That proposal would allow you to enjoy a Republican White House for the next 50 years.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
A Texas bill would give neighborhoods the right to veto low-income housing
- Thread starter WedgeX
- Start date
- Status
That proposal would allow you to enjoy a Republican White House for the next 50 years.
Just_myles
Member
Yup I concur. Real estate has a real problem. It is also the hardest industry to "disrupt", and I mean that literally. They are so set in their ways that it is hard to make real effective change.
My point is that there is a better way to do this but they have no incentive(as you say) to do so.
PataHikari
Banned
"Dangerous neighborhoods" and "lowered property values" is, and always has been, code words for minorities.
Hephaestus
Member
Im assuming when you say minorities your not talking about Asians? Living in Canada and growing up in Vancouver the most expensive neighborhoods weren't white.
PataHikari
Banned
Well, ok, Asians get a different excuse for white flight. But it's all the same thing in the end. White people will flee in terror at the presence of minorities.
Texas is the site of so many massive industrial accidents....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_City_disaster
Largest non nuclear explosion recorded.....
but back on topic...seems to be a republican agenda, destroying low income housing. Why do they hate less fortunate humanity so much.
I feel like all you suffering middle class homeowners saying "Fuck you, got mine, fix your damn ghetto," would it not be easier to to setup a billboard of types "Poors not Welcomed" perhaps a burning cross since you would clearly be the suffering party?
The same damn attitude, just different words.
The same damn attitude, just different words.
No suffering here, my car's tires are not in danger of getting slashed any time soon.
superdeluxe
Member
We can check neighborhood crime rates, homes that are worse off areas (lots of section 8, rental homes etc) have much higher rates of crime at least in our area, people with kids especially want safer areas.(a couple of our neighbors moved from those aforementioned areas) to our area.
My concern is more about my children and my neighbors and making our neighbourhood a great place to live and not necessarily about my property value
The Maverick
Member
People in this country would revolt like you've never seen. Folks are occasionally fine with the idea of the poor/lower class getting assisted, but not when their lives are disrupted in any way. A lot of US citizens would rather watch the country burn than sacrifice for a greater good.
Just like the poster in here who said he'd rather toss his money to charity than take a hit on property value. People would rather die then change.
Low income on its face is not unconstitutional because it is blind to race, color, religion, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender or national origin. The prospective homeowner is as likely to be White or Asian as they are to be Hispanic or Black.
Personally I don't think it is a middle class issue. The wealthy are just as concerned about who moves into their neighborhood. They just have taken steps to assure that it is less likely to happen. Plus they have a natural buffer in the middle class.
No they wouldn't be at all but it's cute you think they would be.
It has nothing to do with thinking. Here are the stats. You forget the demographics of middle America.
https://hudapps.hud.gov/public/picj2ee/Mtcsrcr?category=rcr_familystatus&download=false&count=0
I can't click on a link that doesn't work.
Not sure why the link does not work but here is the HUD website. https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HU...s/public_indian_housing/systems/pic/50058/rcr
Vanillalite
Ask me about the GAF Notebook
Republicans know this too. They enjoy seeing the rich make out like bandits while the poor and middle class fight it out and vote against each other. So the rich Republicans can win with this scenario.
That site allows you to generate reports in many different ways. I don't know what you are pointing to.
diablos991
Can’t stump the diablos
That's a good way to crash the housing market. Just tank prices across the board for all Americans!
Bingo. The neighborhood should have a say in what happens to their neighborhood. If the state decides some sort of low income housing is needed the neighborhood needs to be involved every step of the way to prevent the perception as an assault on the existing home owners.
SoRuffShoNuff
Member
It would only lower prices if the people trying to run away had a place to run to.
I don't have an issue with this, and this is pretty much how it is already. I've seen multiple proposals around our house for re-zoning for apartments (not even low income) that have been turned down because the local home builders, hoa's, etc have recommended no.
Our neighborhood is a very nice neighborhood in Fort Worth and the neighbors are white, mixed couples, African, Pakistani, Asian, Muslim, etc. Diversity doesn't seem to be an issue, especially since a division of the FAA is relocating here, and there are a bunch of financial and technology jobs popping up nearby.
Our neighborhood is a very nice neighborhood in Fort Worth and the neighbors are white, mixed couples, African, Pakistani, Asian, Muslim, etc. Diversity doesn't seem to be an issue, especially since a division of the FAA is relocating here, and there are a bunch of financial and technology jobs popping up nearby.
