Opinion Opposing section 8 housing is racist?

[Son of Ireland 34]

How about if you rely on the government to house you, then you lose all right to complain about where they house you?

 

[cottagecheesefan]

Section 8 is turning into a mess, at least in FL. There is like a 1-2 year wait list, sometimes even 3.

On top of that, all the homeless shelters are full, and there is weeks-month long wait list for even that.

Sorry if this has nothing to do with the thread

 

[Sketch]

"I hate poor people. Wahhhh wahhhhh. " stfu

 

[giusti825]

Fair point.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that old ladies and the disabled don't make up the majority of the population group in section 8 housing.

On that topic.

For those that are fans of this.
There is nothing stopping people from buying property and renting it out under Section 8.

I wonder how many supporters of this are actually putting their money where their mouth is.

To me it would be a terrible investment.

However, somebody has to put their money down and help the old ladies and the disabled.

Its actually so profitable that they run radio ads in the bronx to help people get into the low income housing market. Its actually lower risk. The government pays the security deposit and the last months rent up front. If you take a homeless veteran, you get a $4000 check and your broker gets $2000. If a homeless vet stops paying his rent, the VA will pay all arrears when he leaves.

The government is guaranteeing that these scam artists get way over market value. Either the government should inspect each apartment and assign an appropriate price its willing to pay, or the government should just outright own housing, but these vouchers are destroying the economy in the bronx and making people who work full time dependents of the government which has got to hurt their sense of independence and the pride they have in working.

 

[The ScorpioN]

"I hate poor people. Wahhhh wahhhhh. " stfu

We don't hate you, just go be poor somewhere else.

 

[ElKarlo]

One of the biggest problems with Section 8 is that it artificially inflates rent prices. Landlords wouldn't charge $1600 a month for a studio if that wasn't the max amount a section 8 voucher would pay. In a sense, Section 8 forces the spread for the need for section 8.

I think the government should just buy buildings outright from landlords, give them slightly above market value and house the low income for 30% of their net earnings. But they should spread it out. Putting all the low income in one neighborhood concentrates poverty. It should be various buildings throughout the city.

Whats currently happening is landlords with more than six units in a building will almost by default set their rents to the section 8 maximums. Its a scam. The section 8 vouchers in the bronx have created a situation where way too large a portion of the city is dependent on vouchers because the wages in the bronx cant reasonably pay for housing. The price of the apartments doesn't reflect their market value or correlate in the slightest with the wages.

So we have a situation where investors are getting into the practice of making new buildings with the intent of exlcusively renting to section 8 voucher holder so they can get the government to give them way over market value.

if section 8 were to go away in the bronx, rental prices would be cut in half overnight. Landlords would be forced to choose between having a bunch of empty apartments or making reasonable rental prices given the wages of the workers in the area.

I think within 10 years, almost everyone living in central and south bronx will need a voucher even with 2 jobs. The voucher values increase faster than wages and faster than the market value of the apartments. I honestly think its all a huge kickback scam.

The "housing market" i.e. home prices are used as an economic success marker. That shit makes absolutely no sense if nobody can afford an apartment without a government subsidy. Its like using the stock market in 2020 as a measure of the economy, when 88% of stocks are owned by the top 10%. Sure, it looks nice that the dow is at 19000, but that doesnt accurately reflect reality at all for 90% of society.

I wholeheartedly agree. I think a lot of this affordable housing is a scam. Maybe it had good intentions, but it's clearly being games by landlords. It also makes rents higher, and rise father than wages. Which isn't good for society.
I wonder if a Singapore model would work? Where you rent a place for below market and eventually are allowed to own it. Which gives an inventive and a punishment for those that mess around and aren't responsible.
I think it's another example.of something that needs radical reworking. As it's just taking money away from many and ruinning neighborhoods. And it's really being done so in the least effective way possible

 

[Badger67]

I hate it when geared to income housing allows gang members to move in next to me (or inflates y property taxes to where i receive no benefits from its increments) . I don't need your heroin or sex trafficking next door thanks. I like my neighborhood without scumbags.

 

[Captain Davis]

Fair point.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that old ladies and the disabled don't make up the majority of the population group in section 8 housing.

On that topic.

For those that are fans of this.
There is nothing stopping people from buying property and renting it out under Section 8.

I wonder how many supporters of this are actually putting their money where their mouth is.

