Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Wingnutt on December 03, 2009, 09:33:17 PM

Title: Subsidized housing paradox.
Post by: Wingnutt on December 03, 2009, 09:33:17 PM
I guess its a paradox of sorts..

First off this has nothing to do with politics...


Ive worked in the communications industry for 9 years now, much of it doing field work, working on pieces of equipment all over town in various areas, so Ive seen areas progress through the years for nearly a decade..

One thing I keep seeing occurs in subsidized housing, which is they all start out as decent places, and within a few years are pretty nasty.

So They (state I guess, whoever)  want to be able to give people who do not or cannot make much money, a chance to live somewhere other than in a run down shack in a squalid ghetto.  So they build relatively nice homes, and offer them at either a drastically lower cost than they would normally be priced at, OR price them based on a % of the occupants income..

Within a few years, these houses are in severe disrepair, the neighborhood is generally crime ridden, and the basic ambiance of the entire area is pretty nasty.

So now these people have converted their home and neighborhood, into the ghetto they were supposed to be avoiding by living in the subsidized housing.


My theory on this phenomenon is basically that people never appreciate or take care of something they are given, because they didn't earn it...

any other theories?



Title: Re: Subsidized housing paradox.
Post by: Donzo on December 03, 2009, 09:49:29 PM
I guess its a paradox of sorts..

First off this has nothing to do with politics...


Ive worked in the communications industry for 9 years now, much of it doing field work, working on pieces of equipment all over town in various areas, so Ive seen areas progress through the years for nearly a decade..

One thing I keep seeing occurs in subsidized housing, which is they all start out as decent places, and within a few years are pretty nasty.

So They (state I guess, whoever)  want to be able to give people who do not or cannot make much money, a chance to live somewhere other than in a run down shack in a squalid ghetto.  So they build relatively nice homes, and offer them at either a drastically lower cost than they would normally be priced at, OR price them based on a % of the occupants income..

Within a few years, these houses are in severe disrepair, the neighborhood is generally crime ridden, and the basic ambiance of the entire area is pretty nasty.

So now these people have converted their home and neighborhood, into the ghetto they were supposed to be avoiding by living in the subsidized housing.


My theory on this phenomenon is basically that people never appreciate or take care of something they are given, because they didn't earn it...

any other theories?


None needed, you pretty much nailed it.
Title: Re: Subsidized housing paradox.
Post by: phatzo on December 03, 2009, 09:50:57 PM
We have seen a similar occurance here in Australia, where outback comunities are created because some of the indigineous people of the area were still living in huts and shacks, and wandering the desert like they have been for the last 40,000 years. The nice new houses end up decrepit in a mater of a few years, there is a complete lack of trade qualified people in the area to do anything about it and most of the people disappear back into the desert leaving the "undesireable elements " behind. It clearly shows that anything like this requires long term supervision and maintenance by the body that implemented it. Or just go back to where you started or worse.
aud$0.02
Title: Re: Subsidized housing paradox.
Post by: Dragon on December 04, 2009, 10:45:05 AM
I moved into my house 17 years ago with none of "those" houses on our street and everything looked nice, not perfect, but nice.  Now I know of 7 of them (there could be more) and the large clans of people hanging out on front porches or in the streets smoking weed and drinking are starting to really piss me off.  The properties where they live are beginning to show signs of neglect as well as the vacant houses where they also tend to hang out.

I was hoping to get out of our house in just a few years when the kids finally move out, but now we have to think if we will be able to get any $ for the house if things keep going like they are.


 :furious :furious
Title: Re: Subsidized housing paradox.
Post by: ink on December 04, 2009, 11:12:49 AM
I just don't give a crap what others do to there, life, house, or property :aok
 now if they were to bring ANY of that "stuff" to MY life, house, property, then is when I would have a say!

and I get really offended when someone tries to dictate how I can live my life!

I recently lived in a smaller town and the neighbors called the Town because me and the wife were sleeping on a enclosed porch,"that was supposed to be used for storage..."  as he said. :mad:

lets say I was a little pissed off when some schmo from the town comes to my appt and tries to dictate where I can sleep,

and I never moved my bed.
Title: Re: Subsidized housing paradox.
Post by: CAP1 on December 04, 2009, 11:35:18 AM
I just don't give a crap what others do to there, life, house, or property :aok
 now if they were to bring ANY of that "stuff" to MY life, house, property, then is when I would have a say!

and I get really offended when someone tries to dictate how I can live my life!

