2kids10horses
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 20:15:09 GMT -5
Posts: 2,759
|
Post by 2kids10horses on Jun 6, 2011 6:48:56 GMT -5
So, getting a job is a bad thing?
Oh, yeah, I forgot! Oscar Meyer is a corporation! OMG!!! He worked for an evil corporation!!!! They make PROFITS there!!!!
The only way for him to go to heaven is to repent and go work for the government!
LOL!!!
|
|
pepper112765
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jan 9, 2011 15:55:30 GMT -5
Posts: 1,812
|
Post by pepper112765 on Jun 6, 2011 13:19:09 GMT -5
ungenteel, My Section 8 tenant HAD a job. But, she found it was "easier" to mooch. By having more kids. By creating more dependants on society. Do you think she should continue to have more children she could not afford? Does she have a RIGHT to more food stamps because she chooses to continue to have children so that YOU and other taxpayers pay her rent? Section 8 was not designed to be permanent housing. It was designed to give people a place to live until their circumstances improved and they could restart their lives. But, no! Why do that? It's easier to get free rent, food stamps, collect the dependant child credit, etc. than it is to be self supporting. Nevermind that the taxpayers paid for her high school education, she doesn't need that! No!!! The government will pay her to live, and produce more leaches. No, I'm sorry. I think that she should have been prohibited from having any more children to contunue to receive Section 8 benefits. That was a CHOICE she made. To have more children. The taxpayers are having to pay for their food, housing, education, medical care. And what do these kids grow up to do? If they are girls, they get pregnant so they qualify for Section 8,and repeat the cycle. Boys, they latch onto a Wellfare momma and live with her, while they do their little drug deals. You can say what you want about Ayn Rand. The reason we have such a lousy economy now is we have too many NON-PRODUCTIVE moochers. Who would rather collect wellfare than work. You might not LIKE the truth, but the seeds of this underclass were planted by Lyndon Johnson and his "Great Society". And, you think "the rich" are to blame. And they should pay "their fair share". Well, if we define the rich as the top 2% earners (those that make more than $380,000 per year), they already pay over 40% of all Federal Income taxes collected. If you took ALL of their income over $380,000 as taxes, you would only pay for 6 months of the Federal Budget. So, the solution is NOT more taxes, it's LESS spending. Starting with entitlements. Putting it in a different prospective, in a sense, you were collecting welfare also by getting money from the government that pays the rent for a Section 8 tenant, because without that particular sort of tenant, you would not be paid and the only reason you rented to that particular tenant was the guarantee of government money. That money is guaranteed to you every month, whether she paid her portion of the rent or not.
|
|
2kids10horses
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 20:15:09 GMT -5
Posts: 2,759
|
Post by 2kids10horses on Jun 6, 2011 14:17:25 GMT -5
Nice try, pepper, but no. I had several houses on this street, and this was the only one I rented Section 8. The only reason I rented it Section 8 is I used a different contractor on this house than usual, and he didn't do quite as good on the fit and finish as my regular contractor. Everything was up to code, but he didn't caulk as well, his painting of the trim sometimes overlapped on to the wallboard. That kind of thing. Nothing I couldn't fix, but I did think it gave me an excuse to try the Section 8 route.
This was on a street of maybe 20 houses and I eventually owned 11 of the 20. I hired a guy full time to mow, do yardwork on the 11 houses and some others I had. This was my only Section 8. And some of the other houses I had in the neighborhood rented for more, some less. It was about average.
I only had one other house trashed: The tenant I rented to (who had references from a Church pastor) turned out to sublease it to hookers. Once I found out, I evicted them. They had drawn some pretty graphic pencil drawings of the services they provided on the walls. I guess the customers could point and choose what the wanted! No language barrier! Whoever the "artist" was was pretty talented. Paint, of course, fixed that problem. But even the hookers didn't tear up the ceiling fans!
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Jun 6, 2011 14:22:08 GMT -5
Section 8 is corporate welfare.
|
|
pepper112765
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jan 9, 2011 15:55:30 GMT -5
Posts: 1,812
|
Post by pepper112765 on Jun 6, 2011 14:29:46 GMT -5
Whatever reason you rented to that tenant, reference from the pastor or not, was the guarantee of rent payment and possibly doing a good deed. Without going fully back up in the thread, the tenant was not working when first moved in and then was required to contribute to the rent. My point is, without that guarantee of rent from the government, you would not have rented to that particular tenant. To whomever you rent your property is your business.
