NYCHA Funding Shortfall Could Mean Dark Days for Projects

Well here is a question - if the average income is 20Gs why is the average rent only $320- that works out to be less than 20% of income - seems too low.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 9:49 AM

Bad times. Here come the 70s.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 9:56 AM

Way to go Bloomie. Typical of fiscal conservatives. Penny wise pound foolish. Doing something to save money on the short term but creating a situation that impacts our economy and property values profoundly in the longer term.

Iraq
Mortgage Crisis
Education
Healthcare

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 10:06 AM

This is Bush's (and Congress') fault, and part of the Grover Norquist plan to make government fail. NYC's public housing has been a success story, overall -- one of the best run systems in the country.

I think the rent formula also adds in other housing costs (utilities etc)...it's supposed to be 30% of income, and NYCHA has already hiked rents at least once.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 10:18 AM

Polemarchus, are you serious? Why don't we ship off all lower income families to an island where they can fend for themselves. I agree that public housing at its earliest inception lacked a vision for the future and now is a gross failure but to advocate poor less educated people migrating to the "south" is ridiculous, why not divide the entire country? I am not surprised to find this type of thinking on brownstoner

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 10:26 AM

Public housing should be designed to help people who are down on their luck, not as a permanent solution to the lack of affordable housing. As it stands, once people get an apartment in the projects they never leave. The will give the apartment to their children and grandchildren who all have the incentive to keep their reportable income low so they do not have to move out. I know several people who are "artists" or work for non-profits who live in the projects in apartments they grew up in so they can save money.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 10:31 AM

Polemicist;

Well said!! I really look forward to the day when the projects are sold off. Their aesthestics derive directly from the statist, socialist mind-set that produced them. They are remnants of the grip that Soviet-style thinking used to have on the mind of NYC. Fortunately, the days of this mindset, like those of the projects and rent control, are numbered.

The saddest thing about the projects, however, are the people trapped in them. These projects do nothing to help their residents move on with their lives. These people have made a sad bargain.

Finally, I have nothing but contempt for the socialists who still try to defend these failures, such as the professor quoted in this story, and the 10.18 poster. How have these projects been a success? Rather than cite the condition of the buildings,or the budget of the NYCHA,please cite some actual PEOPLE who have benefited from the experience of living in a project.

BTW, I know of what I speak, as I spent a few of my formative years in the Red Hook projects. Fortunately, my parents had the good sense to get the hell out as soon as they could.

Benson

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 10:32 AM

Still think living in B. Hill next to the projects is "no big deal"?

Wait and see!!!

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 10:35 AM

10:31- the scenario you describe could be used to describe the identical situation that occurs in PRIVATE housing due to Rent Stabilization, as well as Section 8.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 10:50 AM

Lets see - NYCHA has residents with the highest unemployment rate in the city.
NYCHA has a huge budget shortfall and as a result will have to cut back

SOOOOO why not have those residents who are unemployed 'help out' in their community and earn some $.

Oh I know....because the Unions wont allow it!

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 10:54 AM

Actually the unions have been working with NYCHA residents to get them apprenticeships in construction, working on repairs and rehab on public housing. It's required under federal law.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 11:04 AM

Polemicist - the projects are far from 'barracks' or a 'crap hole' - unless you consider the near identical "luxury apartments" at Sty Town and Peter Copper Village to be 'barracks' as well.

The issue with the projects is not the design, architecture or the layout - the issues all revolve around the residents, not the physical buildings.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 11:15 AM

Polemicist, I thank all of the Higher Powers that you and Benson and 9:49 are not in charge.

First of all, public housing does not only house those you feel are living large on the cheap. It houses a huge population of the elderly on fixed incomes, the disabled, and those with serious medical and physical conditions that prevent them from working or earning enough to get out. They cannot simply "go South".

And speaking of which, please provide more than anecdotal evidence to show the viability of living down south. The reason there are so many foreclosures down there is because THERE ARE NO JOBS. Manufacturing is leaving or left, textile factories and heavy industry left years ago. Even auto plants are downsizing or delaying openings because of the economy and the fuel prices. Do you propose that they revive the time honored practice of sharecropping, migrant farm work and cheap servants? Newsflash, THOSE jobs are taken, too. It’s cheap to live there by NY standards because people make more money here. Moving down South to work for minimum wage provides no better a standard of living there than living here in the projects. You just broil all year instead of for only 3 months. And who are you to socially engineer who lives in New York City. We don’t ship people Down South like convicts to Australia, to “clean house” so the projects can be reclaimed for the “worthy”. Not yet, and not ever.

