patrick.net

Bap33 says

Get Section 8 out of the sub-divisions and back into the projects.

That's a great idea, as if we don't have enough poverty condensed into a small, run down, crime ridden areas that don't have access to decent schools, grocery stores, or safe open spaces... You know what, you should run for president... You'd fit right in with "Gingrich." http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/387033/may-19-2011/john-lithgow-performs-gingrich-press-release

Bap33 says

the dirty secret of Section 8 Landlording is to not worry about the tennants portion, since the gaurenteed portion being covered by taxpayers is normally more than they could rent it for to working people.

I've never met a property owner or professional manager with that attitude. That's not to say it doesn't exist, there's lots of uneducated, ill-informed, amateur property owners out there, many with the best intentions, and there are some slumlords out there gaming the system, but to paint an entire industry with the color of the worst among us isn't accurate, or intellectually honest.

Bap33 says

I am not sure if your area has some type of 70%/30% rule, but here in Merced County, California, there Section 8 is up to full payment of rent.

That's because some people have absolutely no income. Hard to believe I know, but it's true. Unless you'd expect people to live on the small amount of aid money they collect from the government, or from collecting beverage containers and recycling them for the CRV.

Bap33 says

I do not agree with taxpayers paying for investulators to line their pockets while renting to who-ever, turning good neighborhoods to gangland.

I don't know of, and never heard of anyone getting rich by renting to poor people who use section 8 vouchers. It sounds like you're listening to too much Bill O or Glenn B. Maybe you should take a drive into "gangland" and have a talk with a few of the professional property managers there and ask them about their experiences with the program, good and bad.

Maybe a new perspective wouldn't harm you.

Well let's take a different view on section8. If you have a fannue/freddie/fha insured government loan, then isn't a great majority of US loan owners section 8? In a way?

Bap33 says

I am not sure if your area has some type of 70%/30% rule, but here in Merced County, California, there Section 8 is up to full payment of rent.

Merced isn't special. 30% of income, adjusted for medical bills and utilities, There are people who get refunds every month to pay their bills. Section 8 is based on market rent.

The program isn't perfect - one type of S8 pays a flat amount to the landlord and if the landlord charges more, the renter pays it. How he gets his money to do so is his business. For example, if market rent is $600, tenant pays $200, Govt pays $400; if the actual rent is $1000 the tenant will pay $600. That program works both ways - if the govt will pay $400 and the landlord charges $450, the renter pays $50.

Another type requires that the tenant find a place where the landlord will accept the S8 & tenant amounts in full with no other monies changing hands.

In most areas of the country, to receive subsidized housing is damn hard. The waiting lists are at least 3 years. The system isn't perfect, but concentrating the poor in a certain area doesn't work. Higher crime, etc.

IMHO, if a person lives in subsidized housing they should have to maintain it 100%. Tenants should have to work as hard as any home owner or renter. Rather than paying maintentance people, we should teach the tenants how to fix things and make them employable in the process.

There are so many homeless people who don't qualify or are on waiting lists. Single people often don't qualify for any type of assistance.

propmgrjay says

Maybe a new perspective wouldn't harm you.

oh, yea. Until you're very poor with no options, I guess you won't understand.

Nomograph says

rather than try to give welfare recipients a feeling of normalcy and societal integration.

That attitude being so widely held in our society has encouraged inter-generational poverty and increased crime. There really is a middle road between the extremes. When we get one side away from exploiting the poor and perpetuating a sense of entitlement, and get the other side of the discussion to allow some help and some tools to be provided, I think you'd be surprised at how well many poor people, or at least their children, could end up doing.

Section 8 just ensures people have a decent (minimally acceptable) home to live in. They are not great homes, they are not homes you'd want to live in. That home gives children some stability they may not normally have, which allows them to do better in school, and allows them to have a more normal childhood. If that home is located outside of the really bad neighborhoods, even more normal. That consistency and normalcy allows the child to get an education... Something that is required if they are going to have a better life and be more productive for the community than their parents were capable of. What on earth could be wrong or bad about that?

elliemae says

one type of S8 pays a flat amount to the landlord and if the landlord charges more, the renter pays it. How he gets his money to do so is his business.

I don't think that's exactly how it works... Now I'm not an expert on the government side of the program, I've only been on the property owner side, but I can tell you it works like this.

