U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
 [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 04-05-2015, 10:42 AM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,093 posts, read 72,469,891 times
Reputation: 27565

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Linda_d View Post
^^^


You are not understanding what NMSFM is saying. The individual/company/nonprofit that owns these apartments is guaranteed market rate by the feds. They are supposed to provide apartments that are good enough to be market rate, not apartments that are "good enough" for the rents the tenants in the building pay.

In NMSFM's area, maybe the market rate is $800. In your area of Texas, maybe it's $1500 a month. In NYC, it might be $2500 a month. In the same building, there might be tenants making as much as $2000 and others only $900 a month, which is immaterial to the landlord who is getting $800/$1500/$2500 a month per unit whether the tenant is paying $600 or $270 out of his/her own pocket.

The question is, would market rate apartments have the kinds of "amenities" that the tenants of the subsidized apartments are "demanding"? If the answer is "yes", then their demands are not out of line because that's what the taxpayers are paying the landlords to provide.
I would say only the high scale apartment buildings would have AC in the halls and they would be paying more in their rent to pay for it.

I've lived in many apartment buildings over my life and none had A/C in the hallways, especially up north where you only have 2-3 months of summer.

Maybe they want their apartment building to operate more like a hospital which does have all those amenities they want.
Then again, maybe some of them need to be in assisted living where they also have additional support.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-05-2015, 11:33 AM
 
Location: California
4,552 posts, read 5,466,666 times
Reputation: 9608
I really like the spirit of the "ring leader" as without people like her, we would still be a English colony.

However, I think it is a matter of priorities. Where I live, there are many foreigners who come here and later bring in their old family memebers, including those for reburial. They then make demands for American tax payer dollars as they claim we aren't doing enough for their culture and want free medicare without any contributions.

Americans should be the first priority and understand that it is the politicians, who are often behind the generational wars, as they want their own free health care and other benefits. Since I have not seen the "ring leader's" building I can't speak to her individual complaints but she does have a right to organize and be heard as well as move out if that is her choice. Older Americans have earned the right to a little peace and comfort, which the younger ones today will want when they are older.

Curmudgeon, you are spot on!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2015, 12:11 PM
 
5,599 posts, read 3,661,241 times
Reputation: 5417
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catdancer View Post
The background: My 82 year old dad lives in senior housing. It's a great thing for elderly folks on a limited budget. He pays one third of his income for rent with most utilities included. It's a decently sized one bedroom apt in a 26 unit building and he's happy as hell. The management company takes good care of the property, maintenance issues are taken care of promptly and they have a rep on site at least 2 days a week. By all accounts, it's a better place than most of the apartments I've lived in while paying over a grand a month...........but all is not well in this elderly haven.

Yesterday he was telling me that there is a group of people in his building, led by one crusader, that are raising hell with senior services and the state dept. on aging. They want the management company to install AC for the building because the hallways are too hot in the summer, they also want an onsite management team to live in the building, handle complaints as well as liaison with the town senior services. Last but not least, they want an emergency generator so if/when the power goes out, some of them can run their oxygen generators. I guess that some of them are under the impression that having an emergency generator will be just like having regular power.

Not to politicize the topic but the ironic thing about all this; I've met and spoken with the woman leading the charge for these amenities and she's a die hard, Fox watching republican who's discussed the the "awful problem of welfare people, our horrible president and those damn immigrants" with me......on more than one occasion.

So I guess the question would be- are the elderly entitled to more services than the average person? Personally, I think the requests are ridiculous. While I believe that we owe it to our seniors to offer low cost housing alternatives... should they live under better circumstances that the rest of the (full paying) apartment renting population? Are they more entitled than everybody else?
Sounds like these old folks should have planned better for old age.

