Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I love that quote. But reality is that while I do not blame the children, I do blame the parents. MANY people, not ALL people have children when they cant afford to even take care of themselves. Why should everyone else have to support them.
I advocate personal responsibility. ANYONE can have a rough spot in their lives, and we ought help them for a set amount of time work towards a plan where they will be self sufficient. As in job training or education, help them with food and housing and day care while they progress toward that goal. Drug test them etc, help place them in a job when they have completed their training or education.
I object to people staying on assistance forever, and having children they have no reasonable hope of providing for
I adapted my own script of A Christmas Carol and I love that line as well. "Business? MANKIND was my business! The common welfare was my business! Charity, benevolence...The dealings of my trade were but a drop of water in the comprehensive ocean of my business."
But what you write here is much more nuanced than what you first wrote, which was just get "end it all," basically. I don't agree with cutting food stamps (they don't cost much) for children at all, but definitely adults should held to some kind of deadline. Not sure how we can regulate people having children they can't afford--I mean, I agree the decision to have a child should BE a decision, a financially responsible one, but I don't see any way to tie that to benefits because again it goes back to punishing the child for the poor actions of the parents. (And also, there is a societal benefit to keeping kids healthy--they will do better in school which will benefit all of us in the long run. Also they will be less likely to have health problems.) I think what needs to change is the culture, this passive "welfare is forever" mindset plus the idea that kids just happen. There was an article in New York Magazine a few years ago profiling a young woman living in...the Bronx, maybe? Washington Heights? She was a teen mother and her apathy and lack of insight into HOW this happened (I think at one point she said something like "they knew we was gonna have sex at some point and it just happened") was just staggering. There were *many* LTTEs criticizing her and the father because OF COURSE she was on welfare. It never seemed to occur to her (or obviously the father but the article was mainly about her) that she had the ability to practice birth control or to get an abortion. She was very defensive in response to the criticism but I have to say, once you have your hand out asking for something for free, you have to take the criticism--or at least expect it. Anyway, she is an object lesson in that welfare culture--it's just expected.
Although to be fair I think the system makes it EXTREMELY difficult for anyone who is not ferociously determined to pull themselves out of poverty. I really hate the "poor people just need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps mentality"--it completely discounts how oppressive poverty is, the systemic and cultural barriers these people face. I count myself extremely lucky that my father taught my brothers and me about finance, how to manage our money, how to invest. Yes, I am disciplined but I'm also very lucky.
I saw that article as well! Urban American is a TERRIBLE management company--I used to live in the building very similar in West Harlem: used to be Mitchell Lama, and I was one of their first market rate tenants. At least once a month the glass in the front door would be broken, repairs took forever (the elevator was constantly broken), no one ever answered the phone, they jacked up the rent like 10% after the first year and to top it off the security was terrible and I was attacked in front of my apartment by some thug who was allowed in (I fought him off, I was fine in the end) and of course they had no usable footage because the cameras weren't working properly. I told them I was breaking the lease--they probably would've sued me for the remainder of the lease but likely they were afraid I would sue them for their crappy security! Oh, they are awful, truly a slumlord mentality.
If we are talking about the CP attack and the SP connection, is this the group of 5 which were railroaded by the police into false confessions, and the real attacker confessed much later? They are now settling their lawsuit 15 years later....surely this can't be the example that you are speaking about?
And to be fair, don't we all want a place we can be left alone and pay what we believe is fair, regardless of the market? My taxes and insurance go up every year with no subsequent increase in service or coverage...and it's a squeeze on me...how about you tell them to lower my rates and then we can talk about you! Expenses go up, rents go up...that's life....otherwise we would all still be earning $1 an hour and paying 5 cents for milk.
There is no doubt this investor is trying to turn this building around from decades of neglect..and that can't be done without increasing rents, bringing in market tenants, etc. The alternative is to keep rents low, and let the building rot...and that is no longer an option. You are not guaranteed to live where you want, at the price you deem reasonable, for infinity...nobody made that promise when they brought you into this world. Get over it..welcome to adulthood.