If 9:49 thinks it’s so easy and possible to live on $20K a year, he should be made to do it. I would love to see how he tries to house, feed, clothe, transport, and otherwise live on $370 a week with a family, in New York City.

No one in the projects has a right to live in a "prime" location? What elitist arrogance. Public housing was built in areas that were undesireable, out of the way, and in neighborhoods that the upper classes did not even visit. In the case of the housing around the Navy Yard, they were built to house workers during WW2, also in a place that no one was particularly interested in. NOW, that the city has grown, it's prime land. Well, isn't that a crime, that some poor person has a better view than one of the deserving rich?

Public housing has a multitude of problems that need to be fixed, no doubt. And people need to change that mindset of generational dependency. I will be the first person to agree with you on that. A bloated infrastructure of waste, corruption and ineptitude, on both sides of the tenant/administration relationship exists, and needs massive cleaning up, BUT, public housing is here because it is the right thing to do. Housing is a right, because everyone has a right to a roof over their head in the richest city in the richest country on the planet.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 11:40 AM

Montrose;

Your posts are truly nauseating. You are more interested in demonstrating that you "care" than in actually solving problems.
More to the point, your logic turns on itself.

You state "If 9:49 thinks it’s so easy and possible to live on $20K a year, he should be made to do it. I would love to see how he tries to house, feed, clothe, transport, and otherwise live on $370 a week with a family, in New York City."

Bingo!!! Exactly the point: a person on a low income, be they working or a fixed-income elderly, cannot make it here. Instead of putting them up in a barrack where they have no chance of getting out of a dead-end situation, what Polemicist is advocating is that they be given the CHOICE to move where that level of income can fetch a decent life. There are FAR more opportunities for people with modest skills to have a decent life in the South, Upstate, the Midwest, etc., than in the economy of NYC. It is for this reason that the largest out-migration from NYC right now (as recently cited in a speech by Governor Paterson) is by working-class African-Americans, who have the good sense to know where there opportunities lie.

What is nauseating to me about your post is that is is derived from your need to demonstrate that you "care", and never actually deals with the facts on the ground, or offers a practical solution. We don't need your self-referential platitudes.

Benson

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 11:49 AM

9:49 here - I dont think it is easy to live on 20k a year - but I also know that it is impossible to maintain housing with $320 rents so while I am all in favor of Govt helping out those less fortunate - it isnt really help if you have people living in Govt operated slums. And I also want to point out that while many people in the projects are as you described - based on the cars in the parking lots and other displays of wealth that are fairly common, there is clearly some in the projects who could afford more than $320 rent

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 11:55 AM

i live in the pjs and drive a benz

thanks white people

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 11:58 AM

How about this - you have 2yrs in Public Housing - in that period of time you must 1. Learn to read, write and speak a clear and understandable form of non-slang English and 2. Your kids must attend school regularly - if you don't do 1 and 2 you lose your apartment.

Then ongoing - if your kids fail to maintain adequate school attendance, are a big disipline problem or fall more than 1 yr behind grade level - you lose your apartment.

I predict within 12yrs (a full schooling cycle) the projects will be wonderful

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 12:05 PM

11:58 - the issue with the "projects"/underclass is not one of race - it is one of education/culture.

We live in a knowledge based economy/world and if you do not have an education you are destined for failure - black/white/brown or red.

And if you live in a community where education appears to be shunned or certainly not emphasised - you will likely never receive an education to escape that near certain failure...

rinse, repeat

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 12:10 PM

Montrose, my first job paid 20K and I easily managed to pay my bills, even though my rent was higher than $320 ($500, in fact). I cooked at home, brought my lunch to work, used public transit, didn't waste $ on expensive things that I didn't need, etc. In short, I lived within my means and did just fine. It was this sort of self-discipline that enabled me to bank some money and buy a small studio co-op, which I eventually traded up for a one-bedroom once I got married. And neither my wife nor I got a dime from our families. So it's very possible to succeed at that level as long as one has the ability to sacrifice and look ahead.

And you say there are no jobs? Tell that to the thousands of immigrants who have moved to NYC and gotten one or more jobs within a few months of their arrival.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 12:18 PM

Stuff White People Like
#62 - Knowing What's Best for Poor People

http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.wordpress.com/2008/02/10/62-knowing-whats-best-for-poor-people/

None of you know anything about being poor and living in the projects. Neither do I. STOP TALKING LIKE YOU DO.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 12:19 PM

12:19 -

(1) How do you know that the above posters are white?

(2) Benson already stated that he used to live in the projects

Try thinking before you post, if that's possible.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 12:22 PM

"First of all, public housing does not only house those you feel are living large on the cheap. It houses a huge population of the elderly on fixed incomes, the disabled, and those with serious medical and physical conditions that prevent them from working or earning enough to get out. They cannot simply "go South"."