I don't feel anyone is entitled to anything. It's highly unlikely they pay market rent, let alone enough to be demanding all these changes. Changes that they don't have a right to demand in the first place.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2015, 12:14 PM
 
Location: CO/UT/AZ/NM Catch me if you can!
4,740 posts, read 4,365,107 times
Reputation: 10380
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catdancer View Post
The background: My 82 year old dad lives in senior housing. It's a great thing for elderly folks on a limited budget. He pays one third of his income for rent with most utilities included. It's a decently sized one bedroom apt in a 26 unit building and he's happy as hell. The management company takes good care of the property, maintenance issues are taken care of promptly and they have a rep on site at least 2 days a week. By all accounts, it's a better place than most of the apartments I've lived in while paying over a grand a month...........but all is not well in this elderly haven.

Yesterday he was telling me that there is a group of people in his building, led by one crusader, that are raising hell with senior services and the state dept. on aging. They want the management company to install AC for the building because the hallways are too hot in the summer, they also want an onsite management team to live in the building, handle complaints as well as liaison with the town senior services. Last but not least, they want an emergency generator so if/when the power goes out, some of them can run their oxygen generators. I guess that some of them are under the impression that having an emergency generator will be just like having regular power.

Not to politicize the topic but the ironic thing about all this; I've met and spoken with the woman leading the charge for these amenities and she's a die hard, Fox watching republican who's discussed the the "awful problem of welfare people, our horrible president and those damn immigrants" with me......on more than one occasion.

So I guess the question would be- are the elderly entitled to more services than the average person? Personally, I think the requests are ridiculous. While I believe that we owe it to our seniors to offer low cost housing alternatives... should they live under better circumstances that the rest of the (full paying) apartment renting population? Are they more entitled than everybody else?


First of all, I hate that word "entitled." It makes whatever group that it refers to sound like a bunch of leeches, just dying to milk the system. That aside, I am both disabled and getting up in years (although my age of 63 doesn't seem like it should put me in the "senior citizen" catagory ). I have lived in housing for seniors and/or the disabled, and I must say that my main feelings about the system were both relief and gratitude to be spared becoming homeless. My apartments were run by the Housing Authority (HUD) in my small, rural town. I rented my apartment sight unseen, and traveled 400 miles to get there - I'd lived in the area earlier in life and I'd always wanted to return there. Since the apartments had been built before my return, I had no idea of what to expect. Visions of roach infested kitchens and run-down buildings hidden on the edge of town flashed through my mind.

However, when I arrived at my new home, I was pleasantly surprised to see well- tended lawns both in the front and the back of the complex. The building itself was in good repair, and the apartments, though small, were among the tidiest and best maintained, I'd ever seen - not a single cockroach in 100 miles! We had no on-site manager, but a worker from HUD came over everyday to keep the lawns mowed and make whatever repairs might be needed. The local HUD office was about a 20 minute drive away, and had an open door policy. I could arrive unannounced and ask to see the direstor. Unless she was in a meeting or whatever, she'd always invite me into her office and actually listen to my concerns.

I had worked for 40 years and faithfully paid my taxes before I became disabled. So I don't feel like I'm some parasite, and I know the generousity of my fellow Americans help pays for my place, so I don't feel entiltled to more and more from the system like some leech. My apartment doesn't have air conditioning, and it really isn't needed it in this part of Colorado. I've had little experience with the Northeast, but I did notice how hot and muggy it is and the summer when I was there on a visit, and I know the heat can make it difficult for elderly folks with heart or breathing problems. Some even die in their stiffling apartments every summer. So, a request for air conditioning in places that experience very high temps for days on end doesn't sound too unreasonable to me.

As for "onsite" managers to answer complaints, act as liason with other senior services, etc, why? I'm sure life in senior housing in a big city presents its own set of problems - many no doubt different that what seniors encounter here. But can't your grandfather and everyone else just pick up the phone and lodge a complaint with the management company? Don't they have a standard grievane proceedure the way most other management companies do? And again, if I want to talk to the local senior service, I just pick up my phone and dial their number. As for respiraters , aren't there smaller ones that are available to many if not most and don't need to be plugged always into a power supply ?

Perhaps, the complainers are worried about another catastrophe like Superstorm Sandy or Hurricane Katrina hitting your area. In which case, they need to contact civil authorities and find out if they have a plan in place to evacuate the sickest and most elderly residents.