I recently lived in a smaller town and the neighbors called the Town because me and the wife were sleeping on a enclosed porch,"that was supposed to be used for storage..."  as he said. :mad:

lets say I was a little pissed off when some schmo from the town comes to my appt and tries to dictate where I can sleep,

and I never moved my bed.
had neighbors move in a few years back. they never even introduced themselves to me or others in the neighborhood. they did, however have issues with me working on cars in my garage(i used to do side work) and with me working on my race car(which stayed outside sometimes), and even the fact that i kept it outside.
 they never said word one to me......never even called the police on me. they went straight to a friend of theirs what was on the town council. i got letters reminding me that the curfew was 11pm. i always had the door closed when i was using air tools, no later than 9pm. the letter also reminded me that i could not keep an unregistered vehicle on my own property, as it is an attractive nuisance. so i started leaving it on the trailer, as that was ok according to the ordinances. they changed the ordinances.
 at that point in time, the mayor was a friend of mine, so i had a few conversations with him to find out who(i already knew, but wanted to be sure) was complaining. he reinforced my suspicions.
 so for a time, i started keeping the race car inside....even went and bought one of those instant garages to put it in.

 then i took the same stuff i killed the poison ivy in my yard with(it killed everything), and went into their yard in the little hours. within a week, their yard was brown. nothing would grow.  :devil

 they moved eventually.
Title: Re: Subsidized housing paradox.
Post by: Dragon on December 04, 2009, 11:59:59 AM
 then i took the same stuff i killed the poison ivy in my yard with(it killed everything), and went into their yard in the little hours. within a week, their yard was brown. nothing would grow.  devil


A buddy of mine took something like that to his own yard to irritate his neighbor - an old retired man that had all the time he needed to keep his yard in perfect condition - that would call council and have letters sent as soon as his grass got above 2 1/2 inches tall.  It took 3 years for grass to be able to grow again and there was nothing that anyone could do about a "strange natural occurrence"   :rofl
Title: Re: Subsidized housing paradox.
Post by: ink on December 04, 2009, 01:44:28 PM
had neighbors move in a few years back. they never even introduced themselves to me or others in the neighborhood. they did, however have issues with me working on cars in my garage(i used to do side work) and with me working on my race car(which stayed outside sometimes), and even the fact that i kept it outside.
 they never said word one to me......never even called the police on me. they went straight to a friend of theirs what was on the town council. i got letters reminding me that the curfew was 11pm. i always had the door closed when i was using air tools, no later than 9pm. the letter also reminded me that i could not keep an unregistered vehicle on my own property, as it is an attractive nuisance. so i started leaving it on the trailer, as that was ok according to the ordinances. they changed the ordinances.
 at that point in time, the mayor was a friend of mine, so i had a few conversations with him to find out who(i already knew, but wanted to be sure) was complaining. he reinforced my suspicions.
 so for a time, i started keeping the race car inside....even went and bought one of those instant garages to put it in.

 then i took the same stuff i killed the poison ivy in my yard with(it killed everything), and went into their yard in the little hours. within a week, their yard was brown. nothing would grow.  :devil

 they moved eventually.

thats awesome :rofl :rofl
Title: Re: Subsidized housing paradox.
Post by: BigPlay on December 04, 2009, 05:31:18 PM
I guess its a paradox of sorts..

First off this has nothing to do with politics...


Ive worked in the communications industry for 9 years now, much of it doing field work, working on pieces of equipment all over town in various areas, so Ive seen areas progress through the years for nearly a decade..

One thing I keep seeing occurs in subsidized housing, which is they all start out as decent places, and within a few years are pretty nasty.

So They (state I guess, whoever)  want to be able to give people who do not or cannot make much money, a chance to live somewhere other than in a run down shack in a squalid ghetto.  So they build relatively nice homes, and offer them at either a drastically lower cost than they would normally be priced at, OR price them based on a % of the occupants income..