You're right, section 8 is like a three leg stool. The govt, the property owner, and the resident each being a leg. All needing to do their part for the program to work well for everyone.

What you didn't make clear is the property owner enters into a contract with the government agreeing to go by the rules of the government, so really they are the master partner, and the owner and the resident are subordinate partners, or shorter legs on the stool if you will.

When a resident goes to the county and asks for the program, they go through a complicated application process, and their counselor puts their information into a computer that provides some numbers. As far as the resident is concerned, two numbers are key. How many bedrooms are they entitled to, and what percentage, if any, they have to pay of their rent.

The counselor fills out a form for the resident that contains this info, and the resident takes that form and goes house hunting. When the applicant shows up at my office and mention they have section 8 voucher, I ask for the paper. I go onto my computer and pull up the owner form on the section 8 webpage. I fill in the numbers I see on the applicants voucher, I answer some questions about the home they are hoping to rent, like how many bedrooms there are, how much the rent is, etc, and the section 8 computer on the other end of the internet decides if this apartment qualifies for that applicant or not.

I can charge anything I want for rent for that home, but if my rent is too high, the applicant wont be allowed to use their section 8 voucher for that home, and will have to keep looking.

Someone earlier said something about property collecting much higher rents from section 8 than they could get from the regular market. I've never seen that. I've always had to decrease the amount of rent I'm willing to take on that unit in order to fill it with that applicant so their voucher would be approved for that unit.

elliemae says

if a person lives in subsidized housing they should have to maintain it 100%. Tenants should have to work as hard as any home owner or renter. Rather than paying maintentance people, we should teach the tenants how to fix things and make them employable in the process.

I totally agree with that, and I think that would result in many units being taken care of much better by the residents. The problem with that is whenever a resident is allowed to do any kind maintenance on the property. there is a tremendous amount of financial liability created for the owner. That's a really dangerous thing to mess around with, and the owner is much better off not allowing that to happen.

elliemae says

oh, yea. Until you're very poor with no options, I guess you won't understand.

You misunderstood my comment. Please go back and read it again, focusing on the comment I was responding to, then tell me I don't understand.

propmgrjay says

You misunderstood my comment. Please go back and read it again, focusing on the comment I was responding to, then tell me I don't understand.

I wasn't speaking to you - I agree with most of your comments. I was speaking to BAP, Nomo, and KillerJane, who all lack an understanding of what it's like to be poor and without choices.

Actually, the program ya'll call Section 8 is a combination of programs that subsidize people in the community, although according to this article Section 8 certificates are being phased out:
http://www.infoline.org/InformationLibrary/Documents/Subsidized%20Rental%20Housing%20-%20Section%208%20Tenant%20Based%20fj.asp

"A rental subsidy is paid directly to the landlord on behalf of the participating family. The family then pays the difference between the actual rent charged by the landlord and the amount subsidized by the program. The agency issuing the voucher determines a payment standard which is used to calculate the amount of rental assistance a family will receive, but does not affect the amount of rent a landlord may charge or the family may pay."

These vouchers are also portable, meaning you can move from city to city, or out of state, and receive the subsidy. The amount of subsidy is based on the market rent in the area in which the renter lives, not the city of origin.

Even tho this information is from a specific state, everyone follows the same rules. Now, let's discuss how easy it is to get a voucher:

waiting list to submit an application (not receive a rental) in 2007 in Hampton Virginia: 3 years

St. Louis: wait list for submission of applications is closed

Centralized waiting list in Massachusetts is only updated every two years to see if people on the list are still interested.

Ohio - the waiting list was open in April 2011; after submitting application there's a lotto to see who makes the actual list.

California - a few years on the wait list to be expected (doesn't say how long it is to get on the list).

It's demeaning & degrading to wait in line in order to have a chance to fill out an application that may or may not be accepted - and then the potential renters have to wait years before they get a place. Anyone who thinks that S8 renters have it easy don't understand the system.

When they open the list in Vegas, people are lined up around the block and there's no water available for them - even if it's 115 degrees outside.