So, in general, I don't believe the elderly and/or the disabled are "entiteled" to all the icing on the cake, but sometimes we do need a little (reasonable) extra help. If the need is genuine, nothing wrong with meeting it. But frills and fripperies? No thanks. I'm grateful for my little apartment, they don't need to put in a skylight or a fancy fire place or what have you. I'm fine just as I am. Thanks all the same.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2015, 12:39 PM
 
Location: Near a river
16,042 posts, read 18,967,079 times
Reputation: 15649
^^^

Wonderful, reasonable, well-stated post. Entitlement is a many-edged word.

And yes, the upper hallways of any building of any kind in the high heat and humidity of the East Coast can use a bit of air modulation; it doesn't need to be frigid or even cold, or even "cool." Even some decent ventilation would help.

The senior apt my sister's FIL lives in has window air conditioners whose filters have never been changed since he's lived there, over a decade. He has emphysema. The electricity is included in his rent. With some 7 or 8 floors of tiny apartments all with window a.c.'s, seems like the facility would save a lot on electricity to ditch the window a.c.'s and install central air set at a constant moderate temperature.

To address the OP's question, perhaps it is true that the elderly do not "deserve" more in their subsidized housing than others in subsidized housing, some of whom do not work for a living but are young enough and able-bodied enough to do so. One group has generally worked their entire lives and paid into the system; some or many in the other group may not have. I will not generalize or assume anything about either population as a whole, but it may not be fair, for obvious reasons, to compare those two populations in terms of who deserves what.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2015, 02:57 PM
 
Location: SW MO
23,605 posts, read 31,467,321 times
Reputation: 29071
It seems to me that the key to any housing, senior, mixed-use, low income, etc. is "livability" and the definition of that varies from place-to-place, climate-to-climate. I doubt very much that there's any one size fits all standard. There's also a huge difference between reasonable accommodation, literally, and Cadillac living.

My wife and I both worked long and hard and paid taxes all our lives, still do in fact, and our joint pensions and Social Security make our retirement reasonably comfortable but certainly not lavish by any means. By the same token our home is modest but comfortable and suits our needs. We aspire to nothing more, nor do we aspire to ever higher taxes in the name of income leveling by that or any other name.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2015, 07:44 PM
 
Location: Oceania
8,623 posts, read 6,246,452 times
Reputation: 8318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curmudgeon View Post
And you know a lot of those "lazy govt employees" I suppose, like the ones who processed your application that permits you to live in subsidized housing. Guess you knew a lot of them, huh?

Funny, between the military, law enforcement and political and legislative analysis I spent about 33 of my 45 working years in government service and in all that time I can only count the number of lazy employees I ran across on the fingers of both hands. Not too bad for the hundreds I knew and those I supervised.

In and around DC or some field offices?
Federal employees in the DC area are different than any found elsewhere. Those found on military bases around the world/USA have a different work ethic...hopefully.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2015, 08:07 PM
 
Location: Myrtle Creek, Oregon
12,223 posts, read 12,487,684 times
Reputation: 19364
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyonpa View Post
Management has solution for you not having enough O2, Send you off to somewhere where do. The hospital. The Management will not want the cost or liability of stocking them, Your O2 problem is fixed with one phone call.


Hello 911, we have a senior who needs O2, Please come get him/her take them to hospital.
I have a friend who is an EMT who went to New York to do disaster relief after Sandy. He said one of his biggest problems was trying to run 40 oxygen concentrators off of generators when the emergency shelter was the school gymnasium. It's only sensible that nursing homes be required to maintain basic life support for their customers. You can't dump all those people on hospitals in an emergency. There is no room.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2015, 09:02 PM
 
Location: Silicon Valley
18,081 posts, read 22,924,480 times
Reputation: 35196
Quote:
Originally Posted by biscuitmom View Post
Here in Texas, the market rate is somewhere in the range of 1400-1800 a month, the subsidized monthly is commonly 400-800 a month, i.e 30% of the renter's income.. What you call 'comfort' or what the government should expect and pay for isn't at all clear. Personally, I think 30% of income is good, and I don't understand what you're fighting for. Please elaborate.
What I'm saying is that the owners of subsidized buildings receive the same income for their units as unsubsidized apts on the open market.