To me it would be a terrible investment.

However, somebody has to put their money down and help the old ladies and the disabled.

My brother in law did just that. He has made a killing.

 

[Captain Davis]

"I hate poor people. Wahhhh wahhhhh. " stfu

You sound poor.

 

[milkmandanl]

Having poor people live in neighborhoods they otherwise couldn't afford causes property value to go down in that neighborhood. It also makes the schools worse, and brings in more crime. This is all because poverty breeds more crime, and worse schools, which in turn, lowers home values.

But, it's not fair to let only people who can afford to live in these homes do so, because most of them are white. If the racial mix of people in upper middle class neighborhoods had more blacks, then the government wouldn't have to allow section 8 housing. And if you are against section 8 housing, it's okay, if the people being excluded are white. But if they are black, you're a segragationist, or a racist. Is that correct?

I don’t agree with either paragraph and am confused as to what point the 2nd paragraph if making....

to answer your question directly...No or yes, depending on whether or not you agree with what you stated.

I live in an upper middle class area of North Atlanta and it is extremely diverse....

 

[Pullmyfinger]

My brother in law did just that. He has made a killing.

I had no idea.
One of my coworkers owns a duplex and a couple of houses.

He has mentioned that he felt section 8 was risky.

I'm seeing a different perspective on this. Thanks to this thread.

 

[giusti825]

I wholeheartedly agree. I think a lot of this affordable housing is a scam. Maybe it had good intentions, but it's clearly being games by landlords. It also makes rents higher, and rise father than wages. Which isn't good for society.
I wonder if a Singapore model would work? Where you rent a place for below market and eventually are allowed to own it. Which gives an inventive and a punishment for those that mess around and aren't responsible.
I think it's another example.of something that needs radical reworking. As it's just taking money away from many and ruinning neighborhoods. And it's really being done so in the least effective way possible

I visited Canada for a couple weeks and while i was in Toronto one of my friends there said they dont really have economic restrictions on housing. He told me that his next door neighbor could be a millionaire or a hells angel and he would never know without getting to know the person. They believe that dispersing poverty instead of concentrating it leads to better outcomes for the society as a whole. It makes people less judgmental of the poor while also surrounding the poor with better examples to escape poverty.

I think an approach more in line with this would be better. But the implementation becomes more difficult in American cities due to discrimination and the racial correlation with poverty in American cities.

 

[Ayin]

.
I think government housing should exist, but it should be very far away and limited to remote areas where no one wants to live. Like next to landfills for example. The purpose of it would be to provide the minimum social safety net while minimizing the harm these people cause to the rest of the population. This would dramatically improve cities and make them much safer and more hospital to live.

A few obvious concerns for your plan spring to mind.
For example, the people in that housing are probably among the least likely to own vehichles, and the most needful if public transit, as well as containing many of the least mobile. Locating them far away from resources (grocers, pharmacies) and care (hospitals, addiction centres) seems incredibly counter productive.

Because California is full. You could move to somewhere that is not California and you would be fine. There is a ton of affordable housing in this country. You do not need someone else to pay for part of your housing. I am sure the weather in California is lovely and you feel entitled to live there, but you could always just live somewhere else.

I am in Canada, it we have been going through this nationally to some degree and provincially as well, and it has become clear to me over the last decade that Te vast majority of people would prefer to live in the city they really can’t afford to live in (or in the specific part of that city they cannot afford) and begrudge anyone else who leaves and makes their life elsewhere for the differences between them. The classic example being criticising others for owning homes as having accomplished the impossible when said home owner moved to an area specifically to make that possible.

I know people who legitimately need it, they have real issues for whatever reasons..I also live in a nice neighborhood that would not go for sec 8 housing...they can be designed and located in more commercial type areas...

Going into our version of such government housing was incredibly sad. Filled with people who were obviously old, infirm, mentally unwell, and all of them scared to go outside of their tiny, dirt apartments because of the other people they share the building with.

I would not in any way want to live near that area, but more specifically I would not want my wife or child or my elderly neighbours to have to, but I really wish many of the people who lived in those areas could be removed as well, as they don’t deserve to e housed alongside drug-fuelled thugs.

So old ladies and people too disabled to work should have to live next to garbage dumps?

Republicans, man.