The system isn't perfect, some people do manipulate it - but for the most part we're talking about people who want the opportunity to raise their children in an environment that doesn't hold up as role models people who are criminals and drug dealers. The projects do just that.

propmgrjay says

I don't know of, and never heard of anyone getting rich by renting to poor people who use section 8 vouchers.

this shows a lack of basic truth or understanding on your part. If you put up 20% of "X" for a unit. And you then rent that unit Section 8, then the rent is to be paid by welfare funds. You are having your unit paid for by taxpayers. You can rent it for 30 years, and guess what, the entire thing is now paid for by taxpayers. Specuvestors know the game well.

Now, if you will be honest, you will admit that a person (or corp) will use the Section 8 rentals the most once they learn how to game the system. They prefer welfare renters because they do not get laid off, and they are already single. Step 1 is to sign up for long term contracts. When you do HUD will pay to bring the property back to "as rented" condition. That would them mean that taxpayers will be making the monthly note, and then paying to rehad the rental. Yes, that is exactly the truth. And, yes, the big players around Merced County do it this way.

The only folks that have a bad time with a Section 8 rental are:
A) Those that value the neighbors and area their rental is in.
B) Those that only sign a short term agreement with HUD.
C) Those that try to collect the non-Section 8 portion of the rent that the welfare people are given in the form of cash. They are supposed to get some type of special feeling from taking money from a welfare source and paying the last little portion of their rent ... I never thought that a good idea since all it does is make the welfare check look like a father/husband's earned paycheck. Just my opinion.

@Ellie,
In some cases I feel that 30% is too large a portion of ones income to donate to rent. I would not be happy having to give up 30% for rent, and I never have paid that great of a percentage.
Free housing should be available to anyone wanting to access it. Donald Trump, me or you, should be able to access the same free housing should we feel we need to. The feel and the need should land on the shoulders of the patron, not the Gov.
I would be willing to bet that I know a bit more about getting by on nothing than you may believe, but that is not required to have a voice in the discussion. Everyone that feels Section 8 and EBT and free lunch and all other welfare is a great idea, owe it to the rest of the taxpayers to stop spending our money, and start giving more of their own without being asked.

The truth is Ellie, most folks do not even begin to realize how much welfare is in play these days. On our Power and Light bill we now have to pay extra, by Gov mandate, to cover the bills for those on welfare. Does Utah have that?

Remove Section 8 from the SFH arena and watch how quick the neighborhoods improve. The ones that do not improve will see the rental prices drop like a stone.

Yes, Section 8 for Gov owned projects.
Yes, drug testing for all aid recievers.
Yes, free food/blanket barns next to WalMart. Free to all who want, no Gov qualification required.

No, EBT cash from taxpayers to the hands of those chosen by Gov.
No, free higher education for welfare/teenmothers
No, access to any aid by invaders or any dependants of invaders.

Why do you folks say that centralizing Section 8 renters will centralize crime? Are you suggesting that welfare takers are responsible for fostering the worst elements that plague society? If they are, then why spead the garbage all over a town and make it impossible to get away from? That only seems like a good idea to the elite that do not have to live in the areas that the Section 8ers are able to access, or eliters that do not have kids going to the schools in those areas that are now infested with the garbage that results from being raised by horrible parents.

Centralize the problem, makes it easier to see when the wrong people are in the wrong place. It is a good idea to have a "good side of town".

Emergency services respond to Section 8 dominated areas 125% more than an owner occupied area. Gangs and grafitti fill the streets in Section 8 dominated areas. Lets send the Section 8 landlords the bill.

elliemae says

When they open the list in Vegas, people are lined up around the block and there's no water available for them - even if it's 115 degrees outside.

had they shown a similar desire at every(or any) other step in their life, they would not be in that line. Getting in a line marked "free" does not impress me.

propmgrjay says

I can charge anything I want for rent for that home, but if my rent is too high, the applicant wont be allowed to use their section 8 voucher for that home, and will have to keep looking.

nope. They will get the max they can and pay the rest with the EBT cash. The EBT will be increased to match the need in housing.

Bap33 says

nope. They will get the max they can and pay the rest with the EBT cash. The EBT will be increased to match the need in housing.

You are woefully misinformed.

Bap33 says

had they shown a similar desire at every(or any) other step in their life, they would not be in that line. Getting in a line marked "free" does not impress me.

Luckily they're not trying to impress you. You've obviously made up your mind about people who receive subsidies. Are you as hateful of corporations who receive huge subsidies, or is that just business?