Within a few years, these houses are in severe disrepair, the neighborhood is generally crime ridden, and the basic ambiance of the entire area is pretty nasty.

So now these people have converted their home and neighborhood, into the ghetto they were supposed to be avoiding by living in the subsidized housing.


My theory on this phenomenon is basically that people never appreciate or take care of something they are given, because they didn't earn it...

any other theories?







I once did a HUD renovation on a low income apartment complex. The complex got everything new, windows ,doors heating and AC, new appliances, bathrooms, carpet and everything I didn't mention that would make it brand new. Even the outside was completely redone with private patios with nice landscaping. The tenants would periodically stop by and glow with excitement about how nice it was going to be to live in a clean nice place. Another good thing was the rent was not increasing because of the renovations being done. Even the garages were redone inside and had new garage doors with automatic openers.

It was about a month later that I got a call for a few repairs. Upon arriving at the location I was shocked to see just how much the place had gone down hill. All the landscaping was dead or dying. Windows were broken along with doors off the hinges. I met the manager who gave me the list of repairs. The thing was a mile long. When I entered the first few apartments to get a idea what I was looking at . Entering some of these apartments was about as discusting as it gets, dirty diapers just piled up in the corner, dishes piled up in the sink and every inch of counter covered with half eaten food. trash over flowing out of the waste can. I can go on and on but I think by now your getting the picture. After seeing what I was up against I left the last apartment I dared to look through walked over to the manager and said that I would not be back unless the apartments were sanitary to enter. Later that evening i arrived back to the office with a rather nasty voice mail from the property owner telling me I better fix the repairs. I was so pissed that this A-Hole was assuming that these repairs had anything to do with any work done by us that I called him back immediately. I got his voice mail and decided to just leave a message. I told him that he needed to keep a better handle on his property because it was now ready for the wreaking ball. I then told him my next calls were to the head of the city's HUD department, the health department and since the local newspaper did a story on the apartment and since my company was doing the work I was the person interviewed. I said I was also contacting the paper to let them know how bad the place had deterred in only a month and how programs like this just don't work.

 I never heard back form the property owner and I never went back to fix anything. So I can truly relate to your story. That is one reason I feel giving anything for free to people who have no capacity for responsibility is a recipe for disaster.
Title: Re: Subsidized housing paradox.
Post by: warhed on December 04, 2009, 05:45:21 PM
Give an animal food long enough, and the animal stops hunting for it.  I don't see why humans would be any different.  How much money has been given and invested into Africa?  Are they better off with it, or were they hurt by it?
Title: Re: Subsidized housing paradox.
Post by: CAP1 on December 04, 2009, 05:58:24 PM
ONe thing i  can add about this. i live in lindenwold nj. small town, used to be really nice, although never a rich town.
 i'm in the "garden lake" section. that is about the last holdout in the town. the rest went to hell. why? thanks to apartments. some of them are subsidized, some aren't. either way, they're what's drug this town through the years.

 now here's the kicker. i pay $5300(ballpark) a year in property taxes. my house is over 100 years old. looks like it was built by drunken monkeys on crack. it's 2 bedroom, 1 bath, small living room, small kitchen. no dining room, no tv room or anything like that.
 property's 120' across the front, and 140' front to back. i added a 2 car garage, seperate from the house about 13 or so years ago.

 neighboring cherry hill(where my shop is), the average house is less then 50 years old. usually 3-4 bedrooms, kitchen dining room, tv room. some are 2 story, some split level. most have finished basements.
 propertys are a little smaller though. usually only around 100x100. most of them have attached 2 car garages.

 they average $6500 or so a year in property taxes. newer homes, better school system, better police and fire depts, better roads, and for all intents and purposes, the same tax rates.
 what kind of bs is that?

 i did have a lawyer friend tell me that in towns with a lot of apts. the property tax goes up for homeowners.....but still...........
Title: Re: Subsidized housing paradox.
Post by: Wingnutt on December 04, 2009, 06:19:43 PM
Hey!! I live in an apartment!! what you trying to say :furious