Proof, please?

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 12:23 PM

12:19 - Your right that I know nothing about living in the projects - but I do know that the vast majority of those living in the projects have limited educations and that their children come to school unprepared and with little support to zero support at home.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 12:26 PM

Yes, stop saying anything about living in projects and being poor. Just keep paying for people to remain poor and in the projects though - But you have no right to question it.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 12:26 PM

Someday this war's gonna end. That'd be just fine with the boys on the boat. They weren't looking for anything more than a way home. Trouble is, I'd been back there, and I knew that it just didn't exist anymore.

Captain Benjamin L. Willard - Apocalypse Now

Like moths to a flame! Post a picture of a darken project building and let the hate fly. Classic race baiting tactics and covert race/class warfare!

Now Brownstoner, what is the true purpose of the Blog? Is it to promote the restoration of brownstones or to promote hatred among the people of Brooklyn. I think this is proof positive of your motives.

You have no more credibly with The What! I see for what it is, let get get rid of the poor/black people of Brownstone Brooklyn.

One thing I feel reel good these days because "Someday this war is gonna end.."

The What

Someday this war is gonna end...

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 12:44 PM

Shenani!

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 12:47 PM

Benson, I take this opportunity, on behalf of the poor of New York City, to thank you and Polemicist for your suggestions on how they should order their lives. If
you can swallow your nausea long enough to accept their thanks, you are a champ.

I bet they never thought of moving down South, away from friends, family, jobs, houses of worship, familiar places, and all the things that make where they live home. Since moving 600 to 1000 miles away to an uncertain future is so easy and cheap, I'm sure they will thank you for allowing them the opportunity to better themselves.

Since they can barely afford to live here, I'm sure packing up and moving 8 states away will be really affordable. Maybe they will just leave their belongings and buy new there. Start fresh. Since the housing available for lower income people in the South is generally of worse quality than almost anything here, I’m sure they will thank you for your concern during the next hurricane.

However, may I take this moment to remind you both of a few facts. One, not all people in the projects are black, nor do all poor black people live in the projects, so the literacy rate statistic really is bogus. Secondly, a great deal of the migration of African Americans out of New York to the South is of retired middle class people doing what white middle class retirees have been doing for years, going South. You toss around upstate, the Midwest, down South like they are economic meccas. They are not. Have you been midstate NY lately? I have. There is no economic growth there, hasn’t been for years. I see trailers in the yards of middle class homes, because the kids can’t afford to buy houses, and leave. The only jobs up there are the kinds that have to exist anywhere, like teachers, bus drivers, hospital workers and salesclerks at Walmart. There is very little new industry, and certainly very little industry for unskilled labor. And all those jobs are filled by the people who live there now. The same is true down South, in the Midwest, etc.

So while it is fun to be nauseated by my so-called self serving fake concern, you offer no real solution other than by advocating the removal in NYC, of the “problem”. Those who want to move away from the city don’t need your pat on the head for doing so, and those who stay need real jobs. Real jobs is the answer to whether or not the poor anywhere are helped, and that is not going to happen until this country stops sending jobs overseas and invests in its people. “Self reverential platitudes” may be all I have at this time, but those are better than simply advocating that the plight of the poor can easily be solved by them getting the hell out of town.

Montrose Morris

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 12:52 PM

Why is it race/class baiting - to point out that the population that lives in the projects are generally not well educated and their children are on a similar path???? And that this path leads to failure?

Better we should ignore it What?

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 12:53 PM

How can people who have never worked a steady job in their lives and who can't read, write or speak effectively; going to be helped by my NYC jobs?

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 12:59 PM

"Why is it race/class baiting - to point out that the population that lives in the projects are generally not well educated and their children are on a similar path???? And that this path leads to failure?"

Is Stuy Town and Cooper Village projects? Was they built to help people coming back from war?

In projects you have working class people too. Like Cops, Firefighters and city workers.

"Better we should ignore it What?"" Do you care about poeple in Housing Projects??!! You sound disingenuous and properly worried about your house value.

You see the war is gonna end one day. They may start another one but this one will surely end in tears.

"How can people who have never worked a steady job in their lives and who can't read, write or speak effectively; going to be helped by my NYC jobs?"

How you know that??!! Dumdassed white boy become President! Nobody say anything about that! Maybe those people can help themselves by sticking a Gun in your face. Make you get on the ground and stomping you to death. Maybe then they can "support themselves"

The What (Hee Hee)

Someday this war is gonna end....