Bap33 says

Why do you folks say that centralizing Section 8 renters will centralize crime?

The goal of S8 is to remove the stigma of public housing and to open up the options of places where people can live. S8 renters often live in areas that charge lower rental amounts, which you would recognize as the "bad side of town" or should I say "not good?"

Why do you deny that forcing people to live in concentrated areas of poverty creates higher crime areas?

Landlords who rent to section 8 renters aren't guilty of anything more than renting their units. Using your train of thought, if you own a rental and the tenant sells drugs out of the house, the landlord should pay for law enforcement efforts to remove them - as well as to respond to domestic violence calls, thefts, etc.

You're angry, but you're misinformed. Using misinformation to manipulate your anger appears to work for you.

ellie, I am not "angry", but I am not into being silent while getting porked.

I do not agree with any Gov mandated forced wealth transfers between taxpayers/voters, and that is corp welfare included. I kinda support farm programs, because I like the idea of having food ... but, that too has been F-ed up by Gov and greed. Irrigation, bug spray, fertilizer, ect .. are all regulated out the wazoo, by alot of really bad science, and used by really bad political hacks to tamper with farming and steer spending into, and for, chosen tech. It's a scam 90% of the time.

My information on EBT and Section 8 is first hand (well, second hand a little i guess) .. my 1/2 sister and my wife's sister are welfare queens of the San Joaquin.

elliemae says

Why do you deny that forcing people to live in concentrated areas of poverty creates higher crime areas?

ummm ... the only "forcing" going on is the Gov is forcing productive people to hand over cash so the Gov can dole it out to whomever is willing to wait in the free cash line. Nobody forces anyone to accept a handout .... well, except the Gov and a few banks.

I do not equate poor with crime because I come from a lower-than-average upbringing, and my folks was lower, and their folks were Grapes of Wrath style ..... but, nobody on either side has went to prison, or even went to trial as an accused .... so, I think it is a behavior issue, and a piss poor -lazy parent - raising punks and teenmoms - issue. Economics effecting crime is a scape goat for lazy people making unproductive choices in life.

I never said landlords that use the Section 8 cash cow were guilty of anything. They are smart and are using the system ... just like invaders ... just like the welfare queens they cater too .... just like banksters ... they all use the system to get ahead.

People that are the least productive have out-bred the productive people by 300% over the last 20 years. (round numbers). These people fill the prisons and schools and hospitals. They think smoking dope is cool, but want to ban cigaretts in public. They think that insurance companies should be able to charge fat people extra and have fat people get tested all the time for health issues, but think testing for AIDS, or activity associated with AIDS contraction, is wrong and have outlawed insurance companies from doing it. They think they deserve free stuff. They get to vote. See any trouble ahead?

Bap33 says

I friggin mind section 8. It is taxpayer funding of investments/gambling for landlords. Complete bull shit. At no time should the public be forced to pay rent on a privately owned property. Public should own the property that is free for poor people to live in. Section 8, like all other forced wealth transfers that make non-productive people consumers, screws up market forces and drives costs up.

End Section 8 for all privatey owned housing, or, at least disallow any SFH usage for Section 8. Get Section 8 out of the sub-divisions and back into the projects.

Hell we got a lot of empty homes just sitting all about to where I am. i use my own $$ to buy these homes what nobody wants and with some work i turn them into a clean and liveable house for folks what got off to a bad start in life or what got the short end from they spouses or they parents. yes i do make a profit but tyat is not a dirty word bub. i supply the city with a refuge for these people and i treat them well and with DIGNITY . i eat supper and supply fresh vegetables from my own garden for them. also fresh water. if these houses were all bought up by the state and rented to these folks well I am not sure what makes that so much better in your mind. i care about my people. i can not do it for free tho.

well some folks are born into a poverty and rape from early on. it might be hard to understand but it leaves them less strong then what you or some one else is. we all owe a debt to our society. even if your selfish and do not care well think on it man.. these same people are what makes up whereabouts you live.

Bap33 says

llie, I am not "angry", but I am not into being silent while getting porked.

Yeas I bet you dunked your bread in some of that good gravy your self.