 :D

I agree that low rent apartments are a drag..   but nicer complexes are pretty cool.  My apartments are in the north side of town and in a nice neighborhood, and full of retired people and young professionals.  I had to wait 2 years to get in.   But thats the exception, not the rule these days.  alot of apartments are full of people seemingly trying to hit bottom.
Title: Re: Subsidized housing paradox.
Post by: Meatwad on December 04, 2009, 06:29:30 PM
then i took the same stuff i killed the poison ivy in my yard with(it killed everything), and went into their yard in the little hours. within a week, their yard was brown. nothing would grow.  devil


A buddy of mine took something like that to his own yard to irritate his neighbor - an old retired man that had all the time he needed to keep his yard in perfect condition - that would call council and have letters sent as soon as his grass got above 2 1/2 inches tall.  It took 3 years for grass to be able to grow again and there was nothing that anyone could do about a "strange natural occurrence"   :rofl

2-4-D is a "great natural occurence"  :D
Title: Re: Subsidized housing paradox.
Post by: Dragon on December 04, 2009, 06:30:47 PM

 now here's the kicker. i pay $5300(ballpark) a year in property taxes. my house is over 100 years old. looks like it was built by drunken monkeys on crack. it's 2 bedroom, 1 bath, small living room, small kitchen. no dining room, no tv room or anything like that.
 property's 120' across the front, and 140' front to back. i added a 2 car garage, seperate from the house about 13 or so years ago.


Holy crap, Cap.  I live within Cleveland city limits and have a 3 bedroom, 1 bath, decent LR, no dining room - but a 14 x 10 room off the kitchen on back of house that could be used as one if I didn't have 2 computer desks in it - full basement, half finished in cedar (by me) 1200 square ft house built in 1947 and a 1.5 car detached garage and only pay $1620 per year.  I assume my house it worth quit a bit less than yours though on the retail market.  Mine might sell for 80,000 since I added a huge deck, A/C, new windows, and vinyl siding.  
Title: Re: Subsidized housing paradox.
Post by: Meatwad on December 04, 2009, 06:34:07 PM
You can get a house like that here for probabally in the $50-60's. Thats mainly because 90% of the factories are gone and there are no jobs here except minimum wage
Title: Re: Subsidized housing paradox.
Post by: Jayhawk on December 04, 2009, 06:41:07 PM
2-4-D is a "great natural occurence"  :D

Yep, just like round-up and my neighbors grass. shhh
Title: Re: Subsidized housing paradox.
Post by: Stalwart on December 04, 2009, 07:26:38 PM
ONe thing i  can add about this. i live in lindenwold nj. small town, used to be really nice, although never a rich town.
 i'm in the "garden lake" section. that is about the last holdout in the town. the rest went to hell. why? thanks to apartments. some of them are subsidized, some aren't. either way, they're what's drug this town through the years.

 now here's the kicker. i pay $5300(ballpark) a year in property taxes. my house is over 100 years old. looks like it was built by drunken monkeys on crack. it's 2 bedroom, 1 bath, small living room, small kitchen. no dining room, no tv room or anything like that.
 property's 120' across the front, and 140' front to back. i added a 2 car garage, seperate from the house about 13 or so years ago.

 neighboring cherry hill(where my shop is), the average house is less then 50 years old. usually 3-4 bedrooms, kitchen dining room, tv room. some are 2 story, some split level. most have finished basements.
 propertys are a little smaller though. usually only around 100x100. most of them have attached 2 car garages.

 they average $6500 or so a year in property taxes. newer homes, better school system, better police and fire depts, better roads, and for all intents and purposes, the same tax rates.
 what kind of bs is that?

 i did have a lawyer friend tell me that in towns with a lot of apts. the property tax goes up for homeowners.....but still...........

VOTE WITH YOUR FEET...   Move to Texas.  No state income tax.   Reasonable property and sales tax most places.  Reasonable rent many many places.  Austin is a bit expensive, but it IS the political capital, so you know the types it draws.


