U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > New York City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-26-2017, 10:35 AM
 
Location: New York
2,637 posts, read 2,694,200 times
Reputation: 745

Advertisements

This forum tends to attack people without power; poor people. They aren't the people screwing over the middle class. It's the donor class that has riled up the "politics of resentement" for you to look at people who have no power over your life.

Look at it this way; your life is better to not have poor people so impoverished that they are desperate. The real resentment isn't from them, its that the donor class stole your tax dollars and diverted it to programs that did not benefit you, while not paying the same share of taxes themselves. The middle class deserve those housing subsidies too and taking them away from people who have less than you does not solve that problem. Look to those in power. Those are the villians.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-26-2017, 10:48 AM
 
Location: In the heights
20,411 posts, read 21,939,093 times
Reputation: 10399
For those who are affected, the article cites some of the specific changes which are pretty minor compared to what was previously in place in relative and absolute terms.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-26-2017, 10:49 AM
 
Location: Lower East Side, NYC
1,886 posts, read 1,122,448 times
Reputation: 1349
Which is why I wish we could vote out De Blasio and to some extent Cuomo. That being said, I have no idea how to solve this 'affordability' issue. I take a look at Boston and can see letting the market do what it wants will make things worse as far as what we want to see happen.

I'd still like to see buildings built like they are in Tokyo, not ultra luxury but just big and for masses of people that aren't stupidly expensive. I digress though, America seems to like things expensive and NIMBY's are a death knell for rapidly increasing population.

Maybe I should just buy a cheap place in Pelham Parkway... but then, I'm also not squeezed being rent stabilized downtown. My life is a great irony.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-26-2017, 01:07 PM
 
Location: New York
2,637 posts, read 2,694,200 times
Reputation: 745
Quote:
Originally Posted by Javawood View Post
Which is why I wish we could vote out De Blasio and to some extent Cuomo. That being said, I have no idea how to solve this 'affordability' issue. I take a look at Boston and can see letting the market do what it wants will make things worse as far as what we want to see happen.

I'd still like to see buildings built like they are in Tokyo, not ultra luxury but just big and for masses of people that aren't stupidly expensive. I digress though, America seems to like things expensive and NIMBY's are a death knell for rapidly increasing population.

Maybe I should just buy a cheap place in Pelham Parkway... but then, I'm also not squeezed being rent stabilized downtown. My life is a great irony.
- All newly built housing should automatically place limits on income; that is allocate x% to poor, x% to middle class (and definite the middle class perhaps in two tiers because there is a huge difference between $40K, $75K and $120K.)
- Place heavy penalties on apartments bought or rented by people who are not living in NYC for at least 50% of the year. Why should their be housing scarcity while apartments remain unoccupied.
- Means test subsidized housing so that people can't take advantage of these subsidies when they actually would no longer qualify, and haven't qualified for 20 years.
- Do not give tax incentives to housing developments allocated to the wealthy. Do not give tax incentives to hold-outs who won't rent/sell until they can get the price they want, even if it goes unoccupied for years. If there is a housing shortage and your property is not fillable after six months, the price is too high.
- Build large Single Occupancy communities with shared ameneties. I know a long of young people who really would prefer not to have roommates, but they have no place else to live. Call it what you will, sort of luxury dorm living.
- This will be Politically Incorrect. Get rid of projects. Concentrating all poor people in one place is just bad for poor people and bad for society. Mixed income housing is the most beneficial for everyone, including the wealthy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-26-2017, 01:34 PM
 
1,127 posts, read 1,379,857 times
Reputation: 1525
vote him out
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-26-2017, 02:07 PM
 
880 posts, read 536,348 times
Reputation: 1122
Quote:
Originally Posted by roseba View Post
This forum tends to attack people without power; poor people. They aren't the people screwing over the middle class. It's the donor class that has riled up the "politics of resentement" for you to look at people who have no power over your life.

Look at it this way; your life is better to not have poor people so impoverished that they are desperate. The real resentment isn't from them, its that the donor class stole your tax dollars and diverted it to programs that did not benefit you, while not paying the same share of taxes themselves. The middle class deserve those housing subsidies too and taking them away from people who have less than you does not solve that problem. Look to those in power. Those are the villians.
The issue is not because they are poor, the issue is the behavior and lack of civility that the avg. poor person (not all) imposes on the building and neighborhood.

Middle class folks who work hard for their money do not want to come home to their building and see ghetto a$$ tenants/neighbors chillin' in the building steps, smoking weed, drinking, playing dice or having loud a$$ conversations. Its a quality of life issue.

Middle class people don't want to live around ghetto folks. Afterall, you work so hard so you can live in a nice place where you don't have to be exposed to all that ghetto sh*t. It's common sense.

