I have known several people who lived in pubic housing who could truly afford their own place without depending on tax payers to house them. Do you think something better can be done with public housing rather than housing some people who could afford their own home? ..... Like turning them into homes for the elderly who couldn't afford to live on their own? Or do you think public housing is a good way to give people a start?
2007-06-26 16:26:16 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Civic Participation
I think HUD and public housing need to be overhauled
a very large % of HUD houses go to forsclouser very quickly because the mortage is still to high for the person to handle.
And public housing is a great place for someone to start but there needs to be more over sight so people who can afford their own place do not get to live off the gov't. This would free up more money and more housing.
There is an idea being floated around that if you allow the people in the affordable housing to have the option to by that they would take better care of the place and also take more pride in the area. I could only hope that would be true.
2007-06-27 02:35:16 · answer #1 · answered by G O 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, I think it is a waste of tax money. I know that providing the impoverished with free housing is just a ploy by government to get their votes come election time. The truth is, the government do not really investigate if the people they are giving houses to are really those who can ill-afford their own house. They do not check the background of the applicant nor the status of the family who is going to live in these dwellings.
2007-06-27 02:32:37 · answer #2 · answered by annabelle p 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I think if it's really necessary, public housing under circumstances is a good idea. However, there needs to be some restrictions and criteria in place so that people just don't jump on the freeloading bandwagon.
If we can afford to squander TRILLIONS of dollars on an unconstitutional, illegal, unjustifiable, immoral 'war' so a bunch of rich guys can get richer, we can afford to spend a few billion on public housing for people who are truly in need. -RKO- 06/26/07
2007-06-26 16:31:38 · answer #3 · answered by -RKO- 7 · 5⤊ 3⤋
I completely agree with -RKO-. If controls are there to prevent abuses, then the system should work to help those who truly need it.
If you know people who lived in pubic (sic) housing -- then WOW! Or if they were in public housing and were cheating, you have a moral obligation to turn them in.
2007-06-26 18:46:44 · answer #4 · answered by CarlisleGirl 6 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Public housing is necessary, but isnt run well. There should be strict, and enforced rules attached to their usage, such as, limited years in residence, real-job requirements, school attendance requirements, etc.
2007-06-26 23:56:34 · answer #5 · answered by Paul F 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
yes...big waste...they all need to go..the big racket is an unwed mom gets a 3 bedroom,puts all the kids in one,she gets one and moves in a boyfriend,who sells dope all day and doesnt work,but gives her money and she then rents the 3rd bedroom out to a brother or "cousin" for more cash,the loser here are the kids and taxpayers...
2007-06-26 18:05:14 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Liberals love pandering to the greedy and lazy rather than the needy & deserving. Public housing only gives people a start in one direction, the direction of poverty, government reliance, and a burden on the working class.
2007-06-26 16:41:43 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 5⤋
Yes. Too many people get handouts that do not really need them. All these issues should be handled through private means.
2007-06-26 16:29:27 · answer #8 · answered by GOPneedsarealconservative 4 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Close them all down, homeless are cheaper to deal with.
2007-06-27 05:48:55 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