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.
Rent control and affordable housing mandates are as absurd and asinine here in LA and Orange County as they are anywhere else, and that been the case for decades.
but where is the comparable outrage about unaffordable housing mandates, e.g. exclusionary zoning?
p.s. in much the same way that zoning is protectionism for incumbent homeowners, rent control is protectionism for incumbent renters; neither is concerned with outsiders who are excluded.
Will you please tell me what town this was? I have never seen fewer than four unrelated people in such a limitation. I'm amazed if any place got away with two.
Worth noting that rent control was a (misguided) attempt to level the playing field. All it did was create yet another privileged class. When I lived in NYC I knew a young single man living in a 14-room apt on Central Park West for which he paid less than $2000/mo. He inherited it via rent control.
Such controls, by distorting the market and removing so many housing units from play, most definitely drive up housing costs--tremendously--for everyone else.
That's why it's impossible to find an economist who supports rent control. Not even Paul Krugman supports it.
Rent control and affordable housing mandates are as absurd and asinine here in LA and Orange County as they are anywhere else, and that been the case for decades.
If not for Proposition 13 there would be no rent control in California. There was no rent control before 13 - it was considered a fringe idea. 13 passed because Jarvis promised that rents would go down if 13 passed. Once that happened, renters found out that was a BS story, and rent control went from a marginal crank issue to an unstoppable tide.
It shows how left wing CA is that even in Massachusetts and France rent control is illegal.
"The U.S. Treasury Department needs to do more to learn why more than a quarter of the borrowers in a federal mortgage workout program have re-defaulted, costing taxpayers at least $815 million, according to an audit report released today."
Obama wants to rob suburban wealth and redistribute it to cities to pay for failing cities/schools. He's going to change the way a town/city is defined so cities can tap into suburban tax dollars. It's in his history. Read up on Obama's connection to the Gamaliel Foundation and Building One America. Stanley Kurtz wrote a whole book about it - "Spreading The Wealth: How Obama is Robbing The Suburbs To Pay For The Cities." It was all part of O's second term agenda.
If not for Proposition 13 there would be no rent control in California. There was no rent control before 13 - it was considered a fringe idea. 13 passed because Jarvis promised that rents would go down if 13 passed. Once that happened, renters found out that was a BS story, and rent control went from a marginal crank issue to an unstoppable tide.
It shows how left wing CA is that even in Massachusetts and France rent control is illegal.
Is rent control in CA really far "left wing" or is it a rational response by renters to the campaign lies and the redistributionary impact of Prop 13?
All politics is local, and rent control in CA is the response to Prop 13. Massachusetts and France don't have Prop 13 and they don't have rent control.
Memphis tried closing some of their biggest projects and spreading the people out through "nicer" areas. It spread the crime throughout the city and made it one of the most dangerous cities in the country.
Areas where middle class whites and blacks lived peacefully side by side became war zones. The people who were hurt by it the most were the middle class blacks which suffered declining home values, worsening schools, etc.
Even the people from the projects who got nicer houses/apartments were disappointed. They were happy at first, but as their neighborhoods quickly turned into the same war zones they had left, they were sad that they lost their old sense of community and got no positives in return.
I would really encourage anyone interested in this subject to read the article above. Social engineering in housing rarely helps the people it seeks to help, instead it destroys functioning neighborhoods and schools of middle class people who then get trapped by the declining home values.
For those who care they will get it. For others, it will be an opportunity. It's a recipe for failure.
seems like only whites who want to live in there gated fortresses locked away from the world are against this.
not going to be like that anymore.
You mean those gated fortresses that had to make over $25,000 a year, who worked to purchase their homes without the help of government? Those gated fortresses where there is little crime - no murders, no rapes, no home break-ins at record numbers, no drive by shootings, not infested with drugs? Those gated fortresses?? Yup, they are going to be a thing of the past.
There are plenty of middle to upper class black neighborhoods. Will those neighborhoods be affected? Will the black middle and upper class who worked hard to get where they are welcome their new neighbors with open arms? Do you think when Obama leaves office he'll be moving to a location that will be touched by this diversity program??? Why should only white people be subjected to a downgrade?
Since this program is about diversity, how about the government allocate some prime land in middle to upper class black neighborhoods to white trash who already own their trailer homes? They just need to drive in, set up camp, fire up the BBQ, get the beach chairs out, break out the beer, and let the dogs out. Some of them may even be self-employed and work from home - cooking up some kind of drug in the bathtub.
youve made the inference that poor minorities are going to ruin white neighborhoods if they are allowed to move in next to them, stating that these white neighborhoods should have all the perks to themselves, and nobody else should get any of them.
it sounds like in your opinion that the lower the income of a person, the lower quality of the person.
Do you resent black middle to upper class who worked for those "perks" or just resent white people who worked for those "perks"? Should middle to upper class be allowed to keep their "perks" and not be made to "share" them?
Do your homework. Low income/government housing have high crime rates. Rather than doing something in government housing to stop the crime and destruction of property, someone in government thinks that by spreading the criminals around will stop crime and the property will be taken care of.
another conservative saying everyone is beneath him.
this attitude i quoted is what needs to change.
He is not saying everyone is beneath him. You just want to think that.
I guess you think that the drug addict, the drug dealer, the murderer, the thief, the rapist, the wife beater, regardless of skin (that is who the poster is referring to), is your equal. Good for you that you mastered the attitude change. Doesn't mean everyone else has to be so accepting. So, yeah, those types are beneath law abiding citizens who do the right thing regardless of skin.
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.