And children. In a family that is a disaster, a child’s refuge is usually away from the home, and hopefully it is also away from the complex and the culture of that area. If those kids can get to school, if they can spend more time away with better people in better situations, in clubs and parks, at churches or community centres, they have a better chance, and those kids have extremely minimal ability to travel, being children, so location is important.

If they have nowhere else to go besides their miserable apartment with their damaged family members or hanging out in the stairwells or parking lot with the people from the same building who are willing to accept them, Their future is likely going to be grim, and worse for us all.

Section 8 is turning into a mess, at least in FL. There is like a 1-2 year wait list, sometimes even 3.

On top of that, all the homeless shelters are full, and there is weeks-month long wait list for even that.

Sorry if this has nothing to do with the thread

That seems common. Here we have about the same issue, and our government subsidized housing is about a Billion dollars behind on repairs. So we need to build more, but absolutely can’t afford what we have, as we can’t even keep most of it to a level considered livable.

 

[cottagecheesefan]

That seems common. Here we have about the same issue, and our government subsidized housing is about a Billion dollars behind on repairs. So we need to build more, but absolutely can’t afford what we have, as we can’t even keep most of it to a level considered livable.

Yea, it is pretty fucked up. In reality, these people living in shit conditions and/or on the street leads to billions in healthcare costs each year.

With so many people working at home these days (even before COVID), it would make sense to refurbish some of these office buildings and retail space into housing for the poor. Heck, a lot of empty retail space/office buildings are already in urban areas, so it wouldn't be shifting the dregs of society to the suburbs to cause affluent people to panic.

 

[Badger67]

I visited Canada for a couple weeks and while i was in Toronto one of my friends there said they dont really have economic restrictions on housing. He told me that his next door neighbor could be a millionaire or a hells angel and he would never know without getting to know the person. They believe that dispersing poverty instead of concentrating it leads to better outcomes for the society as a whole. It makes people less judgmental of the poor while also surrounding the poor with better examples to escape poverty.

I think an approach more in line with this would be better. But the implementation becomes more difficult in American cities due to discrimination and the racial correlation with poverty in American cities.

Has your friend ever been to Regent park (canada's oldest housing projects)? most of it is all government housing basically and a shit hole/gangs/ghetto. Toronto has a lot of this surprisingly.

Dispersing poverty might work pending what type of people get placed, but from my experience its always been a shitty neighbor/gangbanger who moves in. They prefer this because it keeps the heat off them....simultaneously turning a good neighborhood to shit. We had a horrible experience a few years ago with this. Thankfully, we rid the neighborhood of pieces of shit...

 

[Deleted member 159002]

There's a moral imperative to ignore race and make make laws/policies that give everyone the same opportunity, regardless of their race. Making enough money to live in a nice neighborhood is something anyone can do if they are smart and work hard. Punishing the hard working, and successful people by putting shitty, low-rent, section 8 housing in their neighborhood is wrong. That's especially true when you're doing it based on what you think a neighborhood's racial makeup should be. Race should not be a factor.

But you liberal scumbags only care about creating your little utopian world of equality, where everybody gets what they want, and everything is fair. A place where nobody't feelings ever get hurt. But life isn't fair. And when the government tries to make it fair, by forcing a person's race to be the primary decider of what policy should be, things only get worse.

I agree with most of your post, but "You liberal scumbags" is way off. I'm not a liberal.

 

[Beechwood]

Having section 8 housing in the suburbs is part of Joe Biden's and the Democrat parties election platform this election go around. As is typical of politics if you are against something the Democratic party wants then you are all to often labeled a racist.

What isn't mentioned is that isn't just minorities that live in section 8 housing. Many white Americans live in these neighborhoods too. Also black Americans are leaving these low income neighborhoods, moving to nicer suburb areas faster than white Americans from what I've read. Black and latino Americans like nice neighborhoods also. Additionally creating large section 8 housing is costly, which will result in higher property taxes.

The True Plight of Black Americans

http://walterewilliams.com/the-true-plight-of-black-americans/

excerpt:

.....Academic liberals, civil rights advocates and others blamed the exodus on racism — “white flight” to the suburbs to avoid blacks. But blacks have been fleeing some cities at higher rates than whites. The five cities whose suburbs have the fastest-growing black populations are Miami, Dallas, Washington, Houston and Atlanta. It turns out that blacks, like whites, want better and safer schools for their kids and don’t like to be mugged or have their property vandalized. And like white people, if they have the means, black people cannot wait to leave troubled cities.....

