Building Low-Cost Housing and Reducing High Interest Rates: An Analysis of Trump's Measures to Address the U.S. Housing Crisis

The U.S. housing market is deeply mired in multiple dilemmas, with intertwined issues such as housing shortages, soaring costs, and class divisions directly impacting social stability. Faced with this severe crisis, the Trump administration has proposed a series of response measures. Behind these policies lie both political calculations and short-term demands, yet they cannot conceal the neglect of long-term social welfare. This article will delve into the core issues of the U.S. housing crisis, Trump's response strategies and their potential impacts, and explore the deeper roots of the crisis and possible solutions. The U.S. housing market is deeply mired in multiple dilemmas, with intertwined issues such as housing shortages, soaring costs, and class divisions directly impacting social stability. Faced with this severe crisis, the Trump administration has proposed a series of response measures. Behind these policies lie both political calculations and short-term demands, yet they cannot conceal the neglect of long-term social welfare. This article will delve into the core issues of the U.S. housing crisis, Trump's response strategies and their potential impacts, and explore the deeper roots of the crisis and possible solutions.

I. The Current State and Core Issues of the U.S. Housing Market

Housing shortage and the distorted evolution of housing supply allocation.

Housing shortage is one of the core contradictions in the current U.S. housing market. In response to this issue, the solution of dividing large houses into smaller units for rent has been widely discussed. Notably, Airbnb's business model aligns with this approach. The platform has evolved from a simple travel accommodation service provider into a massive real estate operation entity. Its core advantage lies in the flexible control of property listings—it can freely decide to rent out or withdraw them based on market demand, thereby ensuring stable cash flow. This also reflects the resource allocation logic of the U.S. housing rental market from a different perspective.

The core obstruction in affordable housing construction: the dilemma of zoning laws.

The booming housing market has made the qualification for constructing affordable housing and low-rent apartments a focal point of intense competition among various parties. The key to obtaining this qualification lies in whether one can circumvent the strict restrictions of zoning laws. In terms of funding sources, the construction of affordable housing primarily relies on subsidies from federal and local housing authorities, which also explains why the U.S. government needs to continuously invest substantial funds in the field of housing subsidies. The booming housing market has made the qualification for constructing affordable housing and low-rent apartments a focal point of intense competition among various parties. The key to obtaining this qualification lies in whether one can circumvent the strict restrictions of zoning laws. In terms of funding sources, the construction of affordable housing primarily relies on subsidies from federal and local housing authorities, which also explains why the U.S. government needs to continuously invest substantial funds in the field of housing subsidies.

The root cause of persistently high administrative and planning costs.

The healthy development of the U.S. housing market is also constrained by high administrative and planning costs. The accumulation of budgeting, urban planning, legal enforcement, and management expenses at various levels results in nationwide housing-related administrative costs reaching as high as $40 billion annually. Tracing back to the source, the root of this problem lies in the current intricate and complex zoning laws across various regions in the United States. The planning and coordination work required has completely exceeded the scope of what can be efficiently managed by human resources, creating administrative barriers that are difficult to break through. The healthy development of the U.S. housing market is also constrained by high administrative and planning costs. The accumulation of budgeting, urban planning, legal enforcement, and management expenses at various levels results in nationwide housing-related administrative costs reaching as high as $40 billion annually. Tracing back to the source, the root of this problem lies in the current intricate and complex zoning laws across various regions in the United States. The planning and coordination work required has completely exceeded the scope of what can be efficiently managed by human resources, creating administrative barriers that are difficult to break through.

Comparative Analysis of the Roles of Market Entities and the Subprime Crisis

The current U.S. housing market exhibits a frenzy of widespread participation: real estate developers, homebuyers, housing authorities are all reveling in the market, and even professionals from non-real estate industries are trying to get a piece of the pie. Compared to the subprime mortgage crisis period, the current market shows significant differences:

During the subprime mortgage era, zoning regulations were relatively lenient, NIMBY movements had not yet led to the disappearance of affordable and comfortable housing in cities, and a large number of low-income individuals acquired their first homes through subprime mortgages. The level of chaos and segregation between communities was far lower than it is today. In the current market, the locations of high-quality housing are fixed and increasingly scarce and expensive. This phenomenon is related to the asset inflation among the wealthy caused by the Biden administration's quantitative easing policies, as well as the irrational surge in housing prices during economic boom cycles (if the needs of the poor are overlooked), placing significant home-buying pressure on young people entering society.

Social despair and political turmoil triggered by the housing crisis.

The ongoing deterioration of the housing issue has triggered a severe crisis in social sentiment, among which young Americans are more desperate than young Chinese. This sense of despair has become a significant backdrop for various socio-political upheavals: radical actions in the Free Palestine movement (such as throwing Molotov cocktails at officials' residences), assassination attempts targeting Trump and Chuck Schumer, among others, are closely linked to the survival pressures brought about by the housing crisis. The core argument is that housing is the most fundamental human survival need, and the continuous escalation of the housing crisis has directly undermined the stability of American society.

