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.
Dime a dozen? Nah, I'm a one and only . Anyway, people like you always whine about the race card being tosses when someone calls you out on your prejudice. Thinking I've been owned is just another fantasy of your's along with thinking I called people racist for disagreeing with them. I only used that term for people that actually are racist. So if you want me to knock it off, don't be such a bigot.
Nobody in here has shown anything even close to prejudice or racism, you're delusional. I don't really care if you knock it off or not, I'm not the one making myself look ignorant over and over again. You continue to prove that you have no idea what is really means to live in these "diverse" areas you strive to create.
Anyone who thinks we can fix poverty (and the devil-may-care, gangsta attitude that many times piggybacks it) by moving the poverty-stricken into upper class, rich neighborhoods should seek professional help.
Can anyone explain to me in detail why they think this would work?
It doesn't work because landlords are greedy and the neighborhood stakeholders are completely out of the loop. I think neighborhood associations should have veto power to keep out Section 8 people who are undesirable, as long as it's not used as a pretense to exclude protected classes. Or maybe multiple applicants coulkd compete before the neighborhood association which would choose which one gets to move in.
Or maybe some will realize that the gravy train has ended and that they will get off their a## and do something constructive like get a job or two or three.
a lot of them already have a job. there have been times when i worked two jobs so that my landlord could work zero jobs.
Does your McMansion sit on more than an acre? You don't need such a big yard and have no right to be selfishly inhabiting so much property! You must relinquish a fraction of your property to allow Habitat for Humanities to construct a home for a low income minority family or (preferably) a half dozen Syrian refugees....
Don't laugh. I can see it happening in several years.
DH and I moved our family from Allentown, Pennsylvania to rural small town Western PA to escape the influx of low income Section 8 renters and other government subsidized non-
English speaking and non-employed "diversity" that infested our once nice low crime neighborhood, plummeted our property values, and turned our local elementary school into a gang graffiti defaced, Spanish speaking cesspool. Best move we ever made.
Property rights allow individuals to buy and sell private property. We need more property rights, not fewer.
More power to you if you can afford more than one acre, but government should not infringe on the liberty of individuals to buy and sell as they choose.
I sincerely hope this comes to fruition for two reasons.
1: It will be the end of the Democratic Party in the white liberal suburbs of Boston.
2: As someone who lives in a section of Boston from where they will get these Section 8 transplants, I will be ecstatic to see them go and watch my property value skyrocket.
Have fun with the gangbangers Wellesley, Belmont, Newton, et al.
"Under his plan, your property value will necessarily skyrocket."
The real racist part of this scenario is the idea that Section 8 housing is synonymous with minorities.
??? Section 8 housing is synonymous with low income seniors and single parents. Minorities have a pretty good handle on the low income single parent category.
Another unearned bennie. Why work when you can get stuff by voting?
??? Like the mortgage interest deduction and the homestead exemption and the tax breaks for employer-provided fringe benefits like health insurance, and the $500,000 capital gain exclusion on sale of your home?
The upper and middle classes have voted themselves vastly greater stuff than the poor ever could.
well, you didn't answer my question, but it is okay.
My question is simply this, if nobody wants to take section 8 tenants.. and I don't know anybody in my neighborhood want to accept section 8 tenants. (not demonizing all section 8 tenants, this is not part of the discussion)
Believe me, many landlords are wondering if they can still hold the applicants to the same income requirements. They are afraid if one day, they are forced to make accommodations for Section 8. That almost seems discriminatory toward everyone else. Would their voucher count toward income requirements?
What is next?
Some people say landlords are greedy. The fact that a number of landlords take Section 8 tenants is pretty good evidence for the hypothesis that landlords are greedy.
So then how do you propose to force rentals in the suburbs where people typically buy their homes instead of renting?
And the issues created by artificially lowering the income levels in these areas still stand regardless of rent vs owning.
Require a certain amount of zoning for apartments. That was easy.
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.
. Anyway, people like you always whine about the race card being tosses when someone calls you out on your prejudice. Thinking I've been owned is just another fantasy of your's along with thinking I called people racist for disagreeing with them. I only used that term for people that actually are racist. So if you want me to knock it off, don't be such a bigot.
