U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Philadelphia
 [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 02-10-2016, 09:00 AM
 
633 posts, read 522,561 times
Reputation: 1119

Advertisements

Found this one while browsing this morning. We've covered some of these topics here and there, but its good to find it all in one place.

Quote:
For Lorraine Washington, a housing choice voucher, colloquially known as Section 8, represents escape and opportunity. Before her recent move enabled by the subsidy, she lived in the Blumberg Apartments, a public housing complex in one of the most impoverished corners of Philadelphia. Then the Philadelphia Housing Authority slated her building for demolition and offered its residents a choice: They could move to a new public housing unit in the city or accept a Section 8 voucher—which can, in theory, be used anywhere they might want to go.
Later in the same article

Quote:
Landlords are also allowed to systemically discriminate against Section 8 voucher holders, and are substantially more likely to do so in higher-opportunity areas. This “source of income” discrimination is outlawed in some jurisdictions, including Philadelphia. But a city-only law is of limited use....None of Philadelphia’s Pennsylvania-side suburban counties have banned “source of income” discrimination, so landlords are free to deny their units to those bearing Section 8 vouchers. Even if landlords in wealthier areas are willing to take vouchers, there is a ceiling on how much a voucher will cover. The Fair Market Rent that dictates the amount of HUD’s rent subsidy is predicated on prices across the whole region, so it often cannot cover units in higher-opportunity areas, which frequently don’t have many rental units anyway. In New Jersey, by contrast, the Mount Laurel doctrine and the legislation that followed affirm that all municipalities have a duty to zone for their “fair share” of affordable housing, ensuring more cheap rental units in affluent areas. No such ruling exists in Pennsylvania.
There's a lot here that's eye opening. I recommend reading the full article here

Tickets Out of Poverty?

Last edited by toobusytoday; 02-19-2016 at 03:43 PM.. Reason: removed a whole bunch of copyrighted article. You cannot quote whole chunks.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-10-2016, 08:16 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
743 posts, read 661,070 times
Reputation: 1577
Me and my wife are working taxpayers doing the best we can. We'd like the government to give us the opportunity to live in a better neighborhood ... Society Hill would work for us. At least we'd contribute to keeping the neighborhood nice.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-10-2016, 09:12 PM
 
Location: New York City
7,165 posts, read 6,245,171 times
Reputation: 4257
Why should someone with a Section 8 voucher be allowed to live in Radnor? That is one of the most elite townships in the nation. Most middle class families making 100k a year could barely afford to live there, so why should someone be given a voucher for it.

A lot of you will disagree with me but it has been proven that allowing large swaths of housing to be reserved as Section 8 results in the destruction of a neighborhood. This is not the same as affordable housing (those have income and rent restrictions), Section 8 is more often than not people who do not work and will bring nothing to the neighborhood.

The cycle will never change, wealthier white people will simply pick up and move again. Instead of working about vouchers, money should be reinvested into these rundown communities to make them more desirable places for low income people to live.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-10-2016, 10:03 PM
 
Location: Dude...., I'm right here
1,506 posts, read 996,608 times
Reputation: 1272
Interesting article, although I had to re-read some paragraphs. IMHO, most people are poor because of the bad choices they make. Unfortunately, one's upbringing will influence their choices, hence poverty is passed from one generation to another and it becomes harder to break out from the cycle. I'm not saying, wealthy folks don't make bad choices. Everyone makes mistakes, it's just that the poor make worse mistakes and in the absence of a safety net, the consequences are more grave.

Going back to the article, it's hard to sympathize with Section 8 tenants. In many cases, these folks cannot be said to be responsible. Who would want such tenants on their property?

In the UK, every borough has public housing, so you will find council housing in the midst of affluent neighborhoods. For some reasons I'm yet to understand, these housing units are not very badly run down. I think because the tenants reside in these units for a long time, they seem to maintain these properties to some extent.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-10-2016, 10:15 PM
 
Location: Villanova Pa.
4,920 posts, read 13,043,804 times
Reputation: 2643
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steinish View Post
Me and my wife are working taxpayers doing the best we can. We'd like the government to give us the opportunity to live in a better neighborhood ... Society Hill would work for us. At least we'd contribute to keeping the neighborhood nice.
I know a few people(slumlords) making a ton of money off this section 8 debacle. They go into a decent area with solid housing buying up 3 BR homes for $50K-$60K , they have a $400 Mortgage on the houses and turn around and section 8 them. They then get a govt check for $900 every month and they get the tenant to chip in $300-$400 more. One section 8 tenant asked an associate how do I get a 4 BR house? He says Have another kid.



Meanwhile You have hard working families electricians,plumbers,teachers etc etc living in 2 BR 1 BA outdated 50 year old apt complexes in Norwood, Drexel Hill etc etc .They pay $1200-$1500 in rent.

The System is screwed up.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-11-2016, 05:07 AM
 
Location: Pennsylvania
5,726 posts, read 10,568,286 times
Reputation: 9768
How many decent areas with solid housing have lots of homes that can be bought for $50-$60K? Clusters of Section 8 housing are more likely to come about because an area is declining, or at least flatlining. They're a symptom, not a cause of a depressed area. Take the Section 8 housing away, with its standards for upkeep, and see what happens to some of those inner ring suburbs.

I'd like to see a source for the claim that most Section 8 holders don't work, but I doubt I will.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-11-2016, 07:55 AM
 
236 posts, read 261,900 times
Reputation: 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by cpomp View Post
Why should someone with a Section 8 voucher be allowed to live in Radnor? That is one of the most elite townships in the nation. Most middle class families making 100k a year could barely afford to live there, so why should someone be given a voucher for it.