Note: I believe that everyone deserves a place to live. HOWEVER, that does not mean it is the place of your choosing, or at the rents you believe you should pay, or that you are guaranteed the same apt for life.
There is no doubt this investor is trying to turn this building around from
decades of neglect..
If a company buys a building for three times what it sold for 2 years ago, then takes it out of Mitchell Lama by taking ANOTHER mortgage to pay off the State mortgage, I think you can be reasonably sure that his motives are something other than "to turn this building around."
Investors aren't interested in "turning things around" but it getting as high a return as possible. And that means getting rid of old tenants by whatever means necessary and replacing them with higher paying ones.
Urban America will do what many developers did in the horrendous 1970's. After finding out the tenants aren't leaving, they will default on their mortgages, default on their taxes and the City and State will end up with the buildings.
The luck that Urban America had was to buy in the perfect location for the expansion of gentrification up Fifth Avenue...but even luck isn't enough if you overpay too much.
Failed developments is how Mitchell Lama really came into it's own in the first place and how tens of thousands of apartments came under the program.
Imagine being told by your landlord that from next month on you will make your own heat...with resistive electrical baseboard.
If a company buys a building for three times what it sold for 2 years ago, then takes it out of Mitchell Lama by taking ANOTHER mortgage to pay off the State mortgage, I think you can be reasonably sure that his motives are something other than "to turn this building around."
Investors aren't interested in "turning things around" but it getting as high a return as possible. And that means getting rid of old tenants by whatever means necessary and replacing them with higher paying ones.
Urban America will do what many developers did in the horrendous 1970's. After finding out the tenants aren't leaving, they will default on their mortgages, default on their taxes and the City and State will end up with the buildings.
The luck that Urban America had was to buy in the perfect location for the expansion of gentrification up Fifth Avenue...but even luck isn't enough if you overpay too much.
Failed developments is how Mitchell Lama really came into it's own in the first place and how tens of thousands of apartments came under the program.
Imagine being told by your landlord that from next month on you will make your own heat...with resistive electrical baseboard.
Investors aren't interested in "turning things around" but it getting as high a return as possible. And that means getting rid of old tenants by whatever means necessary and replacing them with higher paying ones.
This is called "predatory investment," and it is the prevailing economy (in the broad sense) of our current environment.
People would be well-advised to pay a bit of attention to this fact rather than debating some of the issues I see on here - minor stuff in comparison. Bones thrown to the masses so they feel that they are "part of things."
No insulation, tons of fires, floods and bugs eating through the already rotted and holey walls...
Repairs stink, nothing stays fixed and elevators that take you everywhere but your floor... IF they're working...
No heat in winter, creepy guys, nosy as hell neighbors and the guy down the hall who beats his gf on the regular... oh yeah, this sounds like a fun place... So glad I bought a condo across the street... If I'm going to pay thousands of dollars a month I don't intend to pay it in that hellhole.
People have to move. The days of living in these big section 8 apartments are over. My aunt had to give up my her mother's 4 bedroom apartment/ with 2 bathrooms 2 years ago. She was downsized to a one bedroom. she still cries about it today. lol. My grandmother wasn't on welfare but moved into the building in 1961. Nothing last for ever and my aunt worked for the city so she should have moved out years ago. Now a family with two disable kids live in my grandmothers apartment. I'm happy for them because they came from a homeless shelter.
People have to move. The days of living in these big section 8 apartments are over. My aunt had to give up my her mother's 4 bedroom apartment/ with 2 bathrooms 2 years ago. She was downsized to a one bedroom. she still cries about it today. lol. My grandmother wasn't on welfare but moved into the building in 1961. Nothing last for ever and my aunt worked for the city so she should have moved out years ago. Now a family with two disable kids live in my grandmothers apartment. I'm happy for them because they came from a homeless shelter.
Well said. And if you don't want the government telling you where you can live, then use your own money to pay for your own housing! DUH!
I'm glad they made your aunt move and that gave the apartment to a family who had much greater needs.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
