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.
Or if you stay in NYC stay in a nicer neighborhood. I spent many nice summers in NYC..........
These nicer neighborhoods will soon be a thing of the past soon as De Bozo wants to shove "affordable housing" in decent and relatively non - ghetto neighborhoods. He calls it "inclusive housing". That will attract the hoodrats and thugs to move to these new "affordable housing" buildings.
I wish there was a way the government would just go into the projects, ghetto's, trailer parks, slums or any other place these degenerates live and neuter all the men and tie up the tubes of the women. They keep reproducing like rats and producing more and more offspring. They don't care for their kids and only care about the money the govt will give them for each kid. Most of these kids have no future and no place to go so they act like this. I sometimes don't blame the kid but the people that brought him/her into the world.
Let's try to be realistic. If you were going to do this it would have to be with financial incentives. Pick a number - $2,500 for "tube tying" or a vasectomy. But this would have to be proposed by an African American politician because if a white politician were to propose it, he would be accused of genocide. In reality it would save taxpayers billions of dollars, and ease the lives of poor women who really should not be having children, or at the most one child.
The other problem is that it would put Planned Parenthood out of business (most of their money comes from providing abortions), and PP has too many political connections to allow this.
So the beat goes on. Generation after generation of kids (disproportionately minority but numerically white) who are born to single mothers who have no way of supporting themselves, and who have so-called "fathers" who are nowhere to be found as they impregnate multiple women. Very sad.
Let's try to be realistic. If you were going to do this it would have to be with financial incentives. Pick a number - $2,500 for "tube tying" or a vasectomy. But this would have to be proposed by an African American politician because if a white politician were to propose it, he would be accused of genocide. In reality it would save taxpayers billions of dollars, and ease the lives of poor women who really should not be having children, or at the most one child.
The other problem is that it would put Planned Parenthood out of business (most of their money comes from providing abortions), and PP has too many political connections to allow this.
So the beat goes on. Generation after generation of kids (disproportionately minority but numerically white) who are born to single mothers who have no way of supporting themselves, and who have so-called "fathers" who are nowhere to be found as they impregnate multiple women. Very sad.
I was also considering money as an incentive. But the problem is that a lot of these people reproduce as kids. You would have to neuter them when they are 11-12 years old, just when they hit puberty because most of them have kids when they are 14-17. They are not even adults yet and they have kids.
You could get parental consent to do this but a lot of these kids have a single parent or no parents.
It really sickens me because they are going to over run the country in a few years and we can't do anything about it.
These nicer neighborhoods will soon be a thing of the past soon as De Bozo wants to shove "affordable housing" in decent and relatively non - ghetto neighborhoods. He calls it "inclusive housing". That will attract the hoodrats and thugs to move to these new "affordable housing" buildings.
Absolutely not true, as nice neighborhoods are already developed and they won't be getting much in the way of affordable housing.
The latest affordable housing complexes have arisen largely in places like Harlem, the South Bronx, etc.
As for places like the Domino Sugar Factory in Williamsburg, only a minority of units in the complex are affordable, even with the settlement negotiated with the city under de Blasio. Basically, it's an 80/20. In those buildings, bad behavior isn't tolerated and problem tenants are evicted.
The reason why slumlords attract such an awful element is because it's their business to take the tenants no one else wants (Section 8) because that's how they make their money. 80/20s make their money of luxury tenants and there's no way they're spending massive amounts of money to let that be taken down.
I was also considering money as an incentive. But the problem is that a lot of these people reproduce as kids. You would have to neuter them when they are 11-12 years old, just when they hit puberty because most of them have kids when they are 14-17. They are not even adults yet and they have kids.
You could get parental consent to do this but a lot of these kids have a single parent or no parents.
It really sickens me because they are going to over run the country in a few years and we can't do anything about it.
Not neutering... just a removal of any and all benefits if more than an agreed upon number of children are made. And follow up on it!