Nomograph says

+1

Welfare should cover basic needs during hard times, rather than try to give welfare recipients a feeling of normalcy and societal integration. They should seek this on their own or stay in the projects.

you got no clue what you are saying. extreme poverty does some thing to a mans soul. it can gut a guy right out of the chute worse than any thing. you are probably a strong guy. I do not doubt it. but you seem to think every one is just as strong and smart as you and this is your MISTAKE. no every one can be that strong. it does not mean they are useless and should be thrown to the shitpile excuse my language.

some real upsetting ideas on here today.

Elliemae,
The mom in the Napa Valley Register said the family was getting food aid.

http://napavalleyregister.com/news/local/local-family-struggles-to-find-housing/article_4f41dcca-f09f-11e0-8b60-001cc4c002e0.html?mode=comments

It is almost impossible to get on a waiting list for Section 8, yet once in the program, it's OK to stay for 10 years. It's not like the long-term stayers don't continue to have legitimate reasons to need help, but others don't have a chance to be helped at all as a result. As long as this resource is so limited, perhaps a strict 3-year subsidy would be fairest to all.

Used to be that one family could remain in public housing for generations. They'd just add family members to the lease and when they died the place remained occupied by family. I'd seen 3 generations do this.

Housing isn't time limited in most cases. That's why it's so hard to get into. It sounds good - limiting the benefit - but what if they're disabled? What if the economy tanks (it could happen, hahaha) and there are no jobs? What if...

JodyChunder says

extreme poverty does some thing to a mans soul.

yes, you're right.

Bap33 says

I do not agree with any Gov mandated forced wealth transfers between taxpayers/voters, and that is corp welfare included. I kinda support farm programs, because I like the idea of having food ...

Farm subsidies are designed to keep prices down, but they are largely available to corporations and keep the corporations' pockets lined.

Our taxes go to a lot of things, why not help some people out? The majority of my property taxes go to the schools, when I don't have any children in school. People around here have 10 children and live off the welfare of their church, as well as the government, and I'm paying their tuition. I'm not angry, although I do believe that people should pay "by the head" for their children to attend school.

If everyone had to pay a premium after the 3rd kid, they might think twice about procreating beyond their means. The mormon way is to replenish the earth... but i digress.

food stamps aren't enough to cover everything, but they're a start. I'd rather contribute toward someone's food stamps than to see them waiting in line in the cold for handouts at a shelter.

Section 8 works; it's not easy to get and even though I too have family members who live off the system, I've seen people better themselves because of the system.

school:
I never voted to have public schooling. I would scrap the current system in an instant and go private. We would see more guy/girl only schooling, something I feel would result in better classroom attention and better pacing of education by teachers. We would see vocational focus return to schools. We would see tax dollars floating around, that just may help feed a few people in a Section 8 unit.
So, your point about schooling, I agree 1,000%. I would love to see PARENTS be "allowed" to choose and send their kid to be educated.

BUT .... welfare people are not included in that private school theme. They have more kids than productive people have, and could never pay for a private school. They have no income. Plus, they raise their kids like crap 90% of the time. Bad attitude, lazy, mean, kids that are exposed to some very bad things thanks to the welfare queen that hatched them. The moms are home all day, and "could" be made to educate their kids. They "could" be forced to awake at 6am and be productive. They "could" NOT have a TV, Cell Phone, Video Game, Tattoos, smoking habit, drug habit, drinking habit...... but they will never give them up. How many inner-city mutli-moms, with kids from multi-dads, do you think would even be able to follow a simple set of rules to educate their kid? They only do what is minimum to be handed the basics for survival. If selling the kid made them more welfare cash, the kid would be sold. And THAT is what they teach their kids. The kids are educated in how stupid it is to work for something you can take or be given for free. Drug use, getting drunk, sex at very early age, unprotected sex, teenage moms trigger the cas cow, mutli-kids from multi-dads, drop outs .... hmmmm ... so far I just don't see where I was asked my opinion on these choices, so I do not wish to hand over my earned income to the Gov so these bad choices can be rewarded.

You mention the Church helping it's members. THAT is EXACTLY how our society should work. If everyone was made to have accountability to their neighbors and their family for the aide they require, then things would change pretty quick. The Gov and others who are oft times called "bleeding hearts" dream up ways to remove the accountability factor. The EBT cards are made to look and function like credit/debt cards. THat is bullshit. EBT cards should be super-sized, made a bright orange color, have their own checkout line, and a spotlight and trumpet blasts should go on when you swipe it so everyone looks. As an example.