Title: Re: Subsidized housing paradox.
Post by: CAP1 on December 04, 2009, 08:51:19 PM
VOTE WITH YOUR FEET...   Move to Texas.  No state income tax.   Reasonable property and sales tax most places.  Reasonable rent many many places.  Austin is a bit expensive, but it IS the political capital, so you know the types it draws.




i'm kinda stuck here for at least 3 more years. that's the duration of the lease on my shop. if i can make it kick ass, and sell it for a great profit, i was definitly planning on moving out of jersey.
 not that i don't care about my customers......but rather that jersey sucks.
Title: Re: Subsidized housing paradox.
Post by: LYNX on December 05, 2009, 06:27:21 AM
I guess its a paradox of sorts..
SNIP
So They (state I guess, whoever)  want to be able to give people who do not or cannot make much money, a chance to live somewhere other than in a run down shack in a squalid ghetto.  So they build relatively nice homes, and offer them at either a drastically lower cost than they would normally be priced at, OR price them based on a % of the occupants income..

My theory on this phenomenon is basically that people never appreciate or take care of something they are given, because they didn't earn it...

any other theories?


In the UK we have council housing.  Property owned by and subsidised by the town.  Low rent and a right to buy after so many years of renting. 

It's my observation that it's the people that are drawn into these areas.  Usually poorly educated or just plain stupid.  Underskilled as a result of their mental capacity hence poorly paid low earners.  Couple some of this with large families and the income is soon used up.

I have lived in one such council estate and I have to say the vast majority are stand up folk.  Just families trying to get by on what meager income they have.  Unfortunately its the bad apples. Criminals, drug / alcohol addicts, single parents and parents who can't control their kids.  Some of these folk are on a cycle of abuse.  Here's a typical example of 1 such family that lived across the road.  Numerous accounts of demostic violence. 2 occasions where the father was beaten up by some heavies. Father eventually put gaol for burglary. Single mum turned into part time "lady".  I remember one day her coming to the door and she shouts to her 6 year old boy, playing in the street.  "Come here you little B*****, your F****** dinners going cold".....in the street man! 

That kid is probably nearer 20 now and with that type of upbringing he's going to be just the same as his parents now.         

The city council is trying a new tactic with these types of families.  The council have purchased house in residential suburbs.  The hope being that "normal" families will instill in these dysfunctionals a proper way of living.  Guess what?  It don't work.  The once quiet residentail street is now witness to domestic violence, broken windows and so on.  Incidents of crime rising in said areas ...guess who  :rolleyes: Police arresting the kids and so on. 

It's the people mate and I would rather they be kept in 1 area well out the way.  Those that can or want to achieve more will.
Title: Re: Subsidized housing paradox.
Post by: CAP1 on December 05, 2009, 07:57:06 AM
In the UK we have council housing.  Property owned by and subsidised by the town.  Low rent and a right to buy after so many years of renting. 

It's my observation that it's the people that are drawn into these areas.  Usually poorly educated or just plain stupid.  Underskilled as a result of their mental capacity hence poorly paid low earners.  Couple some of this with large families and the income is soon used up.

I have lived in one such council estate and I have to say the vast majority are stand up folk.  Just families trying to get by on what meager income they have.  Unfortunately its the bad apples. Criminals, drug / alcohol addicts, single parents and parents who can't control their kids.  Some of these folk are on a cycle of abuse.  Here's a typical example of 1 such family that lived across the road.  Numerous accounts of demostic violence. 2 occasions where the father was beaten up by some heavies. Father eventually put gaol for burglary. Single mum turned into part time "lady".  I remember one day her coming to the door and she shouts to her 6 year old boy, playing in the street.  "Come here you little B*****, your F****** dinners going cold".....in the street man! 

That kid is probably nearer 20 now and with that type of upbringing he's going to be just the same as his parents now.         

The city council is trying a new tactic with these types of families.  The council have purchased house in residential suburbs.  The hope being that "normal" families will instill in these dysfunctionals a proper way of living.  Guess what?  It don't work.  The once quiet residentail street is now witness to domestic violence, broken windows and so on.  Incidents of crime rising in said areas ...guess who  :rolleyes: Police arresting the kids and so on. 