 

[Gregolian]

Those who embrace it don't actually live in areas where it's implemented. We had a lengthy thread on this a few days ago and many many posters had horrifying stories of their once livable neighborhoods becoming shitholes very quickly to the point they had to move to escape it. Imagine working hard in life to provide for your family all so that one day that safety and security goes out the window through no fault of your own.

This happened a couple years ago in Salt Lake City (@Fawlty Elizabeth might have heard about it too).

Utah has a homeless problem and with the Salt Lake Valley being the only REAL metro area in the state, they all end up here. The CTers claim other parts of the state get the homeless bus tickets to come to SLC but I really feel they all just kind of end up here cause they stick out like sore thumbs in places like Heber or St George.

The folks in the Sugarhouse area... essentially the old honey processing part of town that has been somewhat gentrified with a Trader Joe's and upscale apartments and commercial areas that just remodeled old buildings to keep the aesthetics, wanted a new homeless shelter for the folks cause the current one downtown wasn't large enough. A commendable argument I would agree with.

The City then looking around goes "hey, we own like 3-4 city lots in Sugarhouse that isn't being used let's build it there" and the people in Sugarhouse FREAKED THE FUCK OUT demanding it not be built there because they didn't want property values to tank and to have homeless in THEIR neighborhoods.

Magna had something semi similar happen. When a lot of folks started being priced out of Cali they moved to Utah and surrounding states. A lot of them were families with kids trying to get their kids out of the gang lifestyle or be away from it. Government housing went up in Magna and lots of qualified homes for Section 8 vouchers and such. Guess what happens? Magna is now known as the poor part of town with a ton of gang problems and the Unified Police Department gives BONUS'S to their cops for living in Magna and West Valley City's PD gives bonus's to their cops for living in West Valley City which borders Magna. Something like only 5% of each force actually take their Department up on the offer.

EDIT:
The other thing SLC has run into is their "income restricted" housing is wack. I was looking for apartments since my lease ends in about 5 months and found a GREAT one right downtown, built in the last three years and literally a 2 block walk to my office and a like 5-6 block walk to a nice grocery store. Rent for a 1 bedroom is $875 a month but then I noticed the listing said "income restrictions may apply".

I call them up and ask what the income restriction is. No shit the answer was "if you're living alone you have to make 35k a year or less" and that's gross, pre-tax.

Wait... WHAT?! If I make 35k a year GROSS that means I walk home with like... 28k at best after taxes that year.... That means I make approximately 2k a month and you think someone that only makes 2k a month can afford $875 rent as well as utilities which with electricity and shit in the summer for A/C and gas in the winter for heat means they're probably dropping close to $1100 a month on rent and utilities you think they can make it work? It's a fucking joke.

I make 44k a year gross and $875 wouldn't be hard but it wouldn't exactly leave me a lot of room to put stuff aside on the checks that I deem my "rent and bills" checks.

 

[ElKarlo]

I visited Canada for a couple weeks and while i was in Toronto one of my friends there said they dont really have economic restrictions on housing. He told me that his next door neighbor could be a millionaire or a hells angel and he would never know without getting to know the person. They believe that dispersing poverty instead of concentrating it leads to better outcomes for the society as a whole. It makes people less judgmental of the poor while also surrounding the poor with better examples to escape poverty.

I think an approach more in line with this would be better. But the implementation becomes more difficult in American cities due to discrimination and the racial correlation with poverty in American cities.

And also crime. Man all the section 8 housing in my area were basically the entire source if crime in my town. It's not racial, it's awful people and they don't feel the responsibility to act like decent people. Which is another failing of section 8 imho. Perhaps home ownership would lead to some people behaving better.
But basically as it is now it's getting people stuck on govt assistance with no end game. Which just makes them dependences. And no human thrives under those circumstances

 

[Gregolian]

And also crime. Man all the section 8 housing in my area were basically the entire source if crime in my town. It's not racial, it's awful people and they don't feel the responsibility to act like decent people. Which is another failing of section 8 imho. Perhaps home ownership would lead to some people behaving better.
But basically as it is now it's getting people stuck on govt assistance with no end game. Which just makes them dependences. And no human thrives under those circumstances

There's an entire season of The Wire devoted to this shit and it runs through all 5 seasons as at least a thread.