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 1:11 PM

The low rents that people who live in the projects pay are often the only thing standing between them and the city shelter system. Take away low rents in NYCHA and you'll have a huge influx of people into family shelters.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 1:12 PM

Montrose;

Logic is really not your strong point, is it?

You talk about the quality of housing in the South being generally inferior in quality. On what basis do you make this statement? I'd also like to know how you consider the NYC projects to be of superior quality. Is is the graffitti-covered hallways that do it for you? How about the NYCHA regulations that prohinit residents from making any improvements to the fabulous apartments? How about that battleship gray linoleum tile? Yes, how can a small ranch house with a backyard for the kids compare to these magnificant structures? What benefit is there to someone to have a place of their own, when Montrose and company deem these buildings to be far superior?

You cite the horrors of a person moving hundreds of miles away to improve their lives. Somehow, as the grandson of immigrants who relocated thousands of miles away to improve their lives, your tearjerker doesn't move me. This city is teeming with immigrants who have done just that: move away from what was comfortable in order to improve their lot. Who then, Montrose, are the folks in the projects that, according to your "logic" are to be spared this fate? Do you consider the folks in projects to be some type of caste that should be spared this "horror"?

Finally, your logic seems to think that I am patronizing the poor. You are so damn clueless. You tell me what is more patronizing: pointing out other possibilities, choices and horizons to folks who are caught in a dead-end dependency, or just continuing the same old way,so that you can demonstrate that you "care".

I don't know why I continue to debate you, as you are so trapped in your mindset. I think the only benefit of doing so is that your posts demonstrate the intellectual bankruptcy of those who want to posit policy for the purpose of demonstrating that they "care" more than the rest of us mere mortals.

Benson

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 1:16 PM

"The What" utilizes the worst form of argument known - its called diversion and distraction....

This is how it works - point is made that GENERALLY the population that lives in the projects are not well educated and their children are on a similar path,

Now rather then address this point he says...

"In projects you have working class people too. "

Which of course is true but is totally irrelevant to those (majority) in the PJs that do not have such jobs and are severely undereducated.

Another example:

"How can people who have never worked a steady job in their lives and who can't read, write or speak effectively; going to be helped by more NYC jobs?"

So rather than address the point, "The What" goes on to talk about how dumb President Bush is - which again is probably true but totally irrelevant to the question at hand.

But my favorite "The What" line in this thread is this one:

"Is Stuy Town and Cooper Village projects? Was they built to help people coming back from war?"

I don't have any idea what relevance this line has whatsoever but I love how the grammar makes my point about the need for education perfectly clear.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 1:24 PM

Its amazing how everyone knows so much about the projects and what life there is like. "EVERYONE THERE IS DUMB"??? Listen to yourselves. Public housing is necessary in this city. I know a lot of people who live in the projects, do they like it? NO. Cheap rent, but they will be more than happy to move out once they get the opportunity. Just because you were born into it doesnt mean you will stay there forever. And this "move down south", does it ever occur to you that many people are born and raised here and the city is what they know and love?? Not everyone is from the middle of Kansas who moved here and knows all, like you apparently!! Suckers.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 1:26 PM

The smartest thing Bloomberg ever did was to start that program to pay 'at-risk' kids to go to school.

If all Government welfare for families was tied to school attendance and achievement the underclass in this society would be wiped out in a generation.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 1:28 PM

to 1:26 -Kansas is not down south

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 1:31 PM

Thats not what 1:26 meant, just that people move here from the middle of no where and all of the sudden know everything about and how to change this city.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 1:37 PM

"Just because you were born into it [Projects] doesnt mean you will stay there forever"

But the vast majority WILL stay in the projects and/or Government assistance forever.

You can ignore the issues or call people who bring them up elitist or racist all you want - but the projects (and other areas) are filled with a (more or less) permanent underclass.

Until people start to deal with that issue - all this other stuff is rhetoric

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 1:40 PM

its not this city, public housing has failed all over. And whats wrong with outsiders giving a new perspective. Clearly the people here haven't changed anything for 30 years.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 1:42 PM

Wow- I see Polemicist has once again exposed just how uneducated, shallow and ethically bankrupt HE is. Obviously all the tax abatements and breaks, all the public funding thrown at the rich corporations and developers cannot be construed as welfare for the rich? It is in my book. Yes- lets toss billions of dollars at ratner, lets help poor Goldman Sachs build a new office building while they blackmail the city for more- if you were not so ignorant and incapable of seeing the big picture, you would clearly see that what we spent on public housing is not what is bankrupting us. But no- you are just not smart enough.

