HUD chief Ben Carson proposes hiking rents for some low-income Americans getting housing subsidies

NO, you are the ignorant one this is exactly why this law was set up. And I suppose you think Jerry Brown created sanctuary state law SB54 and lets them all in, including MS13 to wreak havoc on the citizens because he's just a nice guy with a big heart? Seriously? ROFLMAO! No wonder he's been able to pull this off given the fact so many are that naive and gullible. No doubt he's spent his entire career in California laughing his ass off at people like you.

Voter fraud:


http://abc11.com/news/new-evidence-of-voter-fraud-in-nc-alleged/23005/

https://www.dmv.org/ca-california/ab-60-drivers-license.php

losangeles.cbslocal.com/2018/04/04/california-million-drivers-licenses-undocumented-immigrants/


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/11/03/voter-fraud-california-man-finds-dozens-ballots-stacked-outside-home.html


https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/florida-elections-worker-alleges/2016/11/04/id/757191/


https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/08/election-fraud-registered-voters-outnumber-eligible-voters-462-counties/


http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2016/10/27/2-investigators-chicago-voters-cast-ballots-from-beyond-the-grave/

https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/secretary-state-says-evidence-3-illegal-noncitizen-votes-2016-offers-details-voter-fraud-probe

Cost of illegals:

http://www.fairus.org/issue/publica...n-illegal-immigration-united-states-taxpayers

Total Governmental Expenditures on Illegal Aliens

https://nypost.com/2018/03/10/cutting-welfare-to-illegal-aliens-would-pay-for-trumps-wall/

Immigrant welfare statistics:

The Cost of Illegal Immigration to the United States
At the federal, state, and local levels, taxpayers shell out approximately $134.9 billion to cover the costs incurred by the presence of more than 12.5 million illegal aliens, and about 4.2 million citizen children of illegal aliens. That amounts to a tax burden of approximately $8,075 per illegal alien family member and a total of $115,894,597,664. The total cost of illegal immigration to U.S. taxpayers is both staggering and crippling. In 2013, FAIR estimated the total cost to be approximately $113 billion. So, in under four years, the cost has risen nearly $3 billion. This is a disturbing and unsustainable trend. The sections below will break down and further explain these numbers at the federal, state, and local levels.

Total Governmental Expenditures on Illegal Aliens

Total Tax Contributions by Illegal Aliens

Total Economic Impact of Illegal Immigration




http://www.fairus.org/issue/publica...n-illegal-immigration-united-states-taxpayers


https://www.creditdonkey.com/welfare-statistics.html


1. "How do ethnicities break down?
For 2011, here's the breakdown of welfare recipients: 16.3% of Non-Hispanic Whites. 39.7% of Non-Hispanic Blacks. 36.4% of Hispanics. Hispanics represent the fastest rate of growth for any demographic group (a 15% increase since the year 2000)."


Note: Recipiency is defined as living in a family with receipt of any amount of AFDC/TANF, SSI or SNAP during the year.

2. "What percentage of welfare recipients are immigrants?
There are approximately 40 million immigrants living in the U.S., both legal and illegal, and a decent number of them receive some form of welfare. For example, 20% of adult immigrants and nearly half of children from immigrant households had Medicaid coverage in 2011. About 30% of non-citizens received food stamps that same year."

 

Thank you for admitting you are ignorant on this issue and can't back up your dumb assertion.

 

Thank you for admitting you're either one of the brainwashed robots or a welfare recipient...which is it?

 

Ah...lol....still can't back up your claims? Ad homs are not proofs.

 

Ooh! See the dreadful concept of people being forced to actually having to PAY THEIR OWN WAY IN LIFE! What a HORROR!

. "But, but... I haven't worked in NINE YEARS! It's cruel to make me support myself NOW?!"

 

I suppose "hardships and squalor" is subjective. He certainly grew up low-income. Bounced around as a kid from school to school and house to house (including being poor enough his family had to share housing with a relative's family), with parents who were divorced when he was <10 years old, and a mother with problems with depression and suicide attempts. He attended college on a scholarship. And those are just basics I can recall off of the top of my head. I think it's pretty commonly accepted that he grew up poor and lived in areas most of us would cringe at, even if they weren't technically HUD.

 

Oh, we can handle much more in the homeless. So sure, let em live on the streets. At a time when slave labor globalism is dropping people from the middle into poverty. Excellent timing!! Kick em when they down!

 

cut taxes massively.

then cut spending on the poor.

its the GOP dream come true.

 

Snopes leans left, do you trust them? Even they admit periods of poverty and reliance on government assistance. From Snopes:

WHAT’S TRUE: Ben Carson experienced periods of poverty in his youth, and his family intermittently relied on government assistance (primarily food stamps).
www.snopes.com/fact-che

 

There were no "massive" tax cuts. But in principle, yes, I support reducing taxes and reducing spending, and I'm not even GOP. It's just common sense, unless you are one of the fans of big government and big brother.