II. Trump's Response Policies and Potential Impacts

Personnel adjustments and the policy of tightening loan support.

The Trump administration's primary measure to address the housing crisis was personnel arrangements, appointing a new Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency. The core function of the Federal Housing Finance Agency is to provide financing support for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and to set the mortgage quotas they must purchase, targeting low- and middle-income borrowers. Based on this function, Trump's new policy direction is clear: through the new director, promote reducing the number and total volume of affordable housing loans for low- and middle-income borrowers. The Trump administration's primary measure to address the housing crisis was personnel arrangements, appointing a new Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency. The core function of the Federal Housing Finance Agency is to provide financing support for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and to set the mortgage quotas they must purchase, targeting low- and middle-income borrowers. Based on this function, Trump's new policy direction is clear: through the new director, promote reducing the number and total volume of affordable housing loans for low- and middle-income borrowers.

The core objectives of this policy are twofold: first, to compel large real estate developers to abandon the **strategy of hoarding properties and holding back sales**, thereby releasing the accumulated land and housing inventory onto the market to alleviate housing shortages; second, to prevent Freddie Mac from triggering a new wave of subprime mortgage crisis due to excessively high debt ratios. However, critics point out that this policy will directly lead to increased difficulty for low-income groups in obtaining housing funds, making affordable housing less economical, and ultimately shifting the cost burden onto ordinary consumers.

Strategic considerations for proposing the declaration of a "national housing emergency."

Trump plans to announce a National Housing Emergency in October. According to **the "National Emergencies Act of 1976," the President can, after declaring an emergency, bypass Congress to implement a series of powerful measures**—Trump has previously used this law to address major issues such as immigration and trade wars (e.g., imposing high tariffs). This move signifies that Trump is elevating the housing issue to the highest national priority, potentially leading to a series of unconventional policy measures, demonstrating a forceful intervention in the housing market.

Potential Policy Initiatives in a State of Emergency.

If a national housing emergency is declared, the Trump administration may introduce three core measures: First, pressure the Federal Reserve to lower interest rates, using high interest rates harming the housing market as an excuse, and leveraging emergency powers to force the Fed to quickly cut rates, thereby reducing mortgage rates—currently, the absolute burden of U.S. mortgage payments ranks first globally, making rate cuts a key demand to alleviate public pressure on home purchases; second, lower construction standards, redefining material and raw material standards for affordable housing, essentially reducing construction standards to cut building costs. This move has been criticized by outsiders as promoting **low-standard housing**, posing serious safety risks; third, reduce tariffs, exempting tariffs on some imported building materials to lower input construction costs.

The core objective of this series of measures is to address the issue of excessively high construction costs for affordable housing and to break the deadlock where developers are unwilling to participate in construction due to lack of profitability. The core objective of this series of measures is to address the issue of excessively high construction costs for affordable housing and to break the deadlock where developers are unwilling to participate in construction due to lack of profitability.

Dual Evaluation of Trump's Housing Policies

From a political perspective, Trump's housing policy is highly astute: On one hand, much like the issue of combating crime, as long as **performative actions are taken on housing and some results are achieved, it can quickly win the support of people troubled by high housing prices; on the other hand, lowering standards to construct low-standard housing has short-term economic rationality**, because related safety crises are unlikely to erupt during his term; additionally, blaming the Federal Reserve for high mortgage interest rates, pressuring for interest rate cuts to alleviate government debt pressure, while the potential inflation and depreciation of dollar assets that may arise from rate cuts are set aside as non-priority issues.

However, this policy carries significant hidden risks: it essentially shifts the burden of housing shortages onto low-income groups and may foster a distorted public opinion that attributes the inability to afford low-standard housing to a lack of personal effort. It is a typical short-sighted act that prioritizes short-term political gains over long-term social welfare.

III. In-depth Analysis and Fundamental Solutions to the U.S. Housing Crisis

The Structural Roots of Crisis: Resource Misallocation and Institutional Rigidity

The root cause of the housing crisis in the United States is not simply a shortage of houses, but a lack of quality housing—specifically, housing that is well-located and affordable. At a deeper level, the loss of imagination in urban land and spatial planning, coupled with the massive approval processes faced by new area development—especially environmental approvals and lawsuits from various citizen groups—severely constrains the housing supply capacity.

Among these, the rigid interpretation of private land ownership serves as the core obstacle: existing landowners (including environmental groups, farmers, etc.), in order to prevent the devaluation of their own assets, will strongly obstruct the development of new housing projects. These groups happen to be the core political base of both major parties in the United States, making any reforms that touch upon the land system extremely difficult to advance, thereby creating a **vicious cycle of entrenched interests—stalled reforms—worsening crisis**.

