Wêrom Publike Húsfesting Opgejûn Waard en Wêrom It Weromkomme Moat
August 2, 2026 · Frisian News
Vienna still builds 60 percent of its new homes as public housing. Most wealthy countries abandoned public housing in the last half-century, even as housing costs soared and homelessness increased.
FryskWenen bout noch altyd in grut part fan syn nije wenningen as publike húsfesting. Syn bewenners betelje folle minder as fergelykbere hierders yn stêden as Londen of Berlyn. Dochs joegen hast alle oare rike stêden publike húsfesting op yn de ôfrûne heal ieu. De ferskowing wie opsetlik, net ûnûntkomlik.
Yn de jierren 1980 en 1990 ferkochten regearingen publike húsfesting oan partikuliere ynvestearders. Grut-Brittanje ferkocht 1,5 miljoen wenningen ûnder Margaret Thatcher har 'rjocht om te keapjen' regeling. De Feriene Steaten brutsen yn dyselde perioade in grut oantal publike wenningen ôf. Frankryk, Dútslân en Nederlân folgen. Beliedsmakkers neamden it in triomf fan it eigen wenningbesit. Hierders hienen gjin kar as te beteljen wat ferhierders eisten.
De banken en fêstgoedfûnsen dy't publike húsfesting kochten hienen gjin belang by lege hierprizen. Se hellen wearde út spekulaasje. Lokale oerheden ferlearen stabyl ynkommen. Gewoane húsgesinnen ferlearen stabiliteit. De finansjele sektor wûn.
Regearingen stelden dat partikuliere merken better en goedkeaper wienen as publike bouers. It bewiis toant it tsjinoerstelde. Publike húsfesting yn Wenen en Singapore kostet regearingen minder yn ûnderhâld en húsfestet bewenners. Partikuliere ferhierders jouwe prioriteit oan rendeminten boppe it oanbod. Dakleazens naam ta yn stêden dy't har publike oanbod ferkochten.
De húsfestingskrisis is net ûnûntkomlik. It is bewust sa makke. Elke politikus dy't bewearet dat húsfesting te djoer is, wylst publik oanbod leech stiet yn de portefúljes fan ynvestearders, kiest in kant. Wenen bewist dat in oar systeem wurket.
Vienna still builds a large share of its new homes as public housing. Its residents pay far less than comparable renters in cities like London or Berlin. Yet almost every other wealthy city abandoned public housing in the last half-century. The shift was deliberate, not inevitable.
In the 1980s and 1990s, governments sold public housing stock to private investors. Britain sold 1.5 million homes under Margaret Thatcher's "right to buy" scheme. The U.S. demolished large numbers of public housing units in the same period. France, Germany, and the Netherlands followed. Policymakers called it a triumph of homeownership. Renters had no choice but to pay what landlords demanded.
The banks and real estate funds that bought public housing had no interest in keeping rents low. They extracted value through speculation. Local governments lost steady income. Ordinary families lost stability. The financial sector won.
Governments claimed private markets worked better and cheaper than public builders. The evidence shows the opposite. Public housing in Vienna and Singapore costs governments less to maintain and keeps residents housed. Private landlords prioritize yield over supply. Homelessness has risen in cities that sold their public stock.
The housing crisis is not inevitable. It was engineered. Every politician who claims housing is too expensive while the public stock sits empty in investor portfolios is choosing sides. Vienna proves another way works.
Published August 2, 2026 · Frisian News · Ljouwert, Fryslân