Is this "fair"?

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles

The obvious solution is to put a wall around the Windy City.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

If a solution is required, there must be a problem.

If it is a problem that a poor person cannot afford to live in a rich neighborhood, the obvious solution is for the poor person to become rich.

If the poor person is made rich through government subsidy, then, to be "fair" that subsidy should be available to everyone who cannot afford to live in a rich neighborhood.

Then everyone would be equally rich, and, in effect, no one would be rich, since their would be no comparative disparity in wealth to define rich or poor. (Of course, that's an overriding goal of socialism.)

But the catch is that rather than a solution, the result would be a bigger problem. Solving problems by creating more problems is stupid. Not only will there be the functional problems pointed out in the article, there's that sneaky sociological problem that economic equality destroys motivation. All things being equal, there's nothing to strive for.

On the other hand, there's that Nancy Pelosi notion that not having to spend the time and effort to provide the necessities for yourself would free you to write poetry or create music. But what would there be to write or sing about. The ultimate problem with socialism, if it could actually work, would be that it is boring. Stultifyingly boring.

All that is an extreme oversimplification, but it is the germ of a worthwhile discussion which I doubt anyone cares to have. So, in keeping with simplicity: it is not "fair" (that being one of the major operative words driving progressive policy) to subsidize some to live in rich neighborhoods, but not to subsidize everyone else who would like the subsidy . . . especially when those who won't get the subsidy have to pay the taxes used to subsidize the others.

Then, there's that trampling the Constitution thing. And American values. And work ethic. And individual liberty. And all that stuff that nobody really cares about anymore. The important thing is that everyone is equal, and everything is fair. If that's possible

[wdmso]

just the same old same old about how Obama is out to destroy the country..

Obama’s last act is to force suburbs to be less white and less wealthy

I didn't realize all people on section 8 were non whites ?

oh wait they aren't... unless your a conservative apparently

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

just the same old same old about how Obama is out to destroy the country..

President Trump is inheriting quite a mess .......

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

just the same old same old about how Obama is out to destroy the country..

Obama’s last act is to force suburbs to be less white and less wealthy

I didn't realize all people on section 8 were non whites ?

oh wait they aren't... unless your a conservative apparently

"I didn't realize all people on section 8 were non whites ?"

No one claims they are all black. Certainly they are disproportionately black.

Most suburbanites don't care if their neighborhood becomes less white, as long as it doesn't become less safe. Since that argument cannot be refuted, your side claims that it's racist to not want crack dealers living next door to your children. There is no limit to the depths your side will go, no limit to the intellectual dishonesty.

The proposed bill says that landlords cannot refuse a tenant who has a criminal record. Does that sound like a free society to you? You want to invest in a rental property, and be told you don't have the right to say no if Willie Horton wants to live there?

Please tell me exactly where I am wrong.

[Fly Rod]

What else would U expect from spence?....
My friend solved his section 8 problem, stopped renting the unit 15 years ago once there was a murder there.

I would like one of them vouchers so i could move into a 5 mil house on the sea shore....lol...

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"I didn't realize all people on section 8 were non whites ?"

No one claims they are all black. Certainly they are disproportionately black.

you need to get out More If you actually believe That ^^^^ and the headline thinks it to be true how else to you make something less white


Please tell me exactly where I am wrong.

..

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

..

Earth to WDMSO,,,poor people are disproportionately black. It's a fact. You deny that? Really? Why? For what purpose?

[wdmso]

we are talking section 8 and making areas less white

but since your brought it up

http://money.cnn.com/2014/08/21/news...te-inequality/

[scottw]

let's get this very clear....it's the government and in particular, democrats, that look at a section of the country and declare that it is "too white or too wealthy" and that something must be done, usually in the form of tinkering by/through government, in this case subsidizing the migration of less white and less wealthy individuals and families into areas deemed unsatisfactorily integrated and unfairly affluent....of course, democrats have been trying this for decades and as WMD's article points out...things are about as bad as they've ever been for the less white and less affluent....soooo....I'm sure the democrats will promise to fix all of this during the current election cycle and enjoy overwhelming support

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

we are talking section 8 and making areas less white

but since your brought it up

http://money.cnn.com/2014/08/21/news...te-inequality/

Ummm...your article says that blacks are very disproportionately poor. That supports what I was saying.