Radical Solution: Construction of Satellite Cities and Institutional Breakthroughs

The best solution to solve the U.S. housing crisis is believed to be the construction of satellite cities around major metropolitan areas. There have been successful precedents in U.S. history where satellite cities formed spontaneously (such as the development of New York's five boroughs and the driving role of Tom Cotton). As long as satellite cities can be built and related industrial support facilities are improved, the current housing shortage problem will be readily resolved. The best solution to solve the U.S. housing crisis is believed to be the construction of satellite cities around major metropolitan areas. There have been successful precedents in U.S. history where satellite cities formed spontaneously (such as the development of New York's five boroughs and the driving role of Tom Cotton). As long as satellite cities can be built and related industrial support facilities are improved, the current housing shortage problem will be readily resolved.

Specifically, new cities could be planned and constructed in the **Sun Belt South or regions with fewer natural disasters (such as the Mississippi Delta). However, the key prerequisite for this plan is the necessity to thoroughly reform environmental regulations and landowner protection clauses**, even requiring reinterpretation of land privatization through conceptual reshaping or redefinition to concentrate administrative resources in promoting satellite city development. In terms of political feasibility, this would require a strong leader **willing to challenge core interest groups** (environmental groups as the left-wing voting base, farmers as the right-wing voting base). Yet, given the **extreme polarization** in current American politics, neither party dares to confront these core interest groups, making the implementation of the satellite city plan highly challenging.

Critical Reflection on the American Political System

The core governance dilemma currently facing the United States is that administrative resources cannot be centralized, which makes it difficult to effectively address a series of specific issues such as prices, inflation, debt, and housing. Some even argue controversially that the U.S. needs a **strongman-style leader** capable of effectively purging political opponents to break the current political deadlock, consolidate efforts, advance reforms, and solve problems. Whether it is Trump purging the left or the Democrats purging Trump, from a technical perspective, both could help restore the government's administrative execution capacity.

If this stalemate cannot be broken, American society will continue to decline amid ongoing nonviolent political confrontations and internal strife between the left and right, ultimately risking a total crisis that could erupt in the form of **civil war or constitutional collapse**.

IV. Summary and Conclusion

Exploring Solutions to Social Dilemmas

Regarding the path forward for American society, some opinions straightforwardly state: Do Americans want a better life? Wanting a better life requires supporting class struggle. However, this demand carries potential risks—if the current conflict between the left and right cannot be moderated, the ultimate outcome will be society exhausting itself in intense clashes until mutual destruction.

For the United States, the optimal solution might be the emergence of a strong leader (regardless of party) who can prioritize the public interest and integrate the strengths of all parties, leverage executive power to coordinate various factions, drive the implementation of key reforms, and prioritize restoring the government's administrative execution capability. In the face of this goal, issues like corruption appear relatively secondary. For the United States, the optimal solution might be the emergence of a strong leader (regardless of party) who can prioritize the public interest and integrate the strengths of all parties, leverage executive power to coordinate various factions, drive the implementation of key reforms, and prioritize restoring the government's administrative execution capability. In the face of this goal, issues like corruption appear relatively secondary.

Reflection on the System Behind the Crisis and Final Summary

A comment accurately summarizes the current state of American society: people generally hope for a Roosevelt-style strong leader to resolve crises, yet overlook the importance of cherishing and improving the existing system. However, looking back decades later, those once highly anticipated ideal social solutions may ultimately amount to nothing more than empty talk.

In summary, the U.S. housing crisis is the result of multiple overlapping factors: rigid zoning laws, high administrative costs, interest-driven conflicts under private land ownership, and profound socioeconomic divisions, which together constitute the core crux of the crisis. The Trump administration's response strategy is filled with political calculations, attempting to appease voters in the short term and shift conflicts by cutting loan support, planning to declare a state of emergency, lowering construction standards, and other measures. However, in the long run, this may sow the seeds of low-standard housing and financial risks. The fundamental solution to the crisis lies in building satellite cities and reforming land and environmental regulations, but this requires breaking the current political deadlock and centralizing administrative power. Ultimately, whether the United States can overcome the housing crisis essentially depends on its ability to break through the constraints of the political system and produce a strong leader willing to challenge vested interests—otherwise, society will descend into deeper crises through internal strife. In summary, the U.S. housing crisis is the result of multiple overlapping factors: rigid zoning laws, high administrative costs, interest-driven conflicts under private land ownership, and profound socioeconomic divisions, which together constitute the core crux of the crisis. The Trump administration's response strategy is filled with political calculations, attempting to appease voters in the short term and shift conflicts by cutting loan support, planning to declare a state of emergency, lowering construction standards, and other measures. However, in the long run, this may sow the seeds of low-standard housing and financial risks. The fundamental solution to the crisis lies in building satellite cities and reforming land and environmental regulations, but this requires breaking the current political deadlock and centralizing administrative power. Ultimately, whether the United States can overcome the housing crisis essentially depends on its ability to break through the constraints of the political system and produce a strong leader willing to challenge vested interests—otherwise, society will descend into deeper crises through internal strife.