Interesting overview of the Delco suburbs and how it relates to the current use of section 8 vouchers (Philadelphia: 2015, rental)

[AbdiKony]

It seems 20 years is enough for a big demographic transition. I looked at the demographic data for NE philadelphia and it there were pretty big demographic changes from 1990-2010.

[kyb01]

Originally Posted by AbdiKony

It seems 20 years is enough for a big demographic transition. I looked at the demographic data for NE philadelphia and it there were pretty big demographic changes from 1990-2010.

Lots of Russians started arriving in the NE during the 90s after the fall of the Soviet Union.

[Steinish]

Originally Posted by kyb01

Lots of Russians started arriving in the NE during the 90s after the fall of the Soviet Union.

Russians were the least of NE Philly's problems.

[AbdiKony]

Whats the population of Russians?

[Steinish]

Originally Posted by AbdiKony

Whats the population of Russians?

I don't know the exact percentage, but there's a large communityway up Bustleton Ave in the Far NE. They even have a beautiful supermarket that caters to the community called Netcost.

[Steinish]

Originally Posted by kyb01

Of course..... But there's a new three story million $ home right around the corner from where I live. My properties have doubled in value.

My properties in the River Wards have quadrupled in the past twenty years.

[thedirtypirate]

Originally Posted by cpomp

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.

This could not be further from the truth. This mentaility holds the entire region back. Fools think they are better than everyone else. One of the best things that ever happened to NYC so the proper distribution of public housing within the metro in the 1980s'.

HBO even made a good show about it. Having section 8 systematically kept in certain areas is a major problem and contributes to the generational poverty associated with living in the ghetto.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0FPIflcWIOk

[cpomp]

Originally Posted by thedirtypirate

This could not be further from the truth. This mentaility holds the entire region back. Fools think they are better than everyone else. One of the best things that ever happened to NYC so the proper distribution of public housing within the metro in the 1980s'.

HBO even made a good show about it. Having section 8 systematically kept in certain areas is a major problem and contributes to the generational poverty associated with living in the ghetto.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0FPIflcWIOk

Again, hold the region back from what?? The fact that I think the areas wealthiest communities shouldn't have Section 8 makes me a backward thinker?

Respect others options, simply spreading Section 8 housing to the areas wealthiest communities will do nothing but cause further tension between the wealthy and the poor in our area, do nothing to improve the existing ghettos, and it does nothing to educate or assimilate the extremely impoverished into society. Lastly, its a big middle finger to the working class who cannot afford to live in wealthy communities, while those at the bottom get a free pass.

Why not reinvest in the struggling neighborhoods instead of ignoring them?

Pardon me, but I do not think it is at all fair for Section 8 candidates to have options in say Radnor, when 75% of the population cannot afford to live there on a mid to high level salary. THAT is backwards thinking.

[Steinish]

Originally Posted by cpomp

Again, hold the region back from what?? The fact that I think the areas wealthiest communities shouldn't have Section 8 makes me a backward thinker?

Respect others options, simply spreading Section 8 housing to the areas wealthiest communities will do nothing but cause further tension between the wealthy and the poor in our area, do nothing to improve the existing ghettos, and it does nothing to educate or assimilate the extremely impoverished into society. Lastly, its a big middle finger to the working class who cannot afford to live in wealthy communities, while those at the bottom get a free pass.

Why not reinvest in the struggling neighborhoods instead of ignoring them?

Pardon me, but I do not think it is at all fair for Section 8 candidates to have options in say Radnor, when 75% of the population cannot afford to live there on a mid to high level salary. THAT is backwards thinking.

Wow! I agree completely. You should live where you can afford to live.

[1ondoner]

Live where you can afford to buy a good home in a good neighborhood. It may mean moving to a different state. The main difference between renting and paying a mortgage, is that the former enriches one's LL and you end up with no home while with a mortgage you end up with a home.

Back to the topic, the rental cost is what determines which areas section 8's can move into. As much as some would love to live in Radnor, the asking rent price is beyond vouchers plus they have to compete with regular renters, whom LLs prefer because of no bureaucracy with leasing.

Originally Posted by Steinish

Wow! I agree completely. You should live where you can afford to live.