A lot of you will disagree with me but it has been proven that allowing large swaths of housing to be reserved as Section 8 results in the destruction of a neighborhood. This is not the same as affordable housing (those have income and rent restrictions), Section 8 is more often than not people who do not work and will bring nothing to the neighborhood.

The cycle will never change, wealthier white people will simply pick up and move again. Instead of working about vouchers, money should be reinvested into these rundown communities to make them more desirable places for low income people to live.

You make a good point about allowing large swaths of housing to be Section 8 being detrimental. That should be the very reason we need Section 8 housing in all areas, including the rich ones. If small bits Section 8 are in every community, those communities won't decline like the ones which are suddenly flooded with Section 8.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-11-2016, 08:35 AM
 
633 posts, read 522,561 times
Reputation: 1119
Quote:
Originally Posted by cpomp View Post
Why should someone with a Section 8 voucher be allowed to live in Radnor? That is one of the most elite townships in the nation. Most middle class families making 100k a year could barely afford to live there, so why should someone be given a voucher for it.

A lot of you will disagree with me but it has been proven that allowing large swaths of housing to be reserved as Section 8 results in the destruction of a neighborhood. This is not the same as affordable housing (those have income and rent restrictions), Section 8 is more often than not people who do not work and will bring nothing to the neighborhood.

The cycle will never change, wealthier white people will simply pick up and move again. Instead of working about vouchers, money should be reinvested into these rundown communities to make them more desirable places for low income people to live.

On the contrary, I don't disagree with you. As it stands the program is a disaster for these neighborhoods.


Personally I don't have much (ok, any) experience with the section 8 program. Everything I've heard about it is second hand. From what the article and google searches are telling me, the intent of the section 8 voucher is to allow low income residents to live in a wide variety of communities, rather than concentrating them all in public housing OR within high crime low income neighborhoods.


In theory, this is a good thing. low income students (and adults) do better when taken out of high crime, high poverty surroundings, provided they are spread out somewhat evenly.


In practice, the section 8 program isn't working. What's happened is that its simply funneled an absurdly large number of section 8 residents into a handful of inner ring suburbs in Delaware county, which IS absolutely destroying those neighborhoods and school systems. As the article notes, higher income residents both black AND white are fleeing upper darby/William penn/southeast delco school districts and being replaced by section 8 residents that don't have the ability to maintain the tax base. This results in taxes being raised on the remaining residents to make up the difference, which causes more to leave. Section 8 residents with low AGI and subsidized housing largely don't care, since they aren't getting hit but everyone else does- perpetuating the cycle.


This is obviously unsustainable- and you don't need to take my word for it, look at the tax rates of Yeadon/Lansdowne/Darby/etc. they're ridiculously high given the size of those communities and this is why.


The article doesn't really go into it, but I'm willing to bet another big reason the inner ring delco suburbs are getting hit as hard as they do is transportation infrastructure. Those suburbs (especially upper darby where 69th street terminal is) have fairly robust public transportation. not only buses, but trolleys and easy access to the market frankford EL. Even if hypothetically the ability of landlords to discriminate against section 8 residents outside of Philadelphia was taken away, they would likely still cluster in these neighborhoods overwhelmingly and not in Lower Merion because by and large these section 8 residents in Philadelphia, like most low income Philadelphia residents either can't or don't drive.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-11-2016, 11:30 AM
 
1,045 posts, read 644,336 times
Reputation: 1638
Quote:
Originally Posted by cpomp View Post
Why should someone with a Section 8 voucher be allowed to live in Radnor? That is one of the most elite townships in the nation. Most middle class families making 100k a year could barely afford to live there, so why should someone be given a voucher for it.

A lot of you will disagree with me but it has been proven that allowing large swaths of housing to be reserved as Section 8 results in the destruction of a neighborhood. This is not the same as affordable housing (those have income and rent restrictions), Section 8 is more often than not people who do not work and will bring nothing to the neighborhood.

The cycle will never change, wealthier white people will simply pick up and move again. Instead of working about vouchers, money should be reinvested into these rundown communities to make them more desirable places for low income people to live.

I agree with this 100%. In fact, I think the title of the article is completely wrong. Section 8 vouchers are not "tickets out of poverty." By and large, beneficiaries of Section 8 housing, like you said, are contributing nothing to the neighborhood as they are not paying to live there. It's a lesson I learned from my parents at a very young age--work for something, you appreciate the hell out of it; get something for free, you don't.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-11-2016, 11:35 AM
 
1,045 posts, read 644,336 times
Reputation: 1638
Quote:
Originally Posted by maf763 View Post
How many decent areas with solid housing have lots of homes that can be bought for $50-$60K? Clusters of Section 8 housing are more likely to come about because an area is declining, or at least flatlining. They're a symptom, not a cause of a depressed area. Take the Section 8 housing away, with its standards for upkeep, and see what happens to some of those inner ring suburbs.

I'd like to see a source for the claim that most Section 8 holders don't work, but I doubt I will.

Not always. Just as much, it is the government forcing a municipality to reserve a certain percentage of housing for Section 8 in the interest of "fairness." Case in point: Ocean City, NJ never used to have Section 8 housing. One particularly bad year of storms that led to massive beach erosion led the town to petition the state for funds. Governor Corzine (yes, this is going way back) told them that they can have the money if they open up Ocean City to Section 8. Voila! Section 8 housing now available in Ocean City!
Rate this post positively 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:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

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 > Pennsylvania > Philadelphia

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top