« | »

Foreclosures Mean Lux Section 8 Houses

Here is an article from the Wall Street Journal from ten days ago that seems relevant to today’s news:

Housing Bust Opens New Doors for Subsidized Tenants

Landlords Woo Folks on Government Aid to Fill Empty Homes

By DAWN WOTAPKA
August 2, 2010

HENDERSON, Nev.—When Shawnetta Newburn left her drug-infested St. Louis neighborhood in search of a better life for her family in Las Vegas, she didn’t expect to live in a house with frills worthy of a McMansion.

But Paradise awaited.

That’s the name of the gated community where Ms. Newburn, a single mother who makes $10.50 an hour as a pawn-shop cashier, rents a three-bedroom townhouse with soaring ceilings, a gas-fueled fireplace and an oversize walk-in closet in the largest bedroom. The master bath even includes an enclosed toilet room, a feature popular in mini-mansions.

"The only time I ever saw that was on TV or something," she says during a tour of the approximately 2,000-square-foot home. "I never thought I’d have anything like this." The development has a kidney-shaped swimming pool.

Her previous apartment in St. Louis resembled public housing, she says, and her three sons were crammed into one bedroom. After her refrigerator caught fire, her landlord replaced it with an outdated brown model. She now has gleaming-white appliances.

Ms. Newburn can thank the housing bust. She participates in a government program for low-income families that subsidizes about half of her $1,400 monthly rent. The program, known as Section 8, has for decades put families in functional but basic homes and apartments, sometimes in less-than-desirable communities.

And, truth be known, many if not most of these people do not bother to pay their share of the rent. But the landlords are happy just to get the government money, and so allow them to continue to reside there. So this is often a ‘rent free’ situation for the tenant.

But overbuilding during the housing boom has left so many homes available that landlords, desperate for renters, are wooing Section 8 recipients, whose government subsidies, delivered electronically, guarantee the landlord gets paid. As a result, Section 8 recipients suddenly have a housing smorgasbord.

Plenty of average housing stock remains in many places, but in certain markets, there are also more upscale selections. On the website GoSection8.com, landlords nationwide tout boom-era showpieces—replete with "great rooms," backyard swimming pools and built-in stainless-steel barbecue grills—that once sold for hundreds of thousands of dollars. Las Vegas has been one of the nation’s hardest-hit real-estate markets.

Some renters are getting pickier. "More and more, I’m seeing tenants turn down places," says Arman Davtyan, owner of seven Las Vegas properties rented to Section 8 tenants. Instead, they’re going for "another property that’s either bigger or in a better area or has more bedrooms," he says. "Before, they tended to take whatever they could get."

Though some neighbors have long contended that government-subsidized tenants increase crime and depress property values, some now say that having a house occupied is better than leaving it vacant, which attracts vandalism and other problems

Racists. Still, we suspect that there is a lot of ‘vandalism,’ even when these houses are ‘occupied.’

Denise McCrae is looking for an apartment near Newport News, Va. Her current apartment in Philadelphia has a red brick dining-room floor and industrial-style windows. She longs for a dishwasher and a washer and dryer.

Several rental listings around Newport News spotted on GoSection8.com have impressed her. One that stands out is a townhouse with a community weight room and a "theater area" with a big-screen TV for residents. Another perk: central air conditioning, which she now lacks. "I was like, ‘This can’t be Section 8 at all,"’ Ms. McCrae says. "This is beautiful."

The change marks one of the most dramatic shifts since the 1974 creation of Section 8, nicknamed after its location in the U.S. Housing and Community Development Act.

Remember when ‘Section 8’ used to mean ‘crazy’? Some things never change.

The $18.1 billion Housing and Urban Development program offers more than 2 million families the chance to live outside of housing projects. Recipients pay a certain percentage of their income, typically no more than 30%, each month.

“Typically,” the "recipients" pay nothing at all these days.

Landlord participation is voluntary, and the home must pass an inspection. With no official centralized location for available properties, it is impossible to know how many units are available, though the count appears to be rising. When GoSection8.com was launched in 2004, a few hundred listings occurred monthly. Now, 700 or more can come daily, says Richard Cupelli, the site’s president. "The amount of new owners that are seeking Section 8 tenants is through the roof."