Pagusas
Elden Member
They always will have a place to go, just price your sub-division with an insane HOA fee or gate it, problem solved. We have several sub-divisions that have done just that to stay self-contained.
Some people have worked extremely hard to get the home and location of their dreams, Is it not ok to say "this area cost 750k to live in, that's the starting price, if you cant afford that there are other areas to live". I cant afford a 2 million dollar ocean front home so I dont demand that I be allowed to live there, or that affordable housing be put in the area so I may buy it. Why should government subsidized housing or apartments be any different? They should go in a low cost area.
Same, our neighborhood is very mixed here in Frisco (Dallas). With Toyota moving their HQ here (its almost done!) we've had an even more diverse area, and everyone has been extremely welcoming. Prices have shot through the roof though and most of us are okay with it so far (though property tax sucks now). This is an expensive area though, you dont even look in this area unless you can start at 550k. If you cant afford that you can go further west to Little Elm, houses their start at 200k. Cant afford that, head to The Coloney, you can get a fixer-uper or 60's home around 150k or appartments as low as 800/month.
Some people have worked hard all their lives and have very little to show for it, but to hell with their dreams, right?
Then what you are advocating for is shanty towns because for some that's about all they can afford if we are basing it on income alone. The gov't has to subsidize to help people but you don't want them to get as good as you because of the perceived meritocracy which boils down to "They have not earned it".
Pagusas
Elden Member
What exactly are you advocating, that nothing in life should be earned or have to be worked for? That everyone should get a "good job you tried" trophy? How do you reward skill and dedication, or becoming really good at something? We don't yet live in a Star Trek Utopia with replicators and unlimited resources for all. We live in a skill driven society with limited resources and have to work with those constraints. The people with more marketable skills will tend to have more in this society. Sometimes it doesn't work out, sometimes we try really hard and fail. I've been there before and so have many others, it's not a bad thing to fail, you just got to try again. Hell even if we did live in a Star Trek society, how does one decide who gets the ocean view property and who's stuck with the less than flattering parking lot view? Do you go by promotion level? That's just another skill based system that devides people.
As for dreams, we don't all get to see our dreams fuffilled. the promise of a dream isn't the guarantee of it's fuffillment. many people have the odds set up against them though and I fully agree those odds need to be made more fair and just. That includes things like school system funds redistribution and balancing.
I'm not advocating a shanty town at all. Several communities around Dallas are good lower priced areas that work. Irving, Garland, the Coloney, Lewisville. They aren't the greatest area but they are in no way shanty towns.
Houston has tons of middle class suburbs with a good mix of people. I'm thinking the same thing would happen here.
FinaruDensetsu
Member
That sounds like an issue with policing more than anything.
I live in an area where ultra high class housing is basically a stone's throw away from trailer parks and low-income housing. We don't have this issue because the police are pretty amazing.
The children from the low income families get to go to the great schools along with the rich kids. Which is great because they get access to the same great public schools instead of getting pushed into the bad schools in the cities that are in poor shape.
The rich people shouldn't be able to veto that out.
That's because ultra high class housing, will also come with a fairly ritzy police force too. They have the dosh for it. Middle class will come with a middle class police force.
Housing market seems like its already inflated. And there seem to be imbalances. At least when I was looking in my area last year.
Didn't take me long to realize something was wrong as a potential first time buyer. I did not see the same value as the others in the market I guess. Growing up in the area the schools to me have gotten worse curriculum wise, most colleges are going belly up. What the hell am I paying for that raises the realestate to almost double what my parents paid? A better shopping experience? I shop online mostly.
Though personally I don't look at land as mainly an asset but as something to pass on to my decendants and to continue to upkeep for their sakes.
As an aside. I find it interesting that minorities devalue areas. I lived in a nice area that had trailer parks near to it and the area was notorious for a population of white drug addicts, which would resort with attempts at theft here and there. But I guess if whites mainly robbed by their own its not a problem? Hard trying to figure it out.
Didn't take me long to realize something was wrong as a potential first time buyer. I did not see the same value as the others in the market I guess. Growing up in the area the schools to me have gotten worse curriculum wise, most colleges are going belly up. What the hell am I paying for that raises the realestate to almost double what my parents paid? A better shopping experience? I shop online mostly.
Though personally I don't look at land as mainly an asset but as something to pass on to my decendants and to continue to upkeep for their sakes.