Bap,

I'm a social worker, and have worked with many low-income families. I respectfully disagree with your narrow view of people on welfare. Your view is personal, and certainly not indicative of many of the people with whom I've worked.

Sure, there are many people out there who are "lazy" and scam the system. But there are many who don't and work hard for their children to have better lives.

So far as the church helping - sure, that's one example of how it should be. However, these same people are collecting welfare benefits while they collect church benefits. So don't lecture me about the accountability to their neighbors, etc - it's demeaning enough to try to live on the paltry amounts of welfare without having to wear a huge "w" on their shirts.

By the way, if a woman does get a job, she has to wait for a slot in a daycare program. Often times, it's more expensive to work than it is to stay home with the kids.

These issues are complicated and can't be globally applied to the situation that you have in your family. You're jaded, and because of that you can't see the benefits of helping people so that they don't starve to death on the streets while you sit in your home by the fire burning dollar bills and sipping fine wine.

Just sayin'. By the way, I'm out of this conversation because you obviously aren't open to understanding that not everyone is successful. so many professions have vanished into thin air and there aren't jobs out there - with your reasoning they should just suck it up and live out of dumpsters.

There, but for the grace of God(ess), go I (and you).

Bap33 says

Befriend or Ignore
Friends: 2
Threads: 12
Comments: 1,878
Mon, 19 Dec 2011 at 8:18 am Quote Like Flag Permalink Share

school:
I never voted to have public schooling. I would scrap the current system in an instant and go private. We would see more guy/girl only schooling, something I feel would result in better classroom attention and better pacing of education by teachers. We would see vocational focus return to schools. We would see tax dollars floating around, that just may help feed a few people in a Section 8 unit.

you are some dreamer. its always the guys with the full bellys that cant believe anyone might be starving. so fed up with jokers like you.

@ellie.
I give to those in need with a glad heart. Nobody needs to tell me to give back.

Your hate for the church keeps you from seeing how warm it feels to have someone who actually knows who you are, what your trouble is, and what you are going through, to lend a helping hand - a helping hand that is not paid by wealth transfers under threat of law, but open handed giving. It is much more personal and builds better people, neighborhoods, towns, states, and eventually Nations .. in my opinion.

I turn over taxes under force of law, and the Gov gives out CASH to other voters. That is a very bad idea.

When the poor are just "the poor" due to bad luck or bad gene-pool, then we can have this conversation again. But, as long as the poor are the drunks, the dope smokers, the cranksters, the teenage breeders, the drop-outs, the smokers, and the single parents, we will have trouble in this conversation.

Personal Accountability is not popular at the welfare office. Bad choices should be painful, so they become less popular. Like Grandpa said, "Doing something stupid is supposed to hurt so you avoid it next time".

elliemae says

By the way, if a woman does get a job, she has to wait for a slot in a daycare program. Often times, it's more expensive to work than it is to stay home with the kids.

I am for moms staying home to raise kids. I am for dads paying for their families. I did not get to pick the boy for the girl, and I did not get to make the baby, so she is responsible for who she picked, and I am not responsible for any of it. The only guy that got the sex should be involved in raising the kid and taking care of the mom as she raised the kid. If the girl is not 18, the boy should be jailed. If the girl is of age, the boy should made to sleep nights in jail, and stay weekends in jail, until he has repaid all the debt to the state for his kid and babymoma. All females who get on aide to have a baby/with a baby, should get NORPLANT. The girls should also give up all right to aide when they have NORPLANT removed.

How can we have all of these teenaged moms and nobody going to jail for rape? Around these parts, each Quinceanerra is followed by a baby shower for the same girl the very next week.

Bap33 says

If the girl is not 18, the boy should be jailed. If the girl is of age, the boy should made to sleep nights in jail, and stay weekends in jail, until he has repaid all the debt to the state for his kid and babymoma.