It's the people mate and I would rather they be kept in 1 area well out the way.  Those that can or want to achieve more will.

just from personal experience here.
within 5 miles of my home, there's at least 1/2 dozen apartment complexes like this. without exception, each and every one of them is nothing but scum. if there was any decent families in any of them, i never met them. and i would have, having used to deliver newspapers in the am, and pizzas in the pm.
 most of these apartments, we wouldn't send a driver in ther solo. always had someone ride shotgun into those places.
 even so, had at least 3 drivers robbed.

 those that read these......that've heard of camden nj? well.....these apartment complexes are just like little "mini" camdens.

 when i go to south street in philly, i drive down 5th street from washington blvd. right on the corner there, is a subsidized apartment complex.
 the ONLY time i don't see guys standing outside on 5th, is when there's police around. other than that, there's lookouts on the sidewalk, and the dealers are nearby. even on 20 degree days these clowns are out there.

 if these people really wanted to help themselves, they'd be out looking for work, not doing this crap, and messing up the very buildings they live in.
Title: Re: Subsidized housing paradox.
Post by: Wingnutt on December 05, 2009, 09:07:50 AM
I think its starting to be come part of "the way"  not the American way or UK way, just people in general..   Used to be Success was what was strived for and having to be "assisted" in life was a source of great shame and to be avoided at all costs.  Now people instead find ways to game the system and make it a point to try and stay on goverment assistance.

I think there should LESS "help" for these people.

Free market society, freedom to succeed, freedom to fail..  Failure breeds invention and progress, if people arent allowed to fail, they will never move forward...  its sucks, but desperation is hell of a motivator.

Title: Re: Subsidized housing paradox.
Post by: ink on December 05, 2009, 10:42:24 AM
I think its starting to be come part of "the way"  not the American way or UK way, just people in general..   Used to be Success was what was strived for and having to be "assisted" in life was a source of great shame and to be avoided at all costs.  Now people instead find ways to game the system and make it a point to try and stay on goverment assistance.

I think there should LESS "help" for these people.

Free market society, freedom to succeed, freedom to fail..  Failure breeds invention and progress, if people arent allowed to fail, they will never move forward...  its sucks, but desperation is hell of a motivator.




 I agree with this :aok
Title: Re: Subsidized housing paradox.
Post by: PFactorDave on December 05, 2009, 10:58:37 AM
It isn't just the subsidized housing.  A few years ago, I was working as a photojournalist.  I was assigned to a reporter who was doind a huge multi page story about Habitat for Humanity homes in the area and how they supposedly were helping ot get people on their feet by giving them a new home that they could never afford on their own etc etc etc.

Problem was...  As we toured around several of the homes, they were so run down and trashed by the people benefitting from the charity of others that we couldn't find any places to takes photos for the article that didn't make the Habitat for Humanity program look like a big waste.

The article was canceled because the editors weren't going to get the light and fluffy, "Look how people are helping the poor folks" story that they wanted.  The editor rejected the expose that the reporter and I pitched after our tour, because we weren't going to put a positive spin on the whole thing.

I learned two things from the experience...

1)  A large segment of the lower class population in this country has no real desire to improve their lives.  They will take and take from the system and the charity of others with no real appreciation or motivation to make the best of their situation.

2)  The news media, and I mean ALL news media, is absolutely corrupted by their own agendas.  Only a fool takes ANYTHING put by the news media at face value.
Title: Re: Subsidized housing paradox.
Post by: CAP1 on December 05, 2009, 12:02:26 PM
It isn't just the subsidized housing.  A few years ago, I was working as a photojournalist.  I was assigned to a reporter who was doind a huge multi page story about Habitat for Humanity homes in the area and how they supposedly were helping ot get people on their feet by giving them a new home that they could never afford on their own etc etc etc.

Problem was...  As we toured around several of the homes, they were so run down and trashed by the people benefitting from the charity of others that we couldn't find any places to takes photos for the article that didn't make the Habitat for Humanity program look like a big waste.

The article was canceled because the editors weren't going to get the light and fluffy, "Look how people are helping the poor folks" story that they wanted.  The editor rejected the expose that the reporter and I pitched after our tour, because we weren't going to put a positive spin on the whole thing.

I learned two things from the experience...

1)  A large segment of the lower class population in this country has no real desire to improve their lives.  They will take and take from the system and the charity of others with no real appreciation or motivation to make the best of their situation.

2)  The news media, and I mean ALL news media, is absolutely corrupted by their own agendas.  Only a fool takes ANYTHING put by the news media at face value.

