What's Your Take? Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

  1. 11:40 – No, but they should have tossed you out on the street.

    No one has argued against help for the handicapped. In fact I specifically stated that there should be help for the handicapped or mentally retarded. Re-read my 11:18 post. In a perfect world that help would come from a private charitable organization and not the govt. but that’s a discussion for another blog.

    I understand about your handicapped neighbor but what was your excuse for taking the city’s subsidy.

  2. Subsidize the rent owed to the landlord, not handicap the landlord so certain individuals can get over.

    In certain cases, people cannot afford to live in the city. That doesn’t mean they don’t have a right to live in the city. These people should get some help from the city. But why should the owner of a building bare the brunt of the responsibility to ensure these people can live affordably?

    To hell with rent stabilization. Pull the entire city on the carpet and subsidize these folks. If you’re going to tax the hell out of the owner, then don’t mandate that some Mo can just live here endlessly for $600 bucks a month

  3. “There is no inalienable right to live in lower manhattan.”

    but there is an inalienable right to decent housing, and not just for disabled people. poor people have human rights too:

    “International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, article 11;

    Housing of the very poor — if they have any — tends to be built with low-quality materials, often lacks running water, sanitation facilities and electricity and is often located in unhealthy environments far away from basic services. It is frequently insecure as a result of legal or arbitrary evictions and the inability of the poor to pay even a minimal rent regularly. Additionally, poor housing has a major impact on the exercise of other rights, such as the rights to health and employment.”

    http://www.un.org/events/humanrights/2006/links.shtml

    you cannot just assume across the board that property holder’s rights trump the human rights of the people occupying the property. they don’t.

  4. Get rid of rent regulation and what do you do with those who are elderly and handicapped? Sometimes it does make fiscal sense to subsidize rents. I lived in a rent stabilized building for a number of years, and one of the tenants was mentally handicapped. The city subsidized his rent so that he could live on his own, instead of in an institution. He had a job as a dog walker, but that wouldn’t have covered