U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 12-29-2011, 10:20 AM
 
511 posts, read 2,237,537 times
Reputation: 642

Advertisements

Up to recently certain communities were just known as places for the rich. Usually these are suburban communities of large metropolitan areas. These communities were blessed with huge wooded areas, interesting topography, or close access to great job centers and highway access to shopping and fine dining. As a result, when developers came into these communities they built high end homes. The few older homes that were there before hand are torn down or expanded and also sell for a million dollars plus.

Now there is a push by liberals and other do gooders to move poor people away from the bad side of town into all types of communities. So by law when they build new homes a certain percent of them have to be for poor people. (Not Middle class people- but poor people) Rich exclusive towns with million dollar homes are now flooded with poor people and the schools go down hill, crime goes up, social problems explode, etc. The rich families have to pull their kids out of the previously great public schools in a private school due to the economic diversity forced on the community which makes the public school go down hill even more!

While these previously all wealthy communities were hardly without social problems before, (rich people have problems too, just not as many!) now they are even worse.

But what is the solution? Was it more logical to just have poor people living on the bad side of town, like before? Or should poor people live everywhere, even in towns where previously most of the people were rich?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-29-2011, 10:21 AM
 
Location: United State of Texas
1,708 posts, read 5,713,186 times
Reputation: 2122
Absolutely ridiculous from all angles.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2011, 10:22 AM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,068 posts, read 76,624,212 times
Reputation: 27642
Yeah..propose a section 8 multi family building and see the crowds turn out.
Hypocrisy at its finest. The NIMBY crowd want it to stay that way.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2011, 10:25 AM
 
511 posts, read 2,237,537 times
Reputation: 642
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
Yeah..propose a section 8 multi family building and see the crowds turn out.
Hypocrisy at its finest. The NIMBY crowd want it to stay that way.
If I were a wealthy person who devoted a significant amount of toil and hard work to my career, my home and my community, I would be a NIMBY too. I would want my community to remain like it was before. Who wants their community to go down hill?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2011, 10:26 AM
 
9,734 posts, read 8,650,034 times
Reputation: 6371
People should be able to live where they can AFFORD. The community should not be obligated to build "affordable" housing which depresses the values of the surrounding properties.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2011, 10:28 AM
 
Location: United State of Texas
1,708 posts, read 5,713,186 times
Reputation: 2122
If they implemented such a program in my neighborhood, I would simply move somewhere that they didn't have such a rule.

If I wanted to live with ghetto dwellers, I'd live in the ghetto.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2011, 10:29 AM
 
Location: Chambersburg PA
1,738 posts, read 1,859,649 times
Reputation: 1471
So...poor equals high-crime? Even tho' many working people are considered poor.
I live in community where the working class, used to be able to afford to live, without subsidy. Taxes are lower here and so retirees and those willing to commute to Fredrick, D.C. etc have moved here. Some built Mcmansions on what used to be good farmland, and others bought older homes either tore them down or as the OP said, "upgraded"

I'm a firm believer that a good society needs people from many walks of life. maybe if all the affordable housing wasn't torn down/converted...you wouldn't then need to build affordable housing.

Granted, I'm talking about lower-middle class working people, and not those who live completely off the dole.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2011, 10:30 AM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,068 posts, read 76,624,212 times
Reputation: 27642
But there are those that think if you move the poor to richer neighborhoods then it will motivate them to get out of poverty.

That was the very thinking behind busing students to other schools. Didn't quite work out the way they thought though so they returned to the neighborhood school scenario.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2011, 10:35 AM
 
3,498 posts, read 1,955,934 times
Reputation: 646
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zembonez View Post
If they implemented such a program in my neighborhood, I would simply move somewhere that they didn't have such a rule.

If I wanted to live with ghetto dwellers, I'd live in the ghetto.
So poor people = ghetto dwellers?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2011, 10:35 AM
 
22,263 posts, read 12,948,375 times
Reputation: 12897
There are a lot of empty foreclosure homes sitting out in the suburbs. Why not put families in them even if they have to subsidize the payment? Seems better than letting them fall apart unheated and maintained?
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:


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 > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

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