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.
I worked for many years for housing authorities as a consultant and as an employee.
FYI, Housing Choice Voucher residents (HCV is now what they call Section 8) has been in suburban communities for 20+ years now. It is not a new thing that Obama started.
On the OP, it improves outcomes by de-concentrating poverty and crime. There have been studies done over the decades that have shown that those children especially who are HCV residents benefit from a better education and better social outcomes by not growing up in poverty stricken, urban communities.
De-concentrating poverty in this way has also caused crime to decrease in practically every major urban area since the mid to late 1990s.
It does work.
Yep. I grew up in a very nice suburb where there was a Section 8 apartment complex just on the other side of the neighborhood. Most people had no idea it was any different than the other apartment nearby apartments. Schools were great, people were nice, and serious crime was practically non-existent.
Liberals like living in the city core, and many of them don't like being around poor people. Moving Section 8 housing out to the suburbs gets the poor out of their neighborhoods.
Does it make sense to have them closer to the core where public transportation is both cheaper and easier to manage? Yes. Is there more jobs available closer to the core where employers are more densely packed? Yes.
So why move them to the suburbs? Simple, NIMBY liberalism.
Normally, you hear liberals complain about sprawl. Seems it's ok when it gets the poor away from them.
Section 8 has been in the suburbs for some time, low income housing is a problem in cities like NYC and SF. Many suburbs have mass transit, not as convenient as the city but it's there.
On the OP, it improves outcomes by de-concentrating poverty and crime. There have been studies done over the decades that have shown that those children especially who are HCV residents benefit from a better education and better social outcomes by not growing up in poverty stricken, urban communities.
De-concentrating crime and poverty = spreading it around. It's not actually eliminating it; rather it is introducing it to people who previously had little exposure to crime and poverty.
It's kind of like if your dog pooped on the floor. Assuming it was impossible to clean up, is it better to leave it in one pile or to smear it around the carpet?
Quote:
De-concentrating poverty in this way has also caused crime to decrease in practically every major urban area since the mid to late 1990s.
Makes sense, but what happened to crime in the formerly Section 8 free areas? Legitimate question - I don't know the answer.
De-concentrating crime and poverty = spreading it around. It's not actually eliminating it; rather it is introducing it to people who previously had little exposure to crime and poverty.
It's kind of like if your dog pooped on the floor. Assuming it was impossible to clean up, is it better to leave it in one pile or to smear it around the carpet?
Makes sense, but what happened to crime in the formerly Section 8 free areas? Legitimate question - I don't know the answer.
You are aware there is a difference between public housing and Section 8, right? Also, you do understand the concept of concentration and decentralization, right? Section 8 and public housing don't create crime, concentrating poor into one specific area tends to help create more crime. Also, Section 8 isn't easy to get into and very easy to get oneself kicked out of it, therefore if someone who lives an apartment or house that is Section 8 is committing a crime, it is best to report them so that they can be arrested for committing a crime, and removed from housing that is for law abiding Section 8 tenants.
Your dog poop analogy doesn't work at all when it comes to housing.....well except for the fact that it makes you look like you think that anyone who is poor and living in Section 8 housing must be the same as dog poop.
I worked for many years for housing authorities as a consultant and as an employee.
FYI, Housing Choice Voucher residents (HCV is now what they call Section 8) has been in suburban communities for 20+ years now. It is not a new thing that Obama started.
On the OP, it improves outcomes by de-concentrating poverty and crime. There have been studies done over the decades that have shown that those children especially who are HCV residents benefit from a better education and better social outcomes by not growing up in poverty stricken, urban communities.
De-concentrating poverty in this way has also caused crime to decrease in practically every major urban area since the mid to late 1990s.
It does work.
While what you posted may very well be true, you're only giving us the benefits a to the section 8 crowd and inner city. Now what about the rest of the story. What's the affect on the suburbs where a large concentration of section 8s move to?
Also, Section 8 isn't easy to get into and very easy to get oneself kicked out of it, therefore if someone who lives an apartment or house that is Section 8 is committing a crime, it is best to report them so that they can be arrested for committing a crime, and removed from housing that is for law abiding Section 8 tenants.
No, you're confused. It's not Section 8 qualification that is "hard" to "get into",
and any criminal activity eviction is just that... an eviction off one property,
per its rules, but not a loss of Section 8 entitlement at all.
Section 8 is a voucher program. It goes with you like real income.
You are aware there is a difference between public housing and Section 8, right? Also, you do understand the concept of concentration and decentralization, right? Section 8 and public housing don't create crime, concentrating poor into one specific area tends to help create more crime. Also, Section 8 isn't easy to get into and very easy to get oneself kicked out of it, therefore if someone who lives an apartment or house that is Section 8 is committing a crime, it is best to report them so that they can be arrested for committing a crime, and removed from housing that is for law abiding Section 8 tenants.
Your dog poop analogy doesn't work at all when it comes to housing.....well except for the fact that it makes you look like you think that anyone who is poor and living in Section 8 housing must be the same as dog poop.
I think some people are confusing putting poor minorities in projects back in the 1970's with section 8 and public housing which are both quite different. Section 8 amounts to an apartment or house in some locations, it is not concentrated in any one community and some are better managed than others but there is oversight.
While what you posted may very well be true, you're only giving us the benefits a to the section 8 crowd and inner city. Now what about the rest of the story. What's the affect on the suburbs where a large concentration of section 8s move to?
That's the thing. Suburbs and outside the inner city are geographically a larger area. You seem to be under the impression they are concentrated in certain suburban areas.
Without adequate public transportation (usually not available in the suburbs), most/many recipients of Section 8 benefits would not necessarily want to live there, it seems to me. I could be wrong but I don't think most don't own cars.
No, you're confused. It's not Section 8 qualification that is "hard" to "get into",
and any criminal activity eviction is just that... an eviction off one property,
per its rules, but not a loss of Section 8 entitlement at all.
Section 8 is a voucher program. It goes with you like real income.
We have rented to Section 8 tenants.
So then you know that Section 8 also assists the smelly disabled and the leechers elderly?
Local preferences and waiting list - what are they and how do they affect me?
Since the demand for housing assistance often exceeds the limited resources available to HUD and the local housing agencies, long waiting periods are common. In fact, a PHA may close its waiting list when it has more families on the list than can be assisted in the near future.
PHAs may establish local preferences for selecting applicants from its waiting list. For example, PHAs may give a preference to a family who is (1) homeless or living in substandard housing, (2) paying more than 50% of its income for rent, or (3) involuntarily displaced. Families who qualify for any such local preferences move ahead of other families on the list who do not qualify for any preference. Each PHA has the discretion to establish local preferences to reflect the housing needs and priorities of its particular...
Tenant's Obligations: When a family selects a housing unit, and the PHA approves the unit and lease, the family signs a lease with the landlord for at least one year. The tenant may be required to pay a security deposit to the landlord. After the first year the landlord may initiate a new lease or allow the family to remain in the unit on a month-to-month lease.
When the family is settled in a new home, the family is expected to comply with the lease and the program requirements, pay its share of rent on time, maintain the unit in good condition and notify the PHA of any changes in income or family composition.
Seems like it's hard to get into.
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.
