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.
It's only common sense. Suburban kids have little to no school choice. Urban kids in large cities have less problems with choice. There are a boatload of specialized schools in major cities that kids can attend as long as they can get there....and they're FREE! And big cities have less issues with transportation.
And you misread what I said about suburban and rural schools. No...they aren't all bad. Many are excellent.
But just as any are no more than decent at best. I live in an affluent semi rural school district, and our schools are decent...maybe even good. But it's overcrowded (we had to close a few schools due to dilapidated old buildings) and since this is a retirement haven, it's very difficult to raise taxes to fund new school construction.
In Tucson, choices are far better.
Actually, he is in the school he was zoned for before he came to our family. People freak out when they hear what school he is at. But it's been wonderful - maybe that's a slight exaggeration, but since I get far more annoyed with the suburban school, the city school seems paradise sometimes.
I guess my theory is you have a choice: zoned, private, homeschool or move. Make the most of what you have. I get what you're dealing with regarding the retirement haven. That is a huge headache in our area not just with schools, but garbage pickup, emergency services, snow removal....you know - anything their community has privately.
It might help the outcome for someone coming from comparatively worse schools. It might remove someone from a bad place.
The places are bad in the first place because the people who live there
are Section 8 types of people.
They live in formerly working class neighborhoods from the pre-welfare age,
which had beautifully manicured lawns and stately homes that have fallen into
disrepair and crime when the working class moved out into the suburbs.
The same neighborhoods that were clean and safe are crime-ridden and dirty
because the people are different, not the buildings.
Why is there a push to send professional welfare recipients into the suburbs
and more desirous locations, such as coastline or prime city blocks ?
Because they can. They are becoming a majority politically, and can elect
politicians who simply mandate to give them their dream homes for free.
Their former homes will be quickly occupied by the hundreds of millions more
that are coming to America, where they will live for free too.
On the bold, actually an illegal alien is not allowed to get Section 8. They must be a legal resident and upon acceptance into the program housing authorities do confirm legal residency status. However, they do not have to be an American citizen, just a legal resident.
If you don't like the link I posted, there are others out there that say the same thing.
Once an illegal alien births an anchor baby, due to said baby, the family is eligible for all sorts of welfare programs, including Section 8.
So...if landlords are allowed to do credit checks on potential Section 8 tenants, then explain how so many Section 8 tenants end up trashing their places and/or bring crime to a neighborhood?
On the bold, actually an illegal alien is not allowed to get Section 8. They must be a legal resident and upon acceptance into the program housing authorities do confirm legal residency status. However, they do not have to be an American citizen, just a legal resident.
There are multiple ways of performing a background check on legal residents as there are databases that background check contractors use (all housing authorities I ever worked with outsource background checks BTW) that can check by name itself and other distinguishing characteristics including resident ID/green card numbers and TINs. Many immigrants have a TIN that is used as an SSN. There are hundreds of global databases that can and many times are checked on immigrants. Places I worked with actually have very extensive checks performed on immigrants moreso than American citizens, which I think is warranted.
On your link, it is a blog and opinion piece and does not reference federal, state or local guidelines pertaining to housing. Usually a lay person's interpretation of a regulation is incorrect. The person who is applying for housing must be a legal resident. They cannot be illegal.
I've never worked in Oregon where your link is from, maybe they have some sort of state guidelines that override this, but I highly doubt it as it is a federal rule.
Illegal alien crosses border --> pops out kid ---> kid is considered a citizen ---> kid qualifies entire household for Section 8.
The places are bad in the first place because the people who live there
are Section 8 types of people.
They live in formerly working class neighborhoods from the pre-welfare age,
which had beautifully manicured lawns and stately homes that have fallen into
disrepair and crime when the working class moved out into the suburbs.
The same neighborhoods that were clean and safe are crime-ridden and dirty
because the people are different, not the buildings.
Why is there a push to send professional welfare recipients into the suburbs
and more desirous locations, such as coastline or prime city blocks ?
Because they can. They are becoming a majority politically, and can elect
politicians who simply mandate to give them their dream homes for free.
Their former homes will be quickly occupied by the hundreds of millions more
that are coming to America, where they will live for free too.
??? ??? Some seniors and disabled people are Section 8 people. Are they like Section 8 baby mamas?
On the bold, actually an illegal alien is not allowed to get Section 8. They must be a legal resident and upon acceptance into the program housing authorities do confirm legal residency status. However, they do not have to be an American citizen, just a legal resident.
There are multiple ways of performing a background check on legal residents as there are databases that background check contractors use (all housing authorities I ever worked with outsource background checks BTW) that can check by name itself and other distinguishing characteristics including resident ID/green card numbers and TINs. Many immigrants have a TIN that is used as an SSN. There are hundreds of global databases that can and many times are checked on immigrants. Places I worked with actually have very extensive checks performed on immigrants moreso than American citizens, which I think is warranted.
On your link, it is a blog and opinion piece and does not reference federal, state or local guidelines pertaining to housing. Usually a lay person's interpretation of a regulation is incorrect. The person who is applying for housing must be a legal resident. They cannot be illegal.
