U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Ohio > Cincinnati
 [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 04-09-2011, 04:03 PM
 
405 posts, read 784,724 times
Reputation: 140

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarah Perry View Post
I THINK I read that within the City of Cincinnati about 95% of the Section 8 housing units are occupied by African American residents. So it makes it easy to claim that anyone with issues with the program somehow has issues with the racial makeup of people participating in the program.
Well, The Federal Agency In Its Wisdom Has Decreed that it is about race.
The say the guy who supposedly was trying to stop S8 in his township was a racist and to pay him back, they are going to spread S8 everywhere.

This is why I don't see the point of HUD anymore.

HUD has continually screwed up ever since it was founded. They were the ones who, in other cities, mandated high rise apartments to pack all the poor people in, in the first place, completely destroying many other neighborhoods in many other cities.

That didn't work so well, so in the 80-90s, they razed all the high rises. The old neighborhoods were dead and gone.

This isn't about race. its about taking people out of a poor area and concentrating them in a new area where a huge cultural clash ensues.

The goal was to try to enculturate poor people into a culture of "success" by placing them in a nice area and allowing them to escape the dreadful pressures of the city.

Instead the "poor" culture takes over these buildings and ruins neighborhoods. The exact reverse of the intended result.

This S8 program is a failure, studies have shown its a failure, but the Agency Still Can Say and Do Whatever it Wants...with our Tax Dollars.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-09-2011, 04:41 PM
 
89 posts, read 166,899 times
Reputation: 103
The sad fact of the matter is that most people in Section 8 housing aren't recidivist violent criminals who touch little kids and break into orphanages to steal drugs from hookers. They're people at a severe economic disadvantage struggling to get by and they don't like their living conditions. Even in the "ghetto" a survey of attitudes will show that criminal occupations are the lowest prestige. It pains me to see a very small minority of residents being taken as the representative of an entire group of people.

Good luck wherever you move, though. Sorry Cincinnati wasn't for you and I hope you find somewhere you like more.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-09-2011, 05:35 PM
 
Location: Philaburbia
32,903 posts, read 61,303,612 times
Reputation: 55090
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bhiggins View Post
Why not place them in an area like Hamilton, Greenhills, Mt Healthy, or Lockland? These areas have obviously come and gone, and basically area already going downhill.
Haven't you been paying attention? Concentrating the economically disadvantaged in one area has done nothing but fail.

Anyway, no doubt many of the good people in Greenhills, Mt. Healthy and Lockland would object to your dismissal of their towns.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-09-2011, 08:32 PM
 
Location: Green Township
329 posts, read 595,974 times
Reputation: 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohiogirl81 View Post
Haven't you been paying attention? Concentrating the economically disadvantaged in one area has done nothing but fail.

Anyway, no doubt many of the good people in Greenhills, Mt. Healthy and Lockland would object to your dismissal of their towns.
What exactly are you trying to say?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-09-2011, 09:05 PM
 
Location: Mason, OH
9,259 posts, read 14,133,058 times
Reputation: 1928
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bhiggins View Post
What exactly are you trying to say?
That any concentration of Section 8 housing is a mistake. To allude that certain areas such as Greenhills, Mt. Healthy, should be the next consideration for Section 8 because their time has come and they can be sacrificed is an absolute affront to the people who are trying to eek out a decent living there. To think that pushing Section 8 out of the downtown core will accelerate its rejuvenation is also a fantasy.

The HUD experience with Section 8 has been a total failure. But what do you expect out of a government program where profit minded people can take advantage of those less fortunate? For those social conscious who feel a Section 8 type program is necessary to alleviate the ongoing poverty level, then use some common sense. Distribute the effect over the broadest area possible, and minimize the concentrations. Set limits on how many units can be under the program in any given area, and in those areas of low family income restrict them even further. If you don't feel this is an equitable solution, then just build a large concentration camp out in the western desert and ship them all there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-09-2011, 09:59 PM
 
307 posts, read 464,048 times
Reputation: 98
Don't you have both private landlord's who accept sec. 8 as well cmha owned housing which is then reimbursed via sec. 8? It would be interesting to see the breakdowns in neighborhoodsof private landlords vs county owned. I feel like the private landlords are often left out of this discussion and are the group benefitting the most.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-09-2011, 11:46 PM
 
Location: Green Township
329 posts, read 595,974 times
Reputation: 139
Private Complexes are proven to be much much nicer and safer than public, and I definitely wouldn't mind this, but public are the ones in question. Hell, they might as well annex parts of Green and Anderson Township.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-10-2011, 12:47 AM
 
Location: Cincinnati(Silverton)
1,585 posts, read 2,422,691 times
Reputation: 656
My motto. If you keep doing what you have been doing, you will keep getting what you have been getting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-10-2011, 04:18 AM
 
125 posts, read 228,753 times
Reputation: 83
The majority of families on Section 8 were born into poverty. This is a completely different animal than when people fall on hard times.

When you are born into poverty,
1.) you're poor
2.) your immediate family is poor
3.) your extended family is poor
4.) your neighborhood is poor
5.) your schools are poor
6.) your friends are poor

Resources and networking that encourage upward mobility are nearly nonexistent. Blaming Section 8 doesn't address the issue of longstanding poverty in particular communities. Section 8 is designed to address nos. 4-6. If a child attends better schools and is around kids that see college as part of their future, that individual is in a much better position to improve his or her standing in society. Section 8 fails because it cannot address nos. 1-3, which would be attacking the root of poverty, which is disenfranchisement based on discriminatory housing, administrative (gov't) and employment practices based on community and/or ethnicity.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-10-2011, 06:17 AM
 
2,886 posts, read 4,195,459 times
Reputation: 1503
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arctic_6 View Post
The sad fact of the matter is that most people in Section 8 housing aren't recidivist violent criminals who touch little kids and break into orphanages to steal drugs from hookers. They're people at a severe economic disadvantage struggling to get by and they don't like their living conditions. Even in the "ghetto" a survey of attitudes will show that criminal occupations are the lowest prestige. It pains me to see a very small minority of residents being taken as the representative of an entire group of people...
I haven't seen anyone here taking the majority of residents as representative of a criminal element. What a lot of people ARE doing is saying that the criminal minority is still significant enough that middle-class folks don't want a big concentration of Section 8 housing in their neighborhood.

On an unrelated note, I'd be interested in seeing the survey you're talking about. Could you please post the source? I don't necessarily doubt it, although the problem seems persistent of large numbers of people in the "ghetto" not seeing anything when the police try to question them about crimes they've witnessed. But that's all a topic for another thread.
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:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 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 > Ohio > Cincinnati
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, 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