you are getting evicted... (if you live in public housing)

[srican69]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323820304578410382522144560.html?


Deep in the president's new budget is a plan that could transform public housing in the nation by allowing housing authorities to increasingly set time limits or work requirements for participants.

Currently, government housing benefits are generally open ended. Unlike welfare—which has a five-year limit—federal housing programs allow low-income Americans to receive rent vouchers or live in government complexes for decades.

The result is that people endure long waits to qualify for the program and sometimes celebrate almost like lottery winners when they get the word. In New York City, the average person stays in public housing for 20.7 years.

But President Barack Obama's fiscal year 2014 budget calls for "substantial expansion" of a 1996 demonstration project that allows select housing authorities to set restrictions on residents, or try other strategies to promote self-sufficiency. Only 39 housing authorities out of 3,200 nationally have this power currently. Congressional approval was required for each one.

Housing agencies are lobbying for the expansion. They say the current system doesn't motivate residents to become financially independent and isn't fair to thousands of impoverished renters who need help now but must wait years for assistance.

why is it all so hush hush.....I guess both sides want this passed

[Newest Reality]

1. Where I am

they are evicting the poor in subsidized housing to make way for a growing yupification.

Don't worry, the solution is private prisons and draconian laws. Profit will be made. Unfortunately it will be the people who actually have to pay taxes who will support this far more expensive alternative, but the point is the profit involved. Much more can be made, per prisoner, for the shareholders of CCA and the like, than the meager sums slumlords can get from subsidized housing, etc.

Hey, if things go horribly wrong for you, at least you know what that there is an iron and concrete safety net there to catch you and keep you.

http://www.aclu.org/prisoners-rights/private-prisons

[Live and Learn]

3. +1 nt

[NCTraveler]

2. I really wouldn't mind if they....

I really wouldn't mind if they expanded the program. Offer additional help and assistance. Optional help and assistance. But nothing in this should be restrictions on residents (other than obvious things in the lease) or mandatory. What should be mandatory in this process is proof of need and the owner of the house/building should be mandated to keep it up to code.

People find themselves in difficult situations. Sometimes those situations can stay difficult for decades. One example, say a young girl gets pregnant, the man leaves, and her family isn't able to help. The housing program can be a huge help for her. This is a bad situation that could last 20 years. The emphasis must be put on caring for the mother and giving the child an opportunity to grow up in a healthy environment. If that does not happen, we are just ensuring that the next generation in her family will need housing. Then 20 years turns into 40.

No time limit on housing.

[bluedigger]

4. Step 1: Crash the housing market.

Step 2: Buy houses for pennies on the dollar and turn them into rental housing.

Step 3: Eliminate public competition and/or increase demand for private rental housing.

[srican69]

5. you figured it out my friend .. nothing happens by accident.nt.

[Marrah_G]

6. People are in them because they can't afford to live elsewhere

[geek tragedy]

7. it's a tough situation--evicting poor people is never an ideal option, but forcing people to

wait 21 years is unconscionable as well.

[question everything]

8. No-win situation

On the one hand evicting people who "overstated" they stay

on the other hand, long waiting time - 20 years!

I suppose the solution is to build more public housing but where is the budget? Not just for building but for land? Individuals who need them need to live in the city, close to the job, not someplace in Wyoming or Montana with all the land.

(Nothing against Wyoming or Montana, but they are BIG)

[Nevernose]

9. In Vegas they're tearing down public housing left and right

They're being replaced by housing vouchers. According to HUD, it was cheaper to give people rental vouchers than it was to make the projects even minimally livable (in at least a couple of cases I know of, this is accurate).

I think this is probably a good thing, along with purchasing geographically dispersed housing, as it helps alleviate both the stigma of the projects and the inertia of centraled, crippling poverty. It's by no means perfect, but there aren't any pretty ways of dealing with the issue that I can find (except maybe providing decent paying jobs, but that's just crazy commie talk -- at least to politicians and the nuts who write op-eds).

[question everything]

10. Thanks. Agree that this is a good apporach

And Vegas does have many jobs. Hope it will work in other cities.

[JVS]

11. I think time limits are reasonable. Public housing belongs to the public...

and there are other members of the public who need to use those facilities.

[Luminous Animal]

12. Jesus Fucking Christ. Rents are out of control all over the U.S. and now this?

How about a fucking jobs program. Our infrastructure is crumbling to the tune of 10 billion plus. Initiate a "space program" to address that and you've created enough jobs for people to RUN out of their substandard public housing.