THey did one of those homes right here in camden nj. i think it was a hispanic family from camden got it.

 they not only trashed the house, but only made it a year or 2 before they got forclosed on, as they were still responsible for the mortgage.
Title: Re: Subsidized housing paradox.
Post by: Jayhawk on December 05, 2009, 12:48:10 PM
I would say a majority of these people are stuck in negative economic and social cycles.  Throwing money at the problem isn't the solution.  Just like the OP said, people who are given something without earning it don't treat it as well.  Think of some spoiled rich kid with a new car, they are a lot more likely to treat that thing like crap.  That's why I see benefits in programs like Big Brothers Big Sisters and Boys and Girls Club.  These organizations don't rely on giving money but rather giving support to these kids.  You can't fix the root of the problem overnight by covering it up with pretty things. 

Housing, drugs, and all those other problems are symptoms of the underlying problem.
Title: Re: Subsidized housing paradox.
Post by: BigPlay on December 07, 2009, 10:26:17 AM


 now here's the kicker. i pay $5300(ballpark) a year in property taxes.

Many states especially the ones with no state income tax have very high property taxes. I don't think the garden state is one of them. In California we have a thing called prop 13. That enables the current prop taxes to only go up 1 % of the current value each year. That being said they are finding other ways to raise the prop taxes. Now if you sell your home and by another I believe you can take a one time exchange.
Title: Re: Subsidized housing paradox.
Post by: CAP1 on December 07, 2009, 10:34:49 AM
Many states especially the ones with no state income tax have very high property taxes. I don't think the garden state is one of them. In California we have a thing called prop 13. That enables the current prop taxes to only go up 1 % of the current value each year. That being said they are finding other ways to raise the prop taxes. Now if you sell your home and by another I believe you can take a one time exchange.

nj state sales tax is 7%.

when i sell tires, i obviously have to charge that 7%. here's the kicker. they instituted a nj state tire tax a few years ago. $1.50 per tire. so i have to charge tax on tires twice.
Title: Re: Subsidized housing paradox.
Post by: BigPlay on December 07, 2009, 10:46:54 AM
nj state sales tax is 7%.

when i sell tires, i obviously have to charge that 7%. here's the kicker. they instituted a nj state tire tax a few years ago. $1.50 per tire. so i have to charge tax on tires twice.

we have a tire tax as well, don't know what it is but remember paying for it. At least your state didn't take a 10% mandatory loan from you that wont be paid back. You have to deduct it from your taxes instead. Now last time I checked there was a penalty and interest  on any underpaid amount. Do you think I am getting interest? HELL NO! The double standards of this country to it's people is getting ridiculous. I hear that the new cap and trade bill will have housing inspection and requirements to sell your home. Some as stupid as window strength.
Title: Re: Subsidized housing paradox.
Post by: Shuffler on December 07, 2009, 10:56:03 AM
Make your own bed and lie in it.


Anyone on handouts should be under the control and supervision of whomever gave out the handouts. Obviously they cvould not do it on their own. They should have duties and work requirements for the handouts.

Otherwise let nature take its course.

I feel the same way about anyone that has kids. They should be taking care of them not me.
Title: Re: Subsidized housing paradox.
Post by: PFactorDave on December 07, 2009, 11:15:07 AM
nj state sales tax is 7%.

when i sell tires, i obviously have to charge that 7%. here's the kicker. they instituted a nj state tire tax a few years ago. $1.50 per tire. so i have to charge tax on tires twice.

They call the extra tax a "Disposal" fee for getting rid of the old tires here in Illinois...  I believe you have to pay it even if you want to keep your old tires...  So much for the disposal thing...
Title: Re: Subsidized housing paradox.
Post by: CAP1 on December 07, 2009, 11:31:01 AM
They call the extra tax a "Disposal" fee for getting rid of the old tires here in Illinois...  I believe you have to pay it even if you want to keep your old tires...  So much for the disposal thing...

ya. charging for disposal is optional here. i pay a guy to come and take my tires. some of them. some, i take to the local hazmat drop off. the balk at it, but they take em.

 i also have the option of letting you take your own tires back when i put the new ones on...and you can put them out in your trash. in nj, most townships will take 2 per week.