So, if you owned a subsidized senior building, and the going rate for 1 bedroom apartments on Craigslist for a 1 bedroom apartment for someone who is non-subsidized - is $1,000/month, then you will get $1,000 per month for your subsidized apartments.

The owner receives $1,000/month rent for each subsidized 1 bedroom apartment. Each one may be funded in a different way, with the city, county, state, feds and the tenant all paying different amounts each. But you will receive $1,000/month for your subsidized apartments.

In return, you are to provide housing worth $1,000/month to your tenants.

Regardless of what their portion is.

So, by people here saying that substandard housing is acceptable because the tenant maybe only paying $200 of that $1,000 - they are saying these guys get to rip off the government entities making up the difference.

These units are not just a government handout. There's a guy in the middle collecting the money, who is in it for profit.

This system was developed to do away with the nightmare public housing ghettos that happened way back when, from what I understand. Now the government subsidizes a for-profit owner/management company, and does minimal overseeing/auditing/inspecting of these for-profit owners who either include or hire for-profit management companies.

I don't know how to make it any clearer.

Perhaps the folk here are going under the assumption that these are completely funded and managed and owned by the government, but they aren't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2015, 10:38 PM
 
Location: too far from the sea
19,824 posts, read 18,832,665 times
Reputation: 33721
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoMoreSnowForMe View Post
What I'm saying is that the owners of subsidized buildings receive the same income for their units as unsubsidized apts on the open market.

So, if you owned a subsidized senior building, and the going rate for 1 bedroom apartments on Craigslist for a 1 bedroom apartment for someone who is non-subsidized - is $1,000/month, then you will get $1,000 per month for your subsidized apartments.

The owner receives $1,000/month rent for each subsidized 1 bedroom apartment. Each one may be funded in a different way, with the city, county, state, feds and the tenant all paying different amounts each. But you will receive $1,000/month for your subsidized apartments.

In return, you are to provide housing worth $1,000/month to your tenants.

Regardless of what their portion is.

So, by people here saying that substandard housing is acceptable because the tenant maybe only paying $200 of that $1,000 - they are saying these guys get to rip off the government entities making up the difference.

These units are not just a government handout. There's a guy in the middle collecting the money, who is in it for profit.

This system was developed to do away with the nightmare public housing ghettos that happened way back when, from what I understand. Now the government subsidizes a for-profit owner/management company, and does minimal overseeing/auditing/inspecting of these for-profit owners who either include or hire for-profit management companies.

I don't know how to make it any clearer.

Perhaps the folk here are going under the assumption that these are completely funded and managed and owned by the government, but they aren't.
I agree. Although in my state most are owned by the government, either state or federal, and there has had to be a crackdown on the managers of these places. Managers who have no qualifications and draw huge salaries. Managers who allow apartments to go empty while there are long waiting lists. I could go on about the lack of upkeep and the run down condition of the apartment complexes.

But the state finally caught on and fired some of these incompetent managers and now there is closer scrutiny as to what goes on. The first manager to be fired was in a run down city but I know of at least one more who was fired from an affluent little town. They should be ashamed of themselves.

In both instances the residents had to organize and in the little town, they took their issues to a state representative who tried to do some good. This did result in some repairs finally being made but not until the mess in that run down city was discovered, did the small town manager finally come under scrutiny and get terminated. I hear that they have a good and qualified manager now, the place looks pretty good, and people are being accepted into the apartments instead of them lying vacant for years.

So in some cases it's a good thing that someone blows the whistle --cases where ordinary things are not being taken care of while the manager draws a huge salary for doing mostly nothing. I don't think anyone living there felt "entitled" to anything out of the ordinary, they just wanted humane treatment. Sometimes people in prison are treated better than law abiding citizens.
__________________
my posts as moderator will be in red. Moderator: Health&Wellness~Genealogy. The Rules--read here>>> TOS. If someone attacks you, do not reply. Hit REPORT.
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 > Retirement
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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