Last year, Mr. Davtyan, who rents to Section 8 tenants, paid $60,000 in cash for a four-bedroom house in North Las Vegas. He charges rent of $1,436 each month, giving him a profit of about $15,000 per year after insurance and property taxes, he says. He also paid $60,000 for a six-bedroom house in central Las Vegas 18 months ago that once commanded nearly $300,000. It rents for nearly $1,700 a month.

"It’s the most lucrative way to go right now," he says. "Nowhere else does your money make that kind of return."

And the beauty of this is that it is a self-generating program. Having ‘Section 8’ housing in the neighborhood means that the other houses will soon lose their value and be foreclosed upon. Which means more Section 8 housing. And the cycle continues.

It is more wealth redistribution, just by another means. It is ‘social justice’ at work.

This article was posted by Steve on Thursday, August 12th, 2010. Comments are currently closed.

37 Responses to “Foreclosures Mean Lux Section 8 Houses”

  1. bousquem says:

    My town has one section 8 housing development in it, right near the hospital too. There are constantly calls one can hear on the police scanner for trouble at that place. Usually drunken fights, domestic violence, and drug dealing. I rememeber hearing once all of one apartment kicked in door of another because of a dispute during a drug deal, the really sad part was it was the son who kicked down his mother’s door, guess he wasn’t getting enough of a cut of the deal. Our town use to be a nice place but it was a mill town so now we get all the imported scum from the cities moving here into the old mill housing and multifamilies along with the section 8 development crowd. And people wonder why property values in the area around the development dropped like a stone.

  2. TerryAnne says:

    This is ridiculous! I used to live in Newport News and can tell you, without a doubt, that there are plenty of low rent places there. In fact, the part of Newport News that touches the water (near the shipyard) is nothing but Section 8 and low rent housing. It’s dangerous there, mind you, but with having approximately 30% of that city already dedicated to Section 8, there is no need for someone to be offering housing in the nicer sections to someone who cannot afford it. In addition, there are plenty of low rent apartments in the area. I was a young enlisted airman and paid $425 for a two-storey townhouse apartment. Rent has gone up since then (this was 10 years ago), but it is still under $1000. It wasn’t a luxury apartment, but it was clean, well tended and quiet. There was even a pool for those who use that as a selling point. Most people who lived there were military, so everyone was respectful of one another.

    With the money she could save in not trying to keep up with the Jones’ by moving into the apartment complex I lived in down there, she would even have enough money left over to join Bally’s Fitness, about 2 miles away. And treat herself to a movie in one of the three movie theaters less than 5 miles away.

  3. TwilightZoned says:

    Enabling at it’s finest. What incentive does anyone have to better themselves with these types of unintended consequences (At this point it I’m beginning to believe it IS intended.) produced by the government? It seriously makes me want to stop working so I can enjoy a better home. (At least the pictures show way better soundings than what I live in.)

    While my 2-bedroom single family home is in gated community, the subdivision is in NO way upscale. When we purchased almost 20 years ago my income would have qualified for bond money down payment which could not be used to purchase in this community. So we bought the old fashioned way and were lucky at the time to be able to afford, with two incomes, a house that has increased in value to a point that if we were to buy it today we could in no way come close to affording. So my husband and I should work, and work hard, to afford and remain in a nice community while others are given a comparable or most likely a better home on $10.00 an hour salary? You can bet this will be checked on to see if in use where I live and a personal crusade will ensue to change it if it does.

    Here are other unintended consequences:
    -crime rates will increase
    -people who bought, move out
    -more low income people move in
    -even higher crime rates ensue
    -homes are not kept up
    -property values plummet
    -more and more people stop working, don’t take education or job skills training, scamming the system.

    And the cycle of slums, ghettos, etc. continue only at a faster rate.

    Does anyone else see a revolt coming?! Excuse me, I’m feeling really nauseated and need to race to the restroom before vomiting all over the monitor.