Jails better than Section 8? Well jail ain't free. who you think pays for jails? or you just feel better bacause it is PENURY. You like the idea of punishing a man. You got that in you. You think throwin a dude in the slammers goin to make him a better member of society? no. you just crave punishing a person.

you sound like you got all the answers here junior. Let me ask you for some advise since you are so easy with it. What do I do with my people? I got a veteran from the Afghanistan war and he suffers POST TRAUMATIC STRESS SYNDROME. not a bad guy at all but hes got problems he is working thru. i made sure he is in a nice quite place and i check on him and the boy. i got another old gal who has Grand Mall seizeures when she get she gets around flouresent lighting. What she supposed to do? Is jail the answer here to? Or should we do like you buddy says and keep them all across the tracks on the edges of town where they belong with all the rapers and killers of children and big bad cholos. keep them down.

i know you are conversing with Allie on this but i can not help but take personal offense at yours and some of the other very trashy ideas on here. you have not put fourth one single idea what does not scream BIGOT or what does not scream disgust or what does scream unforgiving hypocrite.

elliemae says

Your compassion is underwhelming

Because I don't want me taxes jacked to support people who could be doing jibs currently being done my Mexicans, my compassion is viewed as "underwhelming". I don't see how enabling a bunch of people to be lazy is somehow "compassionate". That's a job for a charity, not the taxpayers.

Zlxr says

And second - since I think this area pays something like up to around $1600 or more of the rent for some people - why can't the State or the Feds purchase homes that would eventually be paid off - and then in the future they could charge people low rent and make money instead of us taxpayers having to constantly foot the bill while the investors (who are probably also some of our politicians) make all the money.

Bap33 says

Yes, S8 pisses me off. Not because I do not want a warm safe place for people to sleep. I would be happy to buy some multi-room housing for those in need. But, I do not agree with taxpayers paying for investulators to line their pockets while renting to who-ever, turning good neighborhoods to gangland

Nomograph says

Bap33 says

Get Section 8 out of the sub-divisions and back into the projects.

+1

Welfare should cover basic needs during hard times, rather than try to give welfare recipients a feeling of normalcy and societal integration. They should seek this on their own or stay in the projects.

hmmmmm .... could be on to something here

Bap33 says

this shows a lack of basic truth or understanding on your part.

Is that right? Tell me, how many units under section 8 contract have you owned or managed?

Bap33 says

if you will be honest, you will admit that a person (or corp) will use the Section 8 rentals the most once they learn how to game the system.

I am honest, and that's not at all how it works. You rent your properties to people who apply to rent them. You market your properties, people see your marketing and contact you to apply to rent. You have no control over who wants to rent there and who doesn't, and if you get caught discriminating based on source of income, then you're in big big trouble.

You're talking about something as if you know all about it, but you really don't know the details of what you're talking about.

I clearly said your position shows one of two things. You are either not telling the truth, or you do not understand. If you are being honest, then you do not understand.

I know the details of the HUD program.

So far, you haven't added much to your position. Good luck with that.

propmgrjay says

am honest, and that's not at all how it works. You rent your properties to people who apply to rent them. You market your properties, people see your marketing and contact you to apply to rent. You have no control over who wants to rent there and who doesn't, and if you get caught discriminating based on source of income, then you're in big big trouble.

You're talking about something as if you know all about it, but you really don't know the details of what you're talking about.

dont worry about it. this is just small time jerk trying to stir up some poop. nevermind if his paddles full of holes.

Bap33 says

ur hate for the church

I don't "hate" the church - and by the way, to which church are you referring? There are many, and all of them believe that they are the one, the only, the true believers. Just curious, in your opinion which one is right?

Based on your posts, it's one that believes homosexuality is an abomination, women should have no control over their bodies yet shouldn't be allowed to collect welfare if the one-night stand they had won't step up to his responsibility, has few immigrants and votes conservative.

Boring!

I disagree with any position implying that one is intolerant/bigot/Glenn Beck fan merely for one's viewpoint on S8.

Please recognize that some people ended up on the LL side of S8. That was the hand that got dealt.

Please understand that the same people as above could have ended up on S8, even as we yet still qualify.

It's a cold equation, just as it was over 20 years ago, and none of us could help it.

The link is here:
http://www.youtube.com/embed/oZWXGg4otlg

@ellie,
right on! lol
Merry Christmas

033 says

disagree with any position implying that one is intolerant/bigot/Glenn Beck fan merely for one's viewpoint on S8.

