Public Housing: The Gift That Just Keeps Giving

This should be unbelievable, unfortunately it isn't given the failure and inefficiency of large government programs. Individuals get qualified for low income housing, subsidized by taxpayers. Some of those individuals eventually start making from $100 to $200k a year, but you don't want to punish their success, so it's just fine that they keep living with a portion of their housing costs subsidized by Americans making far less. Another liberal dream turned nightmare for American taxpayers.

"Clearly this housing was not designed for that," he said. "It's good that these folks have reached a point where they are now successful in their income level. But they need to move into market-rate housing and allow these units to be used for the people they are intended to benefit."

County housing officials emphasize -- and a review of county and federal housing rules confirms -- that they have broken no rules by letting tenants remain after their incomes rise. They say every household met eligibility caps when they entered the program. Officials also say that to turn families out would punish them for attaining self-sufficiency. And they note -- correctly, according to records -- that most tenants in the county's housing programs have low incomes.

"We are definitely fulfilling our mission here," said Paula C. Sampson, director of the housing department. "You have to look at all the numbers. The vast majority of the people we are serving are very low income."

Still, some housing experts say even a smattering of such high incomes is unheard of in most subsidized housing nationwide. This is particularly true of public housing, a program regulated and funded by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and intended for the country's poorest families.

Comments

[plutosdad]

"to turn families out would punish them for attaining self-sufficiency"

That's what I say about my own taxes! But I don't even make 6 figures and I'm getting punished. sheesh

[jj]

This is what is wrong with the whole welfare process. Once someone gets on public assistance, they are on it until they die, whether it be crazy checks, public housing, community development, etc. It's ludicrous to give people a blank check written on the public treasury. Wasn't it Aristotle who said all democracies fail because of loose fiscal policy? You see, once people find out they can vote themselves benefits from the public treasury, guess what happens.

[seekeronos]

"In these sentiments, Sir, I agree to this Constitution, with all its faults, — if they are such; because I think a general Government necessary for us, and there is no form of government but what may be a blessing to the people, if well administered; and I believe, farther, that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic government, being incapable of any other."

- Ben. Franklin

"A Democracy will vote away its rights."

-Ben. Franklin

And the signal quote from Mr. Franklin:

"When the people find they can vote themselves money,
that will herald the end of the republic."

- Ben. Franklin

[LOL]

"This should be unbelievable, unfortunately it isn't given the failure and inefficiency of large government programs."

One could argue this about the Iraq war

[seekeronos]

Dunno, Lollipop... but Iraq sure seems a lot more peaceful with less people going BOOM! in the middle of the bazaar than it did this time last year.

And lots of A-Q and other insurrectionists have been caught or killed.

Could it be... (to quote "Bob") that the SURGE has been working? Looks like it has.