    • TerryAnne says:

      Read Atlas Shrugged. Dagny is my hero because she refused to succumb to the government manufactured dependency.

      I will continue to resist, just as she did.

    • proreason says:

      The goal is to eliminate the middle class.

      The ruling class doesn’t like people who want to live their lives without government intervention. They can’t control you that way.

      So making you dependent on government serves two purposes. You are easier to control, and they can transfer your wealth to themselves. So you see, they don’t really care whether a country is rich or poor. They will take whatever they need to live like royalty. If that means you live in the dirt, so be it.

      If you don’t believe it, take a look at how people have lived throughout history when there was a ruling class. It’s not “a pattern”. It’s 100%.

    • jobeth says:

      “They will take whatever they need to live like royalty.”

      Kind of like the great little vacation to Spain! While theirfellow countrymen foot the bill and feel lucky to have friends over for a BBQ.

      And what is a little jaunt overseas without rubbing shoulders with real royalty? After all they have to begin to get to know their “equals”.

      But looking at the pink and yellow unmatched, fluffy, weird, Halloween like, outfit her daughter wore…I think they better learn to dress up better. I don’t think the royals shop at thrift stores.

      Michelle’s outfit, in all fairness may have come from the dollar store…I would recognize their stuff anywhere…I shop there enough since I have to send most of my money to them for their vacations.

      See photo #3 if you missed this fashion show.

      Remember last year we were told everyone is trying to dress like them…

      http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/Michelle-Obama-Sasha-vacation-Spain/ss/events/wl/080510michellespain#photoViewer=/100808/481/urn_publicid_ap_org_af1e130eaf1f4f4c95f92eb6b286f944

    • hushpuppy says:

      Michelle looks more like a char woman. No sense of how to dress – just pure ghetto.

      My favorite frock was that hideous black and red number. One offspring wore solid black, the other solid red… I took one look at Michelle’s dress and starting laughing… see if you can make the connection:

      Michelle:

      http://tinyurl.com/32wgle2

      Reminded me of:

      http://tinyurl.com/2fjmhp

      Guess I’m not the only one who thought of it:

      http://tinyurl.com/264z2h9

    • jobeth says:

      Great stuff hushpuppy…lol

      Would that mean if her hubby kicked the bucket she would be the black widow? bada boom…sorry…

      She should probably keep that dress, just in case.

  4. TwilightZoned says:

    The gated community Paradise soon to be renamed, “Paradise Lost”.

    • tranquil.night says:

      Very clever.

      “Greedily she engorged without restraint,

      And knew not eating death;”

      John Milton is my favorite Epic Poet.

    • Petronius says:

      “Who first seduc’d them to that foul revolt?

      Th’ infernal Serpent; he it was, whose guile

      Stirr’d up with Envy and Revenge, deceiv’d….”

      That part always reminds me of Nerobama.

  5. proreason says:

    I suffered as a landlord for many years, with multiple properties that were hardly slums. My tenants were mostly white, but I had quite a mix of races, marital status, age groups and occupations through the years.

    With more than 20 tenants during my travails, there was only 1 who maintained the property to a minimum level. Several completely trashed the premises. I could tell you 50 stories about it.

    It is a virtual guarantee that Section 8 properties will be destroyed. It only takes a few months. A dedicated tenant can do it in a few weeks.

    • confucius says:

      I hope these tenants wreck the places.

      I then hope the government forces these landlords to repair and even upgrade the places to “green” standards.

      And after all that, I then hope the government confiscates the places leaving the landlords with nothing.

      A**holes.

    • BannedbytheTaliban says:

      The city of Philadelphia has its own special little housing authority. It builds apartment like building for housing degenerates. They are made of concrete blocks have steel doors and most have bars on the windows. They are more fortified than most prisons. However, in about a year, maybe two, the worthless souls they let live there, for free mind you, manage to punch holes in the concrete walls, break out the windows, tear the doors off the hinges, sell the appliances for drug money, etc. So what does the city do? They build more.

    • Rusty Shackleford says:

      “They build more”. Yup.