 

Oh come on. An easy google search for a YouTube video of him and Trump visiting his childhood home will open your eyes a little. Yes, he lived in a shared house while his mother was renting out the house she got in the divorce for income.
Please, just a little reality here.

 

MY family relied on food stamps for a short period but I would never say we lived in poverty.........unless I was running for office, it plays well.

 

Shouldn't you first demonstrate that this is, in fact, the problem before claiming we need to raise their rent as some sort of "tough love"?

Here's a CBO look at the subject:
https://www.cbo.gov/publication/50782

Only 1 in 4 eligible households receive assistance. This is an indication that the assistance program is WOEFULLY underfunded. But it also means that the people receiving the assistance are not really edge cases -- they are the poorest of the poor.

Only half of the households receiving assistance are headed by able-bodied adults. Of those, half get most of their income from working. In other words, 50% of those receiving assistance aren't "able bodied", and another 25% are already working full time.

So that leaves 25% of recipients who are able bodied but not working. The next step would be to find out WHY they aren't working. You want to assume they are just lazy moochers. Maybe they are; but maybe we should actually find out what the deal is before proposing a "solution" to an imaginary problem.

The CBO report notes that most assistance programs provide a mix of incentives -- intentional or otherwise -- that serve to both encourage and discourage employment. The net result is that assistance reduces average employment by 5% and earnings by 10%. That means some people quit working or cut back on hours when they receive assistance.

However, that statistic is meaningless in isolation. For instance, if someone was working 80 hours a week at two jobs before assistance, and assistance allowed them to quit one of their jobs, that would result in a 50% cut in employment and earnings. But that's not a sign of either laziness or mooching: it's a sign of the assistance program doing it's job, making housing more affordable so that the person no longer has to kill themselves just to avoid homelessness.

But even if you assume the entire reduction in employment is due to laziness, it means that we're tripling the rent of people who can least afford it in order to turn a 5% gap in employment into a 3-4% gap. That seems cruel and ineffective to me. Especially coming on the heels of the GOP tax cut that was simply a huge giveaway to the wealthy that also exploded our budget deficit.

It's possible the HUD plan is reasonable. And there are parts of it that make sense, such as letting people keep their assistance for three years after they find work, to encourage them to find work without fear of losing benefits. But I want to see the analyses before saying thumbs up or down.

 

I think it is a perfect solution. We reduced taxes on the wealthy, we kept carried interest and other loopholes, but we need to decrease the budget deficit. I live in NYC - street are full of homeless people and we got use to it. So lets decrease the budget deficit by increasing number of homeless Americans.

zb

 

And how many of those homes did they visit? And how many would you live in if you weren't low-income? Were you expecting to see that he'd been raised in a homeless tent camp or something?

Food stamps are intended for the low-income folks. People receiving them are either low-income or they are scamming the system. How many other high level government officials do you think grew up in households poor enough to receive food stamps and other subsidies?

If Ben Carson was a Democrat, they'd have built him a pedestal nearly as tall as Obama's.

Whatever. At this point I'll just agree to disagree This thread wasn't really about Ben Carson himself anyhow.

 

Two non-answer platitudes that ignore the realities of the modern day economy we have. What do you have to say to the folks who do have jobs? There's only so much pretending that laziness is the problem that can be done before even the most staunch holdouts need to start facing the world we actually live in as opposed to the fantasy land you wish it was.

 

I don't recall including those with jobs? I mean really, it's all of one sentence, how could you possible get it so wrong OH WAIT, is this one of those misinterpretations moments or just the normal read in a lot of something not said times, it's getting difficult to differentiate the two anymore!

 

Both folks with and without jobs receive public housing assistance, which is the topic of this thread. I assumed, perhaps incorrectly, that you were speaking about that topic, but I suppose instead you were just making a general statement about a broad stereotype.

 

For the sake of clarity, how are you defining "with jobs"? Is it 40 hours/week at minimum wage or higher? Or does it include part-time workers? Or folks who maybe "watch the neighbors kids" for $50 a week, or cut a lawn or two here and there? Is there an official govt definition? (Since you've brought it up, I thought you might have a link handy. I have terrible internet connection today, so my Googling is very limited.)

 

It's hard for someone to get independent when your rent is next to nothing, you have a medical card that covers everything with no co pay, your food costs, paid by by food stamps, are close to nil . This is the reality of welfare that carries on for generations. Yes...if you really care a bout poor people you want to motivate them to be strong, independent and self relient.

 

Are you saying carson didnt grow up in the projects and the female snowflake did?

 

I'm saying neither did but one has devoted their professional career to it.

 

Yep, we need another 27 million homeless people sleeping in the streets. If the rent was jacked up to 90% of the people's income it would cure them of government dependency in a minute.

 

Carson needs the money to buy furniture with.

 

And you are wrong

Carson was the son of a single mon who droped out of school at 13

https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/ben-carson-5393.php

Carson was indeed a welfare baby who lived in subsidized housing

But Ibstand corrected thst he lived in the projects

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...t-nominee-ben-carson-public-housing/95070156/