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.
"The complexes listed below were built, acquired or renovated with public funds, and therefore are required to set aside a certain number of affordable units," the county web page says.
These "luxurious" "free market" condos were built with taxpayer money (the same as a public housing complex) in a city that leeches and leeches off the Federal Government and profits massively from NEEDLESS war, so you're DAMN right they should have to set aside affordable units for working Americans-and many Section 8 tenants work and actually pay a significant amount in rent.
Why is it that some people HATE when the poor receive anything from the Government, but never would dare say a word when the wealthiest in our society are spoonfed TRILLIONS and TRILLIONS?
Why aren't people complaining about the developers of these condos that chose to use PUBLIC MONEY, which required them to set aside units for Section 8? It makes no sense to complain about the poor people, THAT HAD NO SAY IN THE MATTER.
I'm not so sure I believe such a thing to this extent, however I used to deliver furniture when I was younger to the projects. On the outside it was your typical projects but on the inside big screen Tv's with surround sound. We were not delivering cheap furniture to them either. Hell paying $20.00 a month more of less they had no problem affording nice things along with all the food stamp they got.
From the OP's link:
"most units set aside as "affordable" aren't occupied by voucher holders."
"In exchange for government subsidies, its operators rent the 101 units at lower-than-normal rates, which can still reach as high as $1,000 a month.
Those units can also be filled, however, by the vouchers wherein the federal government picks up most of the tab. Recipients pay 30 percent of their income, and lose their vouchers if their income increases too much."
The subsidized housing recipients I know are all older hard-working full-time low-wage retail workers. They aren't sitting around eating bon bons by the pool.
The subsidized housing recipients I know are all older hard-working full-time low-wage retail workers. They aren't sitting around eating bon bons by the pool.
This is my experience as well. Problems arise when people not on the lease start living there.
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.