|
|
floridayankee
Junior Associate
If You Don't Stand Behind Our Troops, Feel Free to Stand in Front of Them.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:56:05 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by floridayankee on Jun 6, 2011 14:39:30 GMT -5
Putting it in a different prospective, in a sense, you were collecting welfare also by getting money from the government that pays the rent for a Section 8 tenant, because without that particular sort of tenant, you would not be paid and the only reason you rented to that particular tenant was the guarantee of government money. That money is guaranteed to you every month, whether she paid her portion of the rent or not. That's a bit of a stretch there don't you think pepper? Following that line of thinking, one could pretty much apply that to any government contractor or employee.
|
|
pepper112765
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jan 9, 2011 15:55:30 GMT -5
Posts: 1,812
|
Post by pepper112765 on Jun 6, 2011 15:24:47 GMT -5
Yeah, it is, but I also found it ironic to complain of moochers of the government (which the poster indicated aided and abetted the tenant who had more children in order not to pay their percentage of the rent) while directly benefitting from the moocher via the "contract" with the government.
|
|
2kids10horses
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 20:15:09 GMT -5
Posts: 2,759
|
Post by 2kids10horses on Jun 6, 2011 15:38:24 GMT -5
pepper...
Let's get your facts straight. When my Section 8 tenant moved in, she had a job. That was one of the reasons I rented to her. At the time, they were trying to close down the "Projects", and Atlanta Housing Authority was giving all those who lived in the Projects Section 8 vouchers. (Or certificates... I can't remember which.) The deal was, Section 8 paid all her rent for the first year. After that, it was a subsidy based upon her income. Section 8 paid some, she paid some.
When she moved in she had 4 kids. I went to her place in the Projects and interviewed her. She told me that she had no plans for any more kids, she just wanted to raise her 4 in a better place. The kids were well behaved.
After a year at my place, the kids had destroyed the fixtures. It wasn't until the third year, after Section 8 had reduced the amount they would pay to only 75% that she became pregnant again.
And you know, I never asked her if she intentionally got preggers to get Section 8 to pay all her rent. She was a nice lady, I bet if I had asked she would have told me. But, because she got pregnant, she got free rent, and increased food stamps. So, she got rewarded. Her kids going to school got free breakfast and lunches. So, whether she did it intentionally or not, the behavior was rewarded.
I think another poster said that when behaviour gets rewarded it will be repeated.
So a year and a half later, she has a 6th child. I think the last two had the same father. He lived there, but didn't maintain a "legal address" or have any legal status there. Otherwise, I think she'd lose her S8 voucher.
I tried S8 just to see if I would like it. You do that kind of thing as a real estate investor. You try a technique to see what works for you. Some things do, some don't. I did like getting the automatic check. I did not like having some bozo come and tell me that I had to install screens on windows that the tenant had already torn up. I liked the fact she didn't move out. I did not like her housekeeping. I liked the fact I could raise rent along with the market. I did not like the fact I was told what "market rates" were by AHA schedules.
There's good and bad to everything.
I'm just telling you why I just had one Section 8 house, and I've had dozens of rentals.
Want to know who the largest Section 8 landlords in Atlanta are?
(wait for it....
wait for it....)
Atlanta City Council members and Aldermen!
|
|
|
Post by lakhota on Jun 7, 2011 15:28:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by lakhota on Jun 7, 2011 17:51:10 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Mkitty is pro kitty on Jun 9, 2011 9:28:23 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 6, 2024 23:15:32 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2011 9:49:31 GMT -5
asserted that the GOP efforts to cut funding from many anti-poverty programs while balancing the budget on the backs of the poorest Americans were not in line with Christian values:
Damn odd that liberals hate right wing christian values in Republican politics (which I hate) & yet.....Hers a liberal posting something good about left wing christian values (which I also hate). A person or groups religious feelings should not come into anything political. I don't like either the right or the left pushing that agenda. If your religious views are that you should help the poor, then get up off your butt & do it. Feed 1,000's out of your kitchen, give them money, whatever. Just don't do it with government programs because of your religious leanings. Separation of church & state people.
|
|
NoMoreLunacy
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jun 8, 2011 23:21:57 GMT -5
Posts: 1,293
|
Post by NoMoreLunacy on Jun 9, 2011 12:40:36 GMT -5
Religious Leaders: GOP’s ‘Ayn Rand’ Budget Targets Poor, Goes Against Religious Values
America is a secular country and I don't care what religious leaders think on this matter. Would they prefer a budget that targets the rich?
|
|
|
Post by lakhota on Jun 11, 2011 21:58:58 GMT -5
|
|