As an aside. I find it interesting that minorities devalue areas. I lived in a nice area that had trailer parks near to it and the area was notorious for a population of white drug addicts, which would resort with attempts at theft here and there. But I guess if whites mainly robbed by their own its not a problem? Hard trying to figure it out.
Hephaestus
Member
The police were there almost every night...how much more can they do? I guees we could have pooled our money and put up a fence and a gate some guards, that would have solved the issues to. Im still trying to figure out why if you put two poor people or "low-cost" why does that area become a ghetto?
Wouldnt a better solution be to fund all the schools the same?
God Dayumm
Banned
It is a problem of infrastructure and services. I wouldn't consider it a problem if the wealthy get to live separately in their gated communities and expensive houses as long as everyone gets the same quality of schools, police, and transportation services. Of course, people feel rightfully entitled to better public services when they pay a much higher property tax, so then the solution is to get rid of such regressive taxes.
I would be ok with the veto if there was an effort towards the poorer communities, but we all know the real motivations behind this bill.
I would be ok with the veto if there was an effort towards the poorer communities, but we all know the real motivations behind this bill.
Hephaestus
Member
really because im going to make a wild guess that people that dont want low-cost housing in there area also dont want trailer parks filled with white trash setting up next door either.
So if this trailer park was notorious for addicts, thefts, BnE...why the fuck would people want that sprinkled all over their block?
Where I live in Keller/Fort Worth we've got a trailer park across the street and there really aren't crime problems around us at all. We have an incredibly diverse neighborhood and with a few exceptions, I've found all my neighbors to be absolutely fantastic. House prices are fairly reasonable too. I imagine it's a combination of the trailer park and also the distance from Dallas/Plano/Frisco (not very close). I'd argue the distance is a much larger factor as even the houses further down the block from the trailer park are still relatively low in price.
That in itself goes against your own standards. The people in Garland, Lewisville or wherever worked hard to get where they are. Why should the gov't allow poor people to live there if they can't afford it? Is there a cutoff point where people are no longer allowed to live in a certain neighborhood? What land value would that be? What makes your neighborhood so unattainable but for the people in Garland, they are just supposed to roll over?
Shao Kahn on the Lawn
Member
I had a similar experience except with round-the-clock Jerry Springer-esque shouting matches, kids wailing for hours at a time, blaring music at all hours (Country, rap, and the especially lovely mariachi music), the persistent aroma of weed/crack, a suspiciously high amount of foot traffic to the neighbor's house, and at least one attempt per week to case my house for burglary.
It's easy to talk about being accommodating when one's safety, property, and the value of the largest investment most families will ever make aren't largely dependent upon the people living around you.
Are we really arguing over the existence of nice neighborhoods?
No, we're arguing over the ones that seem to be excluded from having to host the "dirty poors."
Gotdatmoney
Member
I don't think the solution to problems is to build a huge chunk of low income housing in a middle to upper class areas. There has to be an effort to make the housing blend in in new developments and there has to be an actual push for higher quality schooling actoss the board so you dont have to push for higher income areas so your kids dont get shafted.
As far as tanking property values. I get people care but like, just being a minority and moving into a neighbourhood you cam easily afford still lowers the property value. So what is even the argument here?
As far as tanking property values. I get people care but like, just being a minority and moving into a neighbourhood you cam easily afford still lowers the property value. So what is even the argument here?
PataHikari
Banned
That's the argument.
The entire point is to hide and disguise the de facto segregation. Since property values are 100% arbitrary. There's no inherit reason a chunk of land is worth more then some other chunk. It's all based off what value people assign it.
So all they have to do is make the presence of minorities lower property values. But they can't say this directly, so they take advantage of the fact that more minorities use public housing (thanks to systemic racism making minority families poorer) and make that lower property values. Then throw in dog-whistles like "concern about crime" and bam, you have segregation.
Yup, a lot of racists on GAF.
Gotdatmoney
Member
I understand what it is. I dunno how you solve it though. As long as you can artificially lower the value of land on the basis that people of color live there regardless of income it basically will always be segregation.
BlueTsunami
there is joy in sucking dick
There was also an article I read that showed integrating lower class students in higher class school districts raised those students up to the level of their other classmates.
I mean, segregation like this is built on an age old boogeyman. Property values allows people to perpetuate this.
You got it. It's honestly kind of impressive hearing people make the same tired arguments that perpetuate segregation and the creation of ghettos that you saw decades ago. It never ends.
- Status