Posted on 04/26/2018 6:59:20 AM PDT by reaganaut1
WASHINGTON — The Trump administration has proposed legislation that could triple rents on the poorest tenants in federally subsidized housing as part of a push to redefine housing assistance as a temporary benefit instead of the permanent source of shelter it has become for millions of poor people.
The legislation, spurred by Mr. Trump’s conservative budget director, Mick Mulvaney, and drafted by aides to Ben Carson, the secretary of housing and urban development, would also allow local governments to impose work requirements on tenants in public housing deemed fit for work.
The plan would also increase rents for elderly and disabled people after six years, agency officials said.
But the new rules would hit the poorest residents hardest, with minimum monthly rents in public housing developments and for recipients of Section 8 vouchers rising to $150 a month from $50.
The increases would affect about 712,000 families over the next several years, HUD officials said. Rent hikes would gradually be phased in for tenants based on their income and other provisions that could effectively limit the amount of time some tenants would be allowed to remain in government-funded housing.
Continue reading the main story “Every year, it takes more money, millions of dollars more, to serve the same number of households,” Mr. Carson told reporters Wednesday in a conference call. “It’s clear from a budget perspective and a human point of view that the current system is unsustainable.”
The proposal, geared at streamlining the agency and cutting the deficit, was intended to start the conversation and should not be regarded as final, Mr. Carson said.
Housing advocates and congressional Democrats immediately condemned it. “What pretends to be a hand up is really a foot in the back,” said Shamus Roller, the executive director of the National Housing Law Project.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
IF you watch the ‘judge’ shows aily, you will find a large number of Section 8 issues- where the recipient of such largess is suing a landlord or someone over any kind of perceived slight.
Judge on People’s Court likes to ask those who claim all kinds of ‘personal property’ missing when they are evicted for the exact list-—and it is amazing how many 60” plasma TV’s, pieces of jewelry & cell phones are listed.
They have more nice things than most of us.
...and at least one refugee/asylum seeking family!
How about the fact that SS is taken from our checks our whole working lives? I’m decades away from retiring, and would prefer they stop taking money from me if they’re just going to screw me down the road, but if you look at your SS withholdings from your paycheck you’d understand why people should get it back later.
“How about the fact that SS is taken from our checks our whole working lives? “
They take taxes from your check to fund all manner of welfare.
Anyone who thinks there is a lock box, or that they are “saving” for retirement via Social Security is deluded.
Social Security is a means-tested welfare program for the elderly.
It is nothing else.
By the time I retire I’ll have contributed to SS for more than 50 years; you should want me to get back as much as possible. Lockbox or not, IT WAS MY MONEY.
“IT WAS MY MONEY”
It was until the government stole it from you. And lied to you about it.
Hey, we’re all in the same boat.
But it does no good to continue to believe their fairy tale.
So if I get back what was stolen from me it is the same as welfare (where often never-employed parasites can get paid from more of my money)? I am decades from retirement, and I’ll be damned if I don’t try to recoup as much as possible of my money. By then some would have been invested for FIFTY YEARS.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.