      Give a man a fish and he’ll look at you with wild, staring eyes.
      Teach a man to fish and you’ll be sitting in the boat alone because your student wasn’t interested in doing anything that resembled work or that required patience.

      I remember seeing “the projects” in NYC. 9 or 10 years later they were being demolished. These were 40 and 50 story buildings. They leveled them and in their place, built the “new projects” and the cycle continued. That apartment that “JJ” lived in on the show “Good Times”…that was no accident of bad writing. It was accurate. The elevators stopped working, the “super” was nowhere to be found (for fear of getting mugged) and there was graffiti on the walls and destruction and abuse evidence was everywhere.

      Perhaps it’s time to do what Rome used to do. The Centurians would get up a patrol and anyone laying about in the streets would be pressed into military service or sent to work as slaves.

      1/3 of Rome proper was slaves. Another large fraction, it’s unclear how much, were layabouts and criminals and such.

      There will always be “the poor”. Often it’s a choice. Sometimes it’s not. I am reminded of the bird-feeder story but PJ O’Rourke said it best: “You cannot end poverty by giving poor people money”.

      But using the new socialist government’s thinking, you CAN keep the people controlled and voting in your direction. Who would vote the people out who give them everything?

      Pro has hit the nail on the head so many times on this, it’s almost getting boring. But he’s right. They’re “up there” we’re “down here” and they want to first take all our money, then destroy any means we have of living a free and independent life. My biggest fear is that in spite of all the states suing this administration over hell-scare and immigration, etc, there may be an entire rail car full of judges who are activists who desire the people be “put in line”.

      Hello Nazi Germany, 1933. Never thought I would have such a fear. But, if the balloon goes up, and I’ve no way to fight…then I’m gone. I’ll have to figure something out…but…..I’ll not live in a socialist nation like they want to make it.

      The contemptible pukes who are running the show need to have their asses handed to them in a box. Won’t happen because freshmen congressmen won’t buck the established trend of pecking order. With McLame leading the way to a centrist hell, he will be and has been complicit in the destruction. I wonder, sometimes, if when they watch a football game, do they think that “if only that left tackle hadn’t sacked the QB…if only they had talked it out and come to some mutual agreement”. Ridiculous I know but, something happened to our system and it has been bastardized into a haven for pu**ies.

      Sarah Palin was absolutely 100% correct about cojones.

    • BannedbytheTaliban says:

      In an attempt to lift everybody spirits and answer Rusty, here is a little proverb:

      Build a man a fire and he is warm for a day,
      Set a man on fire and he is warm for the rest of his life.

    • proreason says:

      “There will always be “the poor”. “

      There’s a reason the ruling class defines poverty as the lowest 15%. That way, poverty never goes away…..and of course, the need for a government teat never goes away.

      Meanwhile, Shawnetta, a proud lifetime member of the “poor”, aka Obamy voters, lives a lifestyle that not a single one of our parents or their parents or their parents could ever have imagined.

    • jobeth says:

      BannedByTheTaliban…

      Oh yes… that’s a wise taliban proverb isn’t it? lol

  6. Right of the People says:

    Years ago when I was out in the field repairing computers, I was in a real estate office that was the leasing office for a new complex of luxury 2 & 3 bedroom apartments. This was in the late ’70s when average rentals for a 2 bedroom place was $250 to $350 and these places rented for about $500 – $700 depending upon options, location etc.

    Because of federal law they were required to rent 10% of their units to section 8 people. While I was there working a young girl no older than 18 or 19 came in with 3 children in tow, the oldest nearly five years old. They had to rent her a 3 bedroom place for $250 a month because she had 2 boys and a girl and of course the little ragamuffins couldn’t all share one room!

    After she left the agent turned to me and told me that the unit they rented her usually went for $625 a month and she was sure if and when this girl moved out they’d probably have to completely redo the place before they could rent it again. This agency had a number of apartment complexes they rented and that is what always happened after a section 8 family lived in them.

    Wealth redistribution at its finest. Come on November!

  7. jobeth says:

    Little ms Shawnetta somehow got some pretty nice furniture. Do the have section 8 for furniture? (rhetorical)

    Now who’s smarter….the guy or gal who sacrificed for years going to university…or the guy or gal who laid on their backsides with a cold brew or worse. Seems that both make out in the end.