Insofar as knowing what the history of projects in NYC is-once again Poley and Benson show how little they know. the initial projects were built from severtal premises- one as a means of providing civil servants and soldiers decent housing. Another was an architectural/utopian vision of city life (whether or not it was fulfilled is another story). Yet another factor was the historical evolution of giant apartment complexes from such buildings as the Dakota and other enormous, luxury apartment buildings which were often mini complexes in themselves. In the 60's many apartment complexes were built strictly with the middle class in mind.To assume that projects were merely a development of the City trying to warehouse the poor is true ingnorance on your part.

as far as the City's failure with the poor- it is in fact the City's failure with the middle class and, judging by the collapse of several major sevelopment projects, and the lack of anchor tenants in others, a failure with the rich because our City Government is not licking their asses enough (hard to believe, huh?).

The What is perfectly correct to bring up Bush and his cronies- the hemmorhaging of money in this country is not because they are spending it on the poor or on immigrants. It's because our government would rather piss it away in a war we should have never gotten into, or pay it out to their friends at Halliburton, or give it away to billionaires who don't want to pay for the air rights over the rail yards. They are not funding or even creating effective programs that will educate people, or create real jobs- in NYc, the Midwest, the South or the West.

And an even more glaring piece of moronic commentary is the fact that while polemicist says "I really don't see what is so controversial about giving people the choice to live wherever they want." he fails to explain what the choice is other than saying they can move down South. Move or what? certainly by your low standards choice is telling people move or else. Your big problem with Montrose is that you have no intelligent argument or fact to offer in rebuttal so you simply insult. Give it up boys, you are out of your intellectual league.

Bxgrl

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 1:54 PM

1:40- you obviously have no first hand experience with the projects or with anyone who lives in them so I find it hard to take your rhetoric seriously. the fialure is not the people in the projects- its the system that consistently fails to give them the means to do something about it. And trust me when I say that it is intentional because people like Bloomberg would much rather have moeny for his beloved Manhattan projects than put real money and work into an education system that may take years to show a return on that investment. He would rather put an orchestra (and I say this as an artist) in a firehouse, than keep a unit in the neighborhood. After all, a rig is not nearly so refined as a piece of classical music. And this same Mayor and cronies would rather give billions to help a second rate developer and his crap architect build a travesty in Brooklyn than pay a NYPD probie a decent beginning salary. Elitist is Polemicist who many times has ranted over the need for huge apartment complexes because we need housing but I guess he really means housing for "his kind" of people. Sounds a little too Adolf to me.

Bxgrl

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 2:04 PM

Bxgrl - you are mixing issues - sure Welfare to the rich (like your accurate portrayl of Goldman's deal) is wrong but unless you believe that diverting that money to the poor will eliminate the cycle of poverty and under-education of this societies underclass (for which you have little evidence, history or expert support) - the counter argument to a failed (poor) welfare/assistance programs, is not to cite unnecessary (rich) welfare programs.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 2:04 PM

BxGrl - it didnt take years to improve PS 107 or PS 8 or anymore $ - all it took was to have parents who were focused on education to send their kids there - they "system" didnt change, the $ didnt change....the people did.

The "means" to do something about poor education is available to everyone (especially the under or un employed) - its called time, effort and books.

Please do not try and tell me that the underclass (made up of all races in this country - but more so Black and P.R. in NYC) are as dedicated to education as say the Jewish immigrants were 75 years ago or the Korean immigrants are today.

Sure racism and history may be the cause of some (or even all) of these cultural differences today - BUT - until you change the culture in these underclass communities - all the subsidies in the world will do basically nothing

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 2:13 PM

At no time or place did I state that the projects, or project living, is preferable to living in one’s own home. Benson writes as if the poor are going down South to live in some lovely cheap ranch home with a yard and umbrella table on the patio. If you move down South with next to nothing, income wise, to a place that is economically depressed, as most of the South is, you are moving to someplace arguably worse than your average depressing, battleship grey cinderblock project apartment. New York City subsidized housing may not be pretty, but at least there are standards. There are no such standards in most of the South, including in the urban areas. Why do you think hurricanes, floods and tornadoes cause such immense damage down there? Because they tend to cut a swath through substandard poor housing in poor neighborhoods.

Benson and Polemicist’s “choice” is a false choice. It is the modern equivalent of the old British system of Transportation – shipping the undesireables to a place far away, out of sight, out of mind, and out of financial and moral responsibility. If someone chooses to relocate, fine, more power to them, and good luck. But that should be THEIR choice, made for their reasons, and their situation. It should not be public policy, or even public suggestion.

