Posted on 07/21/2015 10:37:13 AM PDT by Sopater
I used to know somebody who lived in a middle class suburban neighborhood. He owned about 10 houses on his street. He said as he became more wealthy he bought houses on his street so he could control who lived near him He was very selective who he rented to. Mostly he rented to people from his church.
A small scale landlord such as him, compelled to rent to Section 8 people, might just abandon the properties instead.
Those unable or unwilling to fight invaders are conquered and as the Gaul said to the Roman; ‘Woe to the conquered!”
Of course the ultimate goal is for the government to take over all housing, certainly compelling landlords to drop out would be a huge step towards just that.
Move some into Grosse Pointe for the audacity of voting in Obama.
And don’t forget Ann Arbor.
0b0z0 want Section 8 Nation!
PING!
Flood ‘em into Maryland, which went for 0. Hopefully, I can leave before it gets too bad.
I see many accidental fires of rental properties happening if that's the case.
Maybe they will move me and Mr. GG2 into St Ives. :=)
Pretty much.
The cities will resemble a series of rings within a ring each with different classes of people.
The very center of the city will be strictly for the elites and the outer rings will support the elites lifestyle with their taxes.
All the highbrow entertainments which the elites enjoy will be located in the very center of the city and supported by the outer rings tax money.
Public transportation like toy trains and supported by outer rings tax money, will be located in the inner cities.
A large police presence supported by the outer rings tax money.
The lefts dream of revitalizing the inner cities and making them liberal Utopias where elites want to live has been ongoing for over 50 years and that’s just what I am aware of.
Ping.
ping
The foofarah about Hispanics is just a smokescreen for the real plan to resettle muslim “refugees.”
Last week there was talk from the Senate about withholding funding from sanctuary cities for failing to comply with immigration enforcement laws and I stated on those threads that is a common practice with every federal agency.
This is exactly how the feds (HUD) will force these new “local” planning decisions. They will withhold fed housing aid money and transportation dollars from these cities. This administration and the faceless bureaucracts understands this is how things work but the elected senators and representatives act as if this something new and a one off idea. It’s called the power of the purse!
“0b0z0 want Section 8 Nation!”
0b0z0 want Section 8 Nation!
0h0m0 needs a C-Section for the h0m0 raghead inside!
I predict that you are going to see a lot of HUD construction projects in the suburbs fall prey to mysterious fires, explosions, equipment theft, and a host of other misfortunes.
Particularly in New Jersey, Cleveland, and the other places where the locals know how to get this done (if you get my drift).
"HUD announced enforcement of its new 377-page rule called the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Rule which will allow them to move people from poor crime-ridden areas into “wealthy” suburbs."
FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument
There are several major constitutional problems with this official action by HUD. First, the states have never delegated to the corrupt feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate, tax and spend for vote-winning, intrastate housing purposes.
Also, even if the states had delegated such powers to the feds, consider this. The Founding States had made the first numbered clauses in the Constitution, Sections 1-3 of Article I, evidently a good place to hide them from Congress, to clarify that all federal legislative powers are vested in the elected members of Congress, not in the executive or judicial branches, or in non-elected government bureaucrats like those running the HUD. So Congress has a constitutional monopoly on federal legislative power whether it wants it or not.
So HUD’s action addressed by this thread is another example of corrupt Congress unconstitutionally camouflaging itself behind a constitutionally unauthorized federal agency in order to exercise powers that Congress doesn’t have in the first place.
Finally, note that if the ill-conceived 17th Amendment had never been ratified then the Senate might have protected 10th Amendment-protected state sovereignty by killing all bills that supported the establishment of HUD.
The 17th Amendment needs to disappear, and corrupt senators and constitutionally unauthorized federal agencies like HUD and EPA along with it.
Now, how would we locals know how to do that stuff?
;^)
That’s already being pushed in places like Austin as a regulation against “income discrimination”, saying you can’t refuse tenants who have housing income.
There are likely legal challenges if they pass, because you have to join a government program to become a Section 8 landlord.
So what happens when a tenant says “I have section 8, rent to me”, and the landlord says “I’m not in the section 8 program”? Will HUD now FORCE all landlords to enroll in the program, like we all have to have an Obamacare health insurance plan or pay a fine?
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.