    The rest of us who are somewhere in between get the leftovers. Not that I’m complaining about the person who went to University…They earned their material goods. They deserve what they earned. Its the other one who ticks me off.

    I’ve gone to school, raised my kids…singly with out government help (or help from their father…they could get by with that years ago)

    Now, after all those years of mandatorily paying into the SS fund that the government used as their private slush fund piggy bank…I am told by the progressive left that SS might need to cut my benefits because they need the money to “spread the wealth” and SS is going broke! What a surprise.

    Uhhh, I have an idea….if you government officials keep your sticky little claws out of that fund we would have plenty of money instead of being billions of dollars short!!!! (can’t remember where, but I think I heard somewhere it was about 3 billion short? Don’t know though…)

    But then I’m only the peon taxpayer. And there are millions of little ms Shawnetta’s out there who need that money

    Where is that Section 8 line forming…..! (kidding…I’d go homeless first!)

  8. NoNeoCommies says:

    Step two (actually three or later since step one was to cause the crisis in the first place) is to arrange for them to actually own the houses.

    It is true that anyone who does not earn what they have value it much less than those that have to work for it.
    This also includes earning their freedom.
    That is why Iraqis and Afghanis need to fight for theirs as hard as we fight for them.

    • jobeth says:

      I’ve been waiting for them to tell my husband and I we have to trade houses with one of their “less fortunate..(read that unproductive)”

      I mean we only have 3 people living in a 3 BR house…and they have families with 6 kids who could better use the space. After all we are seniors and are too old to have need of an extra bedroom and an whole acre of land! Those kids need a place to stretch out.

      I’m only half kidding here.

    • proreason says:

      “I’m only half kidding here.”

      I’m not kidding at all.

      That’s where we are heading. If they can force you to buy health insurance, why can’t they force you to give up your house.

      Housing, by definition, is commerce because you use money to pay for it. And by definition it is interstate commerce, because the value of your house impacts the values of houses in other states. If everybody in your state takes great care of their houses and people want to buy them, the valueswill go up and the values of houses in other states will go down. It is inevitable. And that’s not fair, so the government has to take control. It is obligated to regulate housing for the good of the country and because the constitution dictates it. Government’s function is to promote a fair society, not to allow you to frivously live in luxury on a whole acre while poor blacks suffer with less. It is not fair for anybody to live better than anybody else, except, of course, your rulers, and their favored supporters. So, the government will have to own all housing stock. It’s unavoidable.

    • jobeth says:

      Pro…well said.

      It just occurred to me how easily that could happen using your observations. Who owns most of our mortgages? Fannie and Freddie backs them all. Not to mention the banks that the Feds now pretty much run.

      Not a far reach to say they actually own your house and just as they run GM, Chrysler,the banks and the health insurance, they could tell you where you get to live.

      Its that way in the UK if you use their council housing. THEY, not you get to say where you live. Since housing is so over priced beyond the average person’s ability to pay…you take what they hand you. Don’t argue because you will lose your opportunity and be bumped to the end of the list.

      And I can promise you…Promise you…that the arabs get the choice housing, since most council officials are Pakistani. My step daughter waited well over 2 years for another home out of the crime ridden neighborhood they were assigned. All the while watching arabs just arriving getting their version of private sec 8 houses…because they have so many kids…they need more space than council housing provides.

      Yep…It could happen if we can’t change things…and fast!

      ***

      UK’s Sun Newspaper is surely a Tabloid…but it is a conservative Tabloid and exposes a lot of stuff that is wrong there.

      At least someone is exposing this stuff there. Other than Blogs like S&L who does that here? Not the MSM for sure.

      For a peek at our future…with generations of people who think they are entitled….to everthing….take a look at the following.

      http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/features/3091717/The-Sun-declares-war-on-Britains-benefits-culture.html

    • proreason says:

      The word is out yesterday today that the feds are “rethinking” the government’s policy of promoting home ownership. This after their policies brought the country to the edge of collapse, plunged us into the worst economy since the 1930’s, and stole trillions in equity from people who had worked all their lives.