The problems in public housing are great, and include many thorny issues of race, personal responsibility, public responsibility and the ever present allocation of decreasing funds. Let’s have a real discussion of what can be done. Suggesting that people get out of Dodge solves nothing.

Montrose Morris

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 2:13 PM

"Well here is a question - if the average income is 20Gs why is the average rent only $320- that works out to be less than 20% of income - seems too low."

Not considering the high number of average dependants. Count the number of windows on a project that doesn't have child bars.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 2:30 PM

the problem IS the people in them. there are, in this very city, housing projects with mostly chinese/asian residents. These projects are basically a success in many measured terms and show how it should be done. They don't get any "preferential treatment" (the tired and worn argument of the irresponsible) and they work as places to live safely and cheaply.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 2:31 PM

Well look at what the british policy did - gave birth to America and Australia! seems it worked fine, give people a fresh start where things are affordable.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 2:33 PM

12:18 - EXACTLY! my first job paid $14,000 and i paid $265 in rent. why are these people so frickin special in the projects? if you keep maintaining them in this manner they will never ever make it. you need to get your sh*t together and try really really hard in this world.

also, the education is there! read read read. newspapers, books in the library. also, work as soon as you can.

I had jobs my whole life. sometimes 2.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 2:40 PM

I worked on fishing boats when I was 16 and put myself through school. The work was incedibly hard with long hours and back-breaking work, but it paid very well and allowed me to pay my way through college and led to a very lucrative professional career.

Funny thing is, when I was running one of the boats, I could never find people to work. I would hire anyone willing to work hard, and often the underprivileged and even homeless people. They would come out and last maybe 2 or 3 days. After that they would quit or never show-up again. I could'nt understand it until I entered the business world.

These people did not want to work hard to get ahead, they just wanted it handed to them. I offered so many people the opportunity to make a decent honest living, but the Hard Work requirement of the deal was a total turn-off for them.

That is why so many will be stuck in poverty forever. I have no sympathy because I know if you really, really want to improve your life, the opportunity is out there for anyone.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 3:35 PM

I was born in the projects of another country, where the projects dweelers are mainly white (scotland). The same attitudes, graffiti, pissin-in-the-lifts, vandalism, drug use, welfare dependency and apathy exist there too. Its a self-perpetuating culture that will never be fixed by throwing money at it.

No-one can help you, you have to help yourself. Education and working hard, but intelligently, is the key for most. Just don't go to a school where all the other projecters are.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 3:42 PM

I am totally against you 3:35 - I have tons of sympathy - but frankly sympathy is near worthless - only a cultural change toward education will change anything within NYCs underclass.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 4:13 PM

Poverty is a lousy way to live and there is an element of truth to most of the issues. I don't object to discussing issues but it is all too obvious that certain people use legitimate issues and questions a a springboard to vent their real issue- and that is race. Nearly every discussion we have on B'stoner, race is the 800 lb gorilla in the room, and too many people equate welfare and crime with a particular group- in NYC, we've focused on Black people. Whether its a matter of demographics or not, we have a skewed perception thanks to our headline based interpretation of life in NYC.

Poverty, and I say this for those of you who have never experienced it, not only makes for a poor and short list of life choices, it also makes you feel you can't escape, that you are powerless to change things. for a lot of people that is the reality and for those of you who have never had to navigate the welfare or assistance system in NYC, you will rarely find a more mind-numbing, uncaring, emotion-deadening, demeaning structure so geared to cutting the legs out from under you.

That so many people actually do make it out of the projects is a tribute to them, not the system. And the fact that these people are very much ignored in forums like this by people with money who have no moral or ethical consciousness, only proves my point.If the society of the projects is a self-perpetuating one, it certainly gets more than its fair share of help in staying that way.

And frankly, a society without compassion isn't much of a society. I've lived in rich neighborhoods and poor ones. I've had money and I've been poor. Poor people are made to feel powerless and useless, no matter how hard they work. You can read the attitude on this thread- poor people are a drain on society, etc, etc, etc,. Yet if anyone group can be said to be draining our society and our country, it is the rich, the greedy corporate types who make enough money in one year to send 500 kids to college, or buy books for every child in public school. It's the Halliburtons, the Bushes, the Roves, and their friends who close ranks against the rest of the country. Don't ever think money makes you better than anyone else.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 4:15 PM

Nice soliloquy 4:15 - now what do you suggest be done about poverty and/or the projects....

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 4:23 PM

The "greedy corporate types" making enough money to "send 500 kids to college" already do - by their taxes. Everyone in this city who pays (uncapped) NYC taxes, (uncapped)state taxes and property taxes pays for those who (1) can't or (2) won't help themselves. I don't see anyone here asking for a tax reduction, so save your animosity thanks.