The issue isn't S8, the issue is the belief system that leads to one's attitude toward those who are on S8.

Merry Christsmas to ya'll.

no no, not in my view. Seriously, when we talk JUST about S8, I dislike the system that takes taxpayer funds and places them in the hands of landlords that have SFH's. My top 3 reasons, not in order:
1) That screws up the "market" prices for working people that are competeing for affordable rentals in neighborhoods
2) That introduces lower class attitude/activities into neighborhoods that have rentals that are high/rare enough to be "nice" neghborhoods, where those attitiudes/activities are not normal nor welcomed, resulting in more crappy neighborhoods.
3) Taxpayers pay for/off a LL's assett/gamble/investment, and realize no gain from it. (true, all welfare indirectly benefits a LL that rents to welfare people, but S8 is more direct)

Again, let me say very plain, I have no issue putting people in free, safe, warm, dry, shelter for as long as they will follow all rules and laws that are part of accessing the free shelter, and for as long as they desire to live in the conditions that result from their presence. I do not agree with any type of Gov guage to "allow" access to the free shelter. All humans who desire to use the free shelter, that are not disallowed by a function of law (perverts or criminals, for example), should have the same access as anyone else. No income max or limit or minimum. No Gov qualifications. Free to any should be free to all. And, I will never complain about having free shelter like that. Section 8, or any other suplimented housing, that puts people in privately owned homes, paid by public funds, is a bad idea.

Bap33 says

no no, not in my view. Seriously, when we talk JUST about S8, I dislike the system that takes taxpayer funds and places them in the hands of landlords that have SFH's. My top 3 reasons, not in order:

dear weasle: you took taxpayer dollars to buy a house as I see. you a welfare queen to. it is always the welfare queens who get a little upset at the ones who get more from there schemes than what the they did.

Merry Christmas weasle.

Jody,
I don't know what Bap's situation is, but mine is that I took not a dime of taxpayer dollars for my house, and that, frankly, one should not be extracting taxpayer dollars be it through S8 homeownership program or FHA or first time or whatever.

JodyChunder says

Merry Christmas weasle.

weasle is actually spelled weasel. And IMHO, Bap has a narrow view of the world - I've made no secret of my opinion of that - but I don't think calling him names, even misspelled ones, is productive.

Bap33 says

I do not agree with any type of Gov guage to "allow" access to the free shelter. All humans who desire to use the free shelter, that are not disallowed by a function of law (perverts or criminals, for example), should have the same access as anyone else.

I totally agree with that.

Bap,
Isn't this the way homeless shelters work now?
Such shelters keep people for weeks. Months at best.
You can see how a mom and a few kids would want some stability approaching at least a year. Where would these people go after leaving the shelter?

With such a scarce resource as S8, it does seem fair that vouchers go preferentially to a family who are all citizens vs. a mom who isn't a citizen and has kids who are. Mom should consider going home with her children.

With S8 so scarce a resource, it remains an indefinite guarantee for the small numbers of those fortunate enough to receive vouchers. Staying on S8 for 10 years or more is not uncommon. Such long stays don't seem fair to the 90 percent or more who are crowded out of even getting in line. A strict time limit of 3 years for all but gravely disabled might be painful for those who might have to live in more crowded conditions and lower standards after a time, but such a time limit does seem fairer to all.

033 says

dy,
I don't know what Bap's situation is, but mine is that I took not a dime of taxpayer dollars for my house, and that, frankly, one should not be extracting taxpayer dollars be it through S8 homeownership program or FHA or first time or whatever.

Section 8 is for people who can not do for them selves. HUD loans are tax payer welfare way before SECTION 8. they are a hedge for dudes what either can not save or do not want to use there own $$$

elliemae says

weasle is actually spelled weasel. And IMHO, Bap has a narrow view of the world - I've made no secret of my opinion of that - but I don't think calling him names, even misspelled ones, is productive.

well you worry about being productive and ill call a spade a spade or a spaid or a spayed.

If folks need S8 to make do, the last thing they need is S8 homeownership. A mortgage plus expenses is hell for the government to promote to those least able to fix the roof, the plumbing, the heat, the tree. It goes on and on, all the time, as you know.
Five years into the foreclosure mess, this program seems exceptionally unwise, cruel even:
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/public_indian_housing/programs/hcv/homeownership