Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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)
View Poll Results: Is it time to consider drastically reducing public housing for the long term benefit of it's residen
No 44 41.51%
Yes 62 58.49%
Voters: 106. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-10-2015, 09:56 PM
 
9,470 posts, read 6,968,141 times
Reputation: 2177

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Europeanflava View Post
And you know these people don't appreciate anything how?
How do you know they don't live by the same rules? It's
people like you who give the less fortunate and people who
fall through the cracks a bad name and make life harder
for these people than it should be because there are a
million others just like you who feel the same way about "them".
People do as they think. Or, as Forrest Gump famously said on-screen, "Stupid is as stupid does".

You appear to have somehow arrived at a conclusion that there is some kind of invisible prison, and it requires a gatekeeper to open the door and "let" someone out of poverty. Nothing is further from the truth.

The natural human condition is absolute poverty. If you do nothing, you will become homeless, naked, starving, and dehydrated and then die. In a matter of days. Or faster, if it's winter up north.

The fact is, every hour of every day, and sometimes, every minute of all those hours, you make decisions and actions which are required to maintain being NOT poor. You make these decisions both consciously and unconsciously, because you act on knowledge given you and gained by experience that continually supports your future outcome.

It is not a single act which removes people from poverty, it is an entire way of thinking, behaving, believing, and acting that is both required and must be learned. But we short-change the poor, by telling them variously that it's "rich people's fault", or "the white man's fault" or "the system is against you" while never, EVER teaching a freaking thing about how to NOT be poor.

Yet, I never see liberals saying "let's teach people how to not be poor". No, I hear "send them to school". Though I have investigated the curriculums of a number of schools, I have yet to see a single one of them have a class in "How to not be poor". So, school is mostly useless.


Quote:
Just because a person don't have a job does not mean they
can't appreciate their things and follow the same guidelines.
If you come from the wrong place or don't have good family,
then jobs can be hard if not impossible to get unless your
very intelligent.
I presume, because you use a computer and are at least semi-literate, you are not one of these destitute, hopeless people you talk about.

Yet, here are you are, revealing you haven't the faintest idea why you're not that kind of poor. Why don't you apply some thought and observation a while see if you can figure it out.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-11-2015, 12:23 AM
 
22,469 posts, read 11,990,487 times
Reputation: 20381
Quote:
Originally Posted by Know Nonsense View Post
What are the good ones? I like to learn.
The "good ones" are the ones that screen the residents before they are allowed to live there. In other words, it isn't enough to just have a Section 8 voucher.

The "good ones" won't allow anyone with a criminal record to live there. Back in the 80s, there was some public housing that interviewed each of the residents. They were asked questions like, "When you work, who watches your kids?" One woman said she had a 16 year old baby sitter. She was told that she would need to find an adult. The residents are expected to report anyone who is breaking the rules. One woman ended up sending her teenaged son to live with his grandmother because he started getting in trouble with the law. She was told that if he stayed with her, she would be evicted.

In Chicago, when they tore down Cabrini-Green, some of the residents were allowed to apply to live in some affordable dwelling units that were interspersed with market-rate units. A meeting was held and the residents were told that they would have to get screened if they wanted to live there. The ones who applied went through background checks. A woman was even told that if she wanted to move into one of the units, she would have to divorce her husband. It seems that her husband was in and out of jail and when he was out of jail, he was abusive. So, she thought about it and divorced him. That way, she and their 2 children were allowed to live there.

When public housing is done this way, the result is that the residents don't cause problems because they know that doing so gets them evicted.

I once had a relative who briefly lived in the projects. This was back in the 60s. Each resident was expected to once a month for a week have to clean the hallways in their building---and they all complied.

When projects allow anyone in without screening, you get a criminal element living there. Then crime spills into surrounding neighborhoods.

In ones where people are screened, the surrounding neighborhoods tend to be safe ones.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-11-2015, 03:40 AM
 
33,016 posts, read 27,451,622 times
Reputation: 9074
Quote:
Originally Posted by BOS2IAD View Post
The "good ones" are the ones that screen the residents before they are allowed to live there. In other words, it isn't enough to just have a Section 8 voucher.

The "good ones" won't allow anyone with a criminal record to live there. Back in the 80s, there was some public housing that interviewed each of the residents. They were asked questions like, "When you work, who watches your kids?" One woman said she had a 16 year old baby sitter. She was told that she would need to find an adult. The residents are expected to report anyone who is breaking the rules. One woman ended up sending her teenaged son to live with his grandmother because he started getting in trouble with the law. She was told that if he stayed with her, she would be evicted.