Your baseless stereotyping of those with money as having no "moral or ethical" conciousness is exactly that - baseless. You have no idea about who actually contributes to charities, who makes the connections to get them to work and who are the people who came up with, and saw through, the ideas of welfare and government housing. It was the very people you abhor.

Save us your worn rich = bad nonsense.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 4:33 PM

4.15 PM;

Now that you have established that you are morally superior to us (especially Polemicist and myself), what do you suggest actually be done about the current situation in the projects, or are you saying that they are functioning just fine?

Benson

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 4:35 PM

The poor in this country have nothing to do with the rich. The richest of us contribute the most to society in terms of taxes, generating jobs, and economic activity. It sounds like 4:15 has the same tired, predictible, short-sighted ideas as every other liberal redistributionist in this country - Tax the rich until they are poor and throw money at the poor people so they live like they rich.

Forget anything relating to basic economics and the incentives of the free market, lets get rich people to pay for everything we want.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 4:44 PM

except we don't tax the rich until they are poor. And we certainly aren't throwing money at the poor so they can live like the rich. You need to get a grip on reality here. The richest of "you" pay far too little in taxes proportionately than a single working person- and I know this from experience- as for generating jobs, the greatest amount of jobs are actually generated by small businesses. Perhaps because you richest, in the pursuit of even more money, have sent so many jobs overseas to China. Yet the government, in a panic to stave off a recession desperately threw us "little people" 600$ with the admonition to go spend it, and jump start the economy. What happened to all you generous rich people? Obviously you never stopped spending, but it is far to little to help the economy. No, for that you need us middle class and poor folk to buy your stuff, wait your tables, clean your offices, ship your goods and nursemaid your kids.

And, 4:33, if you read what I said, I said a certain group, not a blanket condemnation of rich people. but since so many of you fell your money entitles you to something, let me also correct you as to the fact that not only do I pay proportionately more of my income in taxes, but i pay for many things that I have no use for- like schools, as I have no children. roads- I have no car. And why should I have my tax money pay for a basketball arena and Ratner's luxury condos?

May I also point out that if you ever studied the donation patterns in this country, you would find that middle class and, yes, poor people also donate huge amounts of money. for thousands of grass roots charitable organizations, they are the only monies that keep them afloat, and we do so without the expectation of a huge tax write off. So spare me the I have more money than Croesus so I am a better member of society. You have no idea about how the rest of us live, but hint- it isn't only about money.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 5:22 PM

Great post, denton. I grew up in Bronx, racially mixed, projects, as did many of my friends. I appreciated your point about the parking because for all the complaints about people in the projects having cars, public transportation is often not the best, or involves a long. complicated trip to and fro. this is especially true in many parts of the Bronx.

I only have one question- why do you feel the Left is responsible for conspiring with real estate interests and driving jobs out of the country? I don't see that.

Bxgrl

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 5:33 PM

5:22 My wife and I made a combined $140,000 last year. We paid a total of $41,000 Fedreal State and Local taxes (Exclusive of Social Security and Medicare,Insurance, etc) We paid out approximmately 30% of our income just in taxes. Now I hardly consider myself rich, but care to share what "Proportion" of the tax Burden you pay? A person Making $40,000 will pay somewhere around 5K or 6K or around 10% in Taxes. Someone making Under 30K likely has closer to $0 tax liability.

What do you propose is fair? It sure seems to me that my $40K "Contribution" in taxes is way too high and any higher acts a dis-incentive to work harder, further my education and try to earn more.

The tax the rich dribble only acts to destroy wealth creation, eliminate jobs, and penalize those people that innovate, create, and employ. Common sense, and empiracle data, clearly shows that the higher the taxes, the less revenue actually gets collected. This is becuase higher taxes creates a drain on the economy, drives jobs overseas, de-motivates investing, and discourages risk takers and entrepreneurs.

The simple and easy solution is not always the best.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 5:41 PM

Those earning over 60K pay more , proportionatley, than those earning 20K, those earning over 150K pay more , proportionatley, than those earning 60K. the biggest tax proportion is paid by those earning salaries with 150-300K income. Your marginal rates increase the more you earn up to the level that covers most earners in the country. Its called "progressive taxation".
So save us your crap. Those in NYC, NY state, pay the highest proportion of their income in taxes in the country due to hi city and state taxes.

The proportion people pay either side of those figures falls - below because they have lower marginal rates (down to those earning below 20K who, with EIC can actually have taxes) and above because those above make money from investment income which is taxed at a lower rate.

The vast bulk of taxes tho falls on working professionals.