You couldn't pay me to live in such an environment. So do you actually think middle class folks will rent these apartment? Very few will. The remaining vacant apartments that were set aside for middle class folks will be rented by ghetto people. And its downhill from there. The predominate culture (hood culture) will plant their roots there. Might as well make it a full blown housing project! De Blasio needs to be voted out!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-26-2017, 02:11 PM
 
Location: New York
2,637 posts, read 2,694,200 times
Reputation: 745
Quote:
Originally Posted by allpro123 View Post
The issue is not because they are poor, the issue is the behavior and lack of civility that the avg. poor person (not all) imposes on the building and neighborhood.

Middle class folks who work hard for their money do not want to come home to their building and see ghetto a$$ tenants/neighbors chillin' in the building steps, smoking weed, drinking, playing dice or having loud a$$ conversations. Its a quality of life issue.

Middle class people don't want to live around ghetto folks. Afterall, you work so hard so you can live in a nice place where you don't have to be exposed to all that ghetto sh*t. It's common sense.

You couldn't pay me to live in such an environment. So do you actually think middle class folks we rent these apartment? Very few will. The remaining vacant apartments that were set aside for middle class folks will be rented by ghetto people. And its downhill from there. The predominate culture (hood culture) will plant their roots there. Might as well make it a housing project! De Blasio needs to be voted out!
So you are basically condemning a whole swath of people because of the behavior of a few. Culture matters. People behave largely in the manner of their surroundings. When people live in an area where certain behavior is frowned upon, the prevailing standard, prevails. Concentrating poor people in ways that treat them like animals begets poor results. Studies have concluded that when poor people are exposed to middle class values, they generally elevate themselves, and their standards. However, I will say right here, some of the most virtuous people on this earth come from and live in humble conditions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-26-2017, 02:23 PM
 
23,343 posts, read 16,233,643 times
Reputation: 8591
Quote:
Originally Posted by roseba View Post
- All newly built housing should automatically place limits on income; that is allocate x% to poor, x% to middle class (and definite the middle class perhaps in two tiers because there is a huge difference between $40K, $75K and $120K.)
- Place heavy penalties on apartments bought or rented by people who are not living in NYC for at least 50% of the year. Why should their be housing scarcity while apartments remain unoccupied.
- Means test subsidized housing so that people can't take advantage of these subsidies when they actually would no longer qualify, and haven't qualified for 20 years.
- Do not give tax incentives to housing developments allocated to the wealthy. Do not give tax incentives to hold-outs who won't rent/sell until they can get the price they want, even if it goes unoccupied for years. If there is a housing shortage and your property is not fillable after six months, the price is too high.
- Build large Single Occupancy communities with shared ameneties. I know a long of young people who really would prefer not to have roommates, but they have no place else to live. Call it what you will, sort of luxury dorm living.
- This will be Politically Incorrect. Get rid of projects. Concentrating all poor people in one place is just bad for poor people and bad for society. Mixed income housing is the most beneficial for everyone, including the wealthy.
Chicago got rid of the housing projects. They put them in mixed income housing in working class areas. Chicago has a murder rate three times that of NYC, despite having one third or less of that population. The areas people from the housing projects were removed to became the new ghettoes.

Did the Destruction of Chicago

So all they did was reduce crime in the city center and put relocate it to the outskirts of the city and to poor suburbs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-26-2017, 02:24 PM
 
23,343 posts, read 16,233,643 times
Reputation: 8591
Quote:
Originally Posted by allpro123 View Post
The issue is not because they are poor, the issue is the behavior and lack of civility that the avg. poor person (not all) imposes on the building and neighborhood.

Middle class folks who work hard for their money do not want to come home to their building and see ghetto a$$ tenants/neighbors chillin' in the building steps, smoking weed, drinking, playing dice or having loud a$$ conversations. Its a quality of life issue.

Middle class people don't want to live around ghetto folks. Afterall, you work so hard so you can live in a nice place where you don't have to be exposed to all that ghetto sh*t. It's common sense.

You couldn't pay me to live in such an environment. So do you actually think middle class folks will rent these apartment? Very few will. The remaining vacant apartments that were set aside for middle class folks will be rented by ghetto people. And its downhill from there. The predominate culture (hood culture) will plant their roots there. Might as well make it a full blown housing project! De Blasio needs to be voted out!
Did the Destruction of Chicago

That is how well destroying the Chicago projects and putting them in working class neighborhoods worked.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-26-2017, 02:57 PM
 
785 posts, read 349,724 times
Reputation: 2050
Quote:
Originally Posted by TizOnly1 View Post
Whether you're depending on housing subsidies or not, you're paying for them. It affects you either way.
When I said "this particular issue" doesn't affect me, I was talking about the issue in the article with the decrease in the amount of subsidized housing for people making $70K - $140K.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > New York City
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top