Posted on 08/16/2009 9:01:49 AM PDT by joinedafterattack
Ha, ha, ha, ha, snork, LOL, ... stop it, you're killing me!!
Mugabe's "veterans" took farms. Obama's "veterans" will take foreclosed FHA homes.
This article is not very specific, but it sounds as if the Obama administration may be abandoning HUD's Homeownership Vouchers program. Or am I dreaming? Am I way off-base here?
The Homeownership Vouchers program is a pet peeve of mine. It's a program started by Clinton at the end of his presidency and then continued by President Bush. So, the idea of subsidizing mortgages is nothing new; it was happening under a Republican president for eight years.
If the Obama administration is dropping it, that's good news. Under this program, families who qualify can "buy" a home using mortgage subsidies. If they happen to be the sort of people who terrorize your neighborhood, you can complain and complain but never have them removed. That house is considered theirs, no matter what. Believe me, my parents had experience with a "family" who moved next door under this program. I tried everything including reporting them to the local housing authority to have them removed. The gov't agents there merely laughed and said, "That's their home now." Yes, it's their home on our dollar.
Yes, the gov't should not be in the housing business, and the Obama administration together with the Democrats are destroying our nation. But, if they are going to subsidize housing, I'd rather they were subsidizing rent instead of mortgages, even though I know the projects are bad news, too.
Until a week or two ago. Living in gov housing will still carry with it gov control of the tenants.
That is the plan. You will have Obama's favored people living in your sub-division and paying rock bottom rents.
The Democrats are returning to this idea as they clear their minds of the idea that building highrise slums is a good one.
It’s a bad idea no matter who came up with it. My point stands though; tenants of gov housing will be subject to whatever rules the gov makes.
Our courts enforce private contracts. In some countries you have to arrange for your own enforcement.
So, the point about being subject to rules is what?
Tell that to my parents, who are currently in the process of buying a 32 unit apartment complex. They are getting a great deal on a foreclosure property that is actually halfway decent and has a high occupancy rate. The last thing they want is their mid-six figure investment going down the tubes with government money and government tenants.
So my folks are taking a huge leap and risk with their money and you say it’s a better thing? No, it’s not. The government needs to get their fat fingers off of the housing market—it’s their fault we’re in the mess we’re in to begin with.
"We're movin' on DOWN!
That the government can set far more draconian rules than a private sector landlord and there is no redress for that. As in my previous example, which stands regardless of recent legislation, the government can abrogate Constitutionally protected rights. You can take a citizen landlord to court for that. Try suing the FedGov.
Here's the way it works, urban areas have been setting aside funds or places for the use of the poor as housing since the dawning of civilization.
The purpose is to get the poor off the streets to make it possible for citizens to get about and do business.
Subsidizing the poor (mostly the "elderly poor") to live in existing surplus housing seems like a very good way to achieve the primary purpose ~ the clearing of the streets for the productive sector of society.
Short of just killing the poor do you have a different approach perhaps?
Yes. Though I have no property to subdivide if I did I'd want to be free to subdivide it however I wish.
Lower taxation so charity can flourish.
No it wasn't. It was about gov control over the lives of gov tenants. Try to keep up.
Exactly. If you take the King's coin, you do the King's bidding.
YAHOO SEARCH———> Allison S. Davis Senator Obama operation board games for slumlords
Like the ones in Chicago...”operation board games for slumlords” that Obama was a backer of!
And, your point is?
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.