I've never worked in Oregon where your link is from, maybe they have some sort of state guidelines that override this, but I highly doubt it as it is a federal rule.
And what's with an SRO being gender-exclusionary?
The other property is a Single Room Occupancy Unit (SRO) located on Coral Street NE in Salem. The SRO units offer housing for eligible single women. The site features handicapped accessible units and furnished bedrooms with shared kitchen, restroom and community space. Tenant rent is based on monthly income and all utilities excluding telephone are invluded. Priority is given to homeless single women, although single non-homeless women may also be served when there are adequate vacancies.
If you don't like the link I posted, there are others out there that say the same thing.
Once an illegal alien births an anchor baby, due to said baby, the family is eligible for all sorts of welfare programs, including Section 8.
So...if landlords are allowed to do credit checks on potential Section 8 tenants, then explain how so many Section 8 tenants end up trashing their places and/or bring crime to a neighborhood?
The bold red is not based on any facts or truth. As stated, I worked for a property management company that managed both HCV and market rate tenants/properties. Market rate tenants trash places just as much as Section 8. Market rate tenants also can turn out to be criminals as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt
Illegal alien crosses border --> pops out kid ---> kid is considered a citizen ---> kid qualifies entire household for Section 8.
On the blue bold of both commenters, the person who applies to be accepted into the HCV/Section 8 program MUST be a legal resident. A minor cannot apply.
Therefore an illegal having an "anchor baby" does not automatically make his/her parents eligible for housing assistance.
The parent has to be a legal resident. When an application is processed, they must submit proof of citizenship or legal resident status. If they don't have it, then they cannot be accepted into the program no matter who is a US born citizen in their household. The parent is the leaseholder and not the child. The leaseholder MUST be a legal resident or citizen.
Housing is not the same as foodstamps and TANF, etc. It is much more federally mandated and has much less local authority from states/municipalities primarily because for public housing (illegals cannot live in public housing either) the feds own the property. For Section 8, they directly foot the bill and they have strict requirements of residents especially in light of the "illegal immigration" issue.
I remember back in 2009 and 2010 when I worked in the field prior to accepting ARRA (aka "the Stimulus") money that we had to obtain additional certification that our residents were legal residents due to additional screenings put in place via our background check contractor. We put quite a few residents through a lot of because we made them get us additional resident/citizenship information.
FWIW, I worked in Atlanta at that time and Atlanta actually has a VERY low rate of latino residents in public housing (when they had it) and Section 8 even though at the time, it had a rather large influx of illegal Latino immigrants especially. The residents that required additional screening were all Asian immigrants, primarily Korean and Russian. We had VERY few Latino residents at all compared to their population.
The other property is a Single Room Occupancy Unit (SRO) located on Coral Street NE in Salem. The SRO units offer housing for eligible single women. The site features handicapped accessible units and furnished bedrooms with shared kitchen, restroom and community space. Tenant rent is based on monthly income and all utilities excluding telephone are invluded. Priority is given to homeless single women, although single non-homeless women may also be served when there are adequate vacancies.
What you are describing is a privately owned development. It is not public housing. Those privately constructed/owned developments more than likely received tax credits from the government. There is nothing to preclude the development from being single gender residences. FWIW there are also developments created that are only for LGBTQ persons and for veterans.
As I have repeatedly stated in this thread, most people who do not work in the industry (and a large amount who do) really don't know much about the inner workings of "housing" in America.
There is a distinct difference betwwen "affordable," "workforce," "public," and HCV/Section 8 amongst others.
Obama's newest social project is to expand Section 8 out to the suburbs and exurbs with the idea being that doing so will improve the outcomes of the program participants. What is not clear to me is how this improvement will supposedly happen. Is success and achievement something that is in the water? Or perhaps success is similar to a communicable disease in that it can be transmitted through the air or bodily fluids? Maybe we will soon be forced to have sex with Section 8 recipients so that the successful genes can be injected into the Section 8 gene pool.
We all know that this program is Obama's way of punishing white flight. I just think it is amusing how there is absolutely no logical explanation as to how this would improve anything. Apparently being around white people will improve through osmosis or magic.
After he leaves office, does anyone think Obama will buy a home in the DC area next to a section 8 housing unit?
There are exceptions to everything, and while many people living in Section 8 housing are quiet and just blend into the neighborhood, in many more cases that's not what happens.
This isn't a racial issue, it's an economic one. Read this article for a better understanding about why people do not want Section 8 housing where they live. I work with a few people who left poorer, crime-ridden neighborhoods, only to find their new neighborhoods are going the same route due to section 8 housing.
In theory, it's a great idea. Sprinkle the impoverished throughout nicer communities so they can take advantage of better schools, no crime, and have an opportunity to lift themselves up out of poverty. Once executed, the result is an increase in problems and a decrease in the value of the homes in the new neighborhood. Very unfair to those who simply wanted to provide a safe, quiet place for their families and found a way to do so.
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.