But go ahead, stick to the same party line.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 6:00 PM

5:41- you may not have noticed but I have nowhere said anything about raising or lowering taxes. I am just pointing out to those folk who seem to think their money makes them better, or more productive and important that in fact without all of us involved and working, this country will be toast. I'm arguing about that feeling of elitist entitlement several poster here seem to have. It's not criminal to be poor or need help, although you can't tell based on what some people have said,it's unfortunate. Nor does being rich mean you really know everything in life about the economy or society (again I point my finger at benson and Polemicist).

But i would like someone to explain to me why with all the tax breaks, and abatements etc., we're still losing jobs -despite investing and everything else. Because investors don't just want profits, they want higher and higher profits. And the comes a tipping point where the people you need to buy your product can no longer afford it. Then everyone loses. free market bull aside, nothing operates in a vacuum- nothing and no one.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 6:03 PM

"You have no idea about how the rest of us live, but hint- it isn't only about money"

You have now idea how the "rich" live, what they contribute, and what they do - its all based on your tired stereotypes of people who have money, no doubt unchallenged and unexamined by the people you hang out with.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 6:07 PM

ah- it it were only so straight forward. Yo may not see the breaks in lower tax rates, but it is a known well established fact that those with the most money have many ways of avoiding paying their full share of taxes. Not to mention all those public funds that get thrown their way, tax shelters, etc. And that's fine- it's their money. BUT the idea that they are keeping the country afloat, and the rest of us who make less are somehow undeserving is a crock. Halliburton- a classic example of piggery-, has made billions off of our government (you know- OUR tax money), and is now moving to Dubai to avoid paying taxes. Now free market or not, what evidence do you see of ethics here? Oh, I'm sorry- its all about the money. Yet our absolutely idiotic President is telling us to spend the measly 600$ he is sending us so that we can save our economy. Why does it fall to the working and middle class instead of the big corporations to save it? Because collectively it is the working class that keep the economy afloat. Of course to figure that out you have to drill down a few levels to see it, not just look at what's on paper. If what's on paper was the whole story, Wall Street traders could save the planet. And now I'm done- doubt I will convince anyone because after all I'm not rich, so obviously what do I know?

bxgrl

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 6:36 PM

denton- did want to discuss that with you. Still think you're confusing libs with the upper crust right who line up behind Bloomberg. Manhattan is becoming a rareified atmosphere because those with money think anything that isn't pretty or smacks of "working class" is just too far below them to stay. those are the people who have pushed out manufacturing. That said, yes libs were the first to jump on the enviromental thing but while that is a liberal issue, pushing out jobs isn't. Not to mention- bad air is bad for everyone. If we're all sick or dying from the pollution, we won't be manufacturing or unionizing or anything else. but you do have to admit it isn't the liberals who are squeezing out the middle and working poor from their neighborhoods. that's big money, real estate money and it is the conservative right.
bxgrl

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 6:51 PM

I pay a lot in taxes and I don't want it spent on welfare mamas and their babies. Close these pieces of crap down and kick the poor and ignorant out into the real world. If you can't survive, take the hint and leave.

No, Polie, I don't want to give them any more money than they have already received in cheap housing, food stamps and free education - which they obviously did not take advantage of.

Get out and close the door behind you as you leave.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 7:57 PM

"Sure racism and history may be the cause of some (or even all) of these cultural differences today - BUT - until you change the culture in these underclass communities - all the subsidies in the world will do basically nothing"

Racism and history are most certainly the cause of the cultural differences. But what has to change is not only the culture in the "underclass communities" - BUT- the overall culture of racism.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 8:03 PM

I culture that thinks getting an education is "acting white" suffers more at its own hands than at the hands of any racists.

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 11:26 PM

Gee 7:57- your sheet with the eye holes is showing

Posted by: guest at May 14, 2008 11:35 PM

Gee 7:57: You ghetto upbringing is showing.

Get a well-paying job, work hard, pay a lot in taxes and then try to listen to the uneducated and under-employed complain about $320/month rent.

I have no sympathy for the poor if all they do is complain and do nothing to get ahead.

If others can come to this country - some illegally - get a job, pay rent, send money back to their home country and never rely on public assistance then some lazy ass native can do the same.

The free ride is over. Start paying your fair share.

Posted by: guest at May 15, 2008 11:03 AM

"In recent years NYCHA has laid off thousands of employees"

I don't know where you got that statistic from. It's more like a few hundred.

Posted by: guest at May 15, 2008 7:46 PM

oh plz goverment knock these hellholes down all ready in nyc its way overdue.

Posted by: guest at July 12, 2008 12:34 AM