I'm Canadian and I'm hardcore left to the core, but the generationally poor will only stop being generationally poor when there are no more generations. They are too far behind in the the game to get ahead + policies in place now encourage ghettoization and hopelessness which only leads to more feelings of inferiority, which means less wherewithal to get out of the situation. The world needs fewer poor children ill equipped for this world who become adults poorly equipped for this world who, in turn, become our responsibility. We end up raising most poor children... it sucks, but it's fact.
It's just... eugenics is a sticky subject, but I'd propose it at an income level.
Absolutely not true, as nice neighborhoods are already developed and they won't be getting much in the way of affordable housing.
The latest affordable housing complexes have arisen largely in places like Harlem, the South Bronx, etc.
As for places like the Domino Sugar Factory in Williamsburg, only a minority of units in the complex are affordable, even with the settlement negotiated with the city under de Blasio. Basically, it's an 80/20. In those buildings, bad behavior isn't tolerated and problem tenants are evicted.
The reason why slumlords attract such an awful element is because it's their business to take the tenants no one else wants (Section 8) because that's how they make their money. 80/20s make their money of luxury tenants and there's no way they're spending massive amounts of money to let that be taken down.
No need to fearmonger.
Mayor De Bozo wants to change the 80/20 model and make it something to the effect of 20/30/50. Which equates to less market rate apartments allocated towards middle class folks and more allocated toward low income and working poor people. And as we all know, there is a HUGE co-relation between low income/working poor people and higher crime along with a lot of social ills and baggage.
This has a bigger negative impact on the outer boroughs such as the Bronx who needs more market rate housing geared towards middle class folks to diversify the income levels in the borough and LESS low income housing in the Bronx as we have more than enough low income people in the Bronx. No need to attract more to the borough.
A perfect example of these "affordable housing" projects affecting traditionally decent neighborhoods is the whole Webster Ave rezoning buildings going up along Bedford Park and Norwood which the majority are more geared towards low income and supportive housing. This in turn will introduce more low income and dysfunctional people to the area changing the vibe and dynamic of the community.
Hardcore left to the core means raising benefits for the poor, not decreasing them. When there was proposal in the US to make some minor cutback on the bloated food stamp program, the hardcore left went ballistic and accused Republicans of wanting to starve the poor.
You may be left, buy are most definitely hard core left.
Mayor De Bozo wants to change the 80/20 model and make it something to the effect of 20/30/50. Which equates to less market rate apartments allocated towards middle class folks and more allocated toward low income and working poor people. And as we all know, there is a HUGE co-relation between low income/working poor people and higher crime along with a lot of social ills and baggage.
This has a bigger negative impact on the outer boroughs such as the Bronx who needs more market rate housing geared towards middle class folks to diversify the income levels in the borough and LESS low income housing in the Bronx as we have more than enough low income people in the Bronx. No need to attract more to the borough.
A perfect example of these "affordable housing" projects affecting traditionally decent neighborhoods is the whole Webster Ave rezoning buildings going up along Bedford Park and Norwood which the majority are more geared towards low income and supportive housing. This in turn will introduce more low income and dysfunctional people to the area changing the vibe and dynamic of the community.
These 20/30/50 buildings are not going to be filled with dysfunctional single mothers with no job and three kids. Those people are shipped to Webster Avenue, where the local residents have no political power.
The 20/30/50 buildings are going to be occupied by what are the equivalent of "lottery winners," that is, those who get chosen to move from their modest abodes in southern Brooklyn or eastern Queens, and get to live the rest of their lives in one of the most sought after locations in New York City - the Brooklyn waterfront.
The concept of 20/30/50 is quite stupid. The most expensive land should be improved with the most expensive apartments with the richest people who will pay the most property taxes. In exchange for a zoning change or the lifting of height restrictions, the developer should be forced to build the affordable housing elsewhere, like on Queens Boulevard. And I don't mean welfare housing. I mean housing for city workers and those with moderate incomes.
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.
