal happiness. Only when this serves as our standard of value can individuals pursue and attain the values that they need and desire, including housing.