In Chicago, when they tore down Cabrini-Green, some of the residents were allowed to apply to live in some affordable dwelling units that were interspersed with market-rate units. A meeting was held and the residents were told that they would have to get screened if they wanted to live there. The ones who applied went through background checks. A woman was even told that if she wanted to move into one of the units, she would have to divorce her husband. It seems that her husband was in and out of jail and when he was out of jail, he was abusive. So, she thought about it and divorced him. That way, she and their 2 children were allowed to live there.

When public housing is done this way, the result is that the residents don't cause problems because they know that doing so gets them evicted.

I once had a relative who briefly lived in the projects. This was back in the 60s. Each resident was expected to once a month for a week have to clean the hallways in their building---and they all complied.

When projects allow anyone in without screening, you get a criminal element living there. Then crime spills into surrounding neighborhoods.

In ones where people are screened, the surrounding neighborhoods tend to be safe ones.

How does a parent earning $8 per hour ay for an adult babysitter?

How should public housing a parent with no criminal record and two adolescent gangbanger kids?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-11-2015, 12:07 PM
 
Location: NH
818 posts, read 1,017,129 times
Reputation: 1036
Public/transitional housing should absolutely be available for handicapped people, victims of domestic violence and most importantly children from abusive homes. But lets face it, most of the people on it now really don't fall into those categories who are living in projects or section 8 housing. I have seen it first hand. And I am guessing at least have some type of drug abuse going on in the household, most of the times openly in front of children. These children suffer the most and end up in the same dysfunctional cycle. Drug abuse, dropping out of school, unwanted pregnancies, lack of esteem, gangs,depression etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-13-2015, 04:56 AM
 
28,164 posts, read 25,298,921 times
Reputation: 16665
Quote:
Originally Posted by pnwmdk View Post
Yes, "public housing" should be given to the people who are currently residents in it. No more ever created and all public housing authorities dismantled.

We created public housing, we put residents in it and it did not solve the problems it was claimed to solve. Obviously, it is not a viable idea.

Next.
What problems was public housing supposed to solve?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-13-2015, 04:58 AM
 
28,164 posts, read 25,298,921 times
Reputation: 16665
Quote:
Originally Posted by Workin_Hard View Post
Public housing needs to not be eliminated, but consolidated and concentrated into specific and tightly controlled areas. Residents must be sterilized - and I don't mean made germ-free. Then a really high fence needs to be put around it. Problem solved within a generation. Then we can have some nice parks in those areas.
Awww, look at that. A modern day American ghetto a la 1940s Warsaw. Sweet.

What a GREAT idea.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-13-2015, 05:00 AM
 
28,164 posts, read 25,298,921 times
Reputation: 16665
Quote:
Originally Posted by Know Nonsense View Post
If it is not available like it was will it not give them incentive to clean up their act? Have you ever seen the inside of the average section 8 housing? The outside says something too but the inside gives it away. They do not care. Yes, bubbles of crime may happen but i am talking about improving things for the long term, meaning the next 40 years or so.


You have no ****ing clue what you are talking about. Many people on Section 8 work and are normal, everyday people. You probably DO NOT know which homes are inhabited by those on Section 8.



And if I sound angry, its because I am. This wholesale denigration of people in need is disgusting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-13-2015, 05:02 AM
 
28,164 posts, read 25,298,921 times
Reputation: 16665
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt View Post
How would people get to work if they're away from population centers?

What would you do with disabled people?
They.do.not.care.

That is what is truly disturbing about all these anti-needy threads.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-13-2015, 05:05 AM
 
28,164 posts, read 25,298,921 times
Reputation: 16665
Quote:
Originally Posted by Know Nonsense View Post
Public/transitional housing should absolutely be available for handicapped people, victims of domestic violence and most importantly children from abusive homes. But lets face it, most of the people on it now really don't fall into those categories who are living in projects or section 8 housing. I have seen it first hand. And I am guessing at least have some type of drug abuse going on in the household, most of the times openly in front of children. These children suffer the most and end up in the same dysfunctional cycle. Drug abuse, dropping out of school, unwanted pregnancies, lack of esteem, gangs,depression etc.
I would love some sort of solid evidence of the claims you've made in this post.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-13-2015, 06:03 AM
 
27,307 posts, read 16,218,061 times
Reputation: 12102
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoFigureMeOut View Post
Hell no. Do you want a bunch of people from the projects being relocated to your neighborhood? If they do away with HUD they have to put these people somewhere. My in-laws beautiful, diverse neighborhood turned into a ghetto after one empty home was converted to low-income housing.
They would have to be able to pay the rent. Where I live, don't see that happening. Nearest liquor store is 30 miles away.
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 > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:44 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top