      Now they are “rethinking it”.

      Well what does “rethinking it” lead to:

      1. Elimination of the income tax mortgage deduction. That is a 50-100 billion dollar tax hike. It will also drive several million more people into foreclosure and bankruptcy.
      2. A dramatic reduction in the mortgage lending business. Thousands of jobs will be lost. GDP will go down substantially.
      3. Another dramatic drop in the value of housing, this time, national. Rents will immediately sink which will be further redistribute the nation’s wealth to the Obamy constituency. Meanwhile, several other million homeowners will go upside down and will probably walk on their mortgages, thus ruining their credit for life and creating even more luxury Section 8 housing.
      4. Red State America, in particular, Texas, will have the destruction inflicted on it that the loans for deadbeats program inflicted on the east and west coast, Nevada and Arizona.

      It looks like the culmination of a 20-30 year strategy aimed at:
      – destroying the American dream
      – flattening the middle class
      – destroying the power of wall street
      – punishining red state America
      – separating the ruling class from the peasants.

      Step 1: force banks to make bad mortgage loans
      Step 2: run up housing prices which encourages people to take on other unsustainable financial commitments
      Step 3: prick the bubble, destroy the economy, bankrupt millions, and get a marxist in the White House
      Step 4: eliminate the mortgage exemption to raise taxes and bankrupt millions more
      Step 5: restibute the housing stock to marxist supporters
      Step 6: make it impossible for the middle class to accumulate wealth through personal property

    • TwilightZoned says:

      “Not a far reach to say they actually own your house…”

      I guess that is the point. That way government can deem whom is
      unfortunate, down trodden, used, abused, etc, etc, etc. My mortgage
      is paid in full. IMO that means I own it, not the government. But
      somehow the very real and scary use of eminent domain is how those
      government _____’s (fill in the blank) will take it from me.

      I can’t begin to describe the deep down disdain and loathing felt toward
      government officials with the ideology of “social justice” and socialism.
      (read communism)

    • jobeth says:

      TZ…I hear you…And congrats by the way in having your mortgage paid off….I envy you…but in a good way…lol…I don’t resent you…just admire you are at that well deserved point.

      I understand fully your fear of eminent domain. Me too. We live in a National Forest and are surrounded by Fed property and are situated on a little lake…perfect for a campground or a private corp who could generate more taxes than the four homes situated with us. One of which is now foreclosed on and is sitting empty…just waiting for our own Sec 8 nightmare.

      In reality Florida has a pretty strong law (for the moment) against private corp take over. But there is always the Fed…and we live in their lap.

      Pro…”Well what does “rethinking it” lead to:”

      It also leads to “rental help” from daddy Obalmy. Very much like the council housing in the UK…Then they REALLY have us under control. They’ll put us where they want to. The hard working right next to the “unfortunates” who’s only talent is to destroy the neighborhood with graffiti and of course they will probably want to “borrow” our possessions…after all, we shouldn’t have more than them…equality for all.

    • TwilightZoned says:

      JB-Long story short…We were lucky enough to have hired a
      good attorney when the business partner tried to steal it. The
      ingrate contributed zero money toward the business while we
      used $100, 000 of our home’s equity. So in all reality we could
      have lost our home to pay off a business we were shut out of.
      That happened about 3 years ago and still chaps my *ss to this
      day!!!

      Anyway, after lawyer fees and paying off the bank note, we cleared
      just enough to pay off the mortgage from the settlement. According
      to the tax acct. it provided the least amount of taxes to Uncle Sam.
      Not a great way of paying of your home. I’m so thankful it worked out.
      It was very stressful not knowing if we’d lose our home. I think that’s
      why this article frosted me so. People getting something for nothing
      and think they’re entitled to it at the expense of others.

      Living in a national forest on federal land could prove very tempting
      in eminent domain. I truly feel your pain. BTW, I live in FL also.

    • jobeth says:

      TZ…thanks for the empathy…Our land, altho smack dab in the middle of the Nat forest has never belonged to the Feds. Back when they designated the lands around here to be deemed a Nat Forest it excluded any land that was already in private hands unless the owner volunteered to sell. The rest was land that was never bought or sold although platted but never sold. In 1908 it became a forest.

      So unlike a nat PARK where everything is Fed owned…a forest is sort of a patchwork of privately owned land among the Fed lands. The Frances Marion Nat Forest in SC is the same way. Lots of patches of privately owned land within the boundaries of the Forest.

      Sooo, while not completely safe, being surrounded by the Fed lands…(if they wanted to, they could create another camp ground or rec area), I think we are safe from private vultures. I hope…lol

      BTW…I’m thrilled for you that you managed to get your money back from that business venture with that thief…Good work…God Bless.

  9. Reality Bytes says:

    My Dad used to call my big brother a “Section 8” cause “he’s just not wired right.” Sad but true. Ironic that the same applies to Obama’s America.

    • jobeth says:

      Oh my! I remember that term. lol I also thought it ironic when I heard that housing was using the same tag. That was what the court found to address people who were ready for the institution. In florida now we call it “Baker Act”.

  10. Reality Bytes says:

    The Obama Presidency or The Section 8 Administration. Perfect!

  11. BigOil says:

    Why exactly do we pay for this woman’s housing? Notice the nice furniture, clothes, and tv (probably with cable). Nobody in the picture appears to be starving.

    How much does that $10.5 per hour wage actually equate to? The wage minus payroll tax is about $20,000 per year. Her section 8 payments are worth another $8,400 per year. Tack on another $5,000 for the earned income tax credit. Say another $2,000 in food stamps. Conservatively, she is probably over 34 grand a year in disposable income.

    Who ever said poverty didn’t pay?

    • proreason says:

      Notice the man at the upper left. Throw in another 27 grand a year for him assuming he makes the same $10.5 per hour (but no section 8 housing).

      Over 5K a month disposable income.

      Except they are living in a house for a family with twice that disposble income.

      Not bad.

      mmm, mmm, mmm

  12. Chinnubie says:

    I was attempting to find an apartment a few years ago and the one we liked was a duplex. The manager told us that he had another applicant and if she fell through we could get the apartment. The reason he preferred her to us was that she had a section 8 voucher and he could charge her $100-$150 more than if she were to pay cash. The reason he told me that he has to charge the higher price for section 8, the destruction that is to follow with renting to section 8. Can’t get a deposit out of the government so they charge a higher monthly rent to cover the damage they KNOW will happen.

    What still amazes me is the pure ignorance/stupidity that these kind of people are happy to display on a daily basis. They actually think of this as their money that is OWED to them and God forbid if something happens and the check doesn’t arrive when it’s expected. They explode and start blaming everyone and claim that they aren’t getting paid. They don’t even realize they are being KEPT as slaves by the very people they continue to vote into power to keep the goodies coming. They have a sense of pride in the entitlements they receive similar to the pride one gets when they achieve a great accomplishment at work or school.

    I wish some of these liberals would come right out and talk about how they continue to keep minorities in their place through the genorosity of the taxpayer. I can wish can’t I??

    • jobeth says:

      Just today…a slew of people were protesting on Wall street because they were demanding…not jobs…but extended unemployment checks. Like it was their right to demand it. Same “group entitlement think”

      We are getting to be a bunch of demanding spoiled brats who think the world owes them.

      They mistake arrogance for pride.

    • Rusty Shackleford says:

      Not “liberals”….socialists

      They expect from the government. If you take the same scenario and apply it to Soviet Russia, or East Germany, or flaming red China, you will see the analogy.

      The utter disgust I have for them squatting in homes that, not only are they NOT entitled to, they probably laugh about the “po sucka” who lost it to begin with. One can easily estimate the end result. Since it’s section 8 (how fitting a name…remember Klinger, trying to convince the Army he was nuts so he could get a section 8 discharge?) housing, who will do the maintenance, etc? The bank that owns it? The government? It is to laugh. The house will eventually look the part and will probably have to be demolished anyway, the residents having done their worst.


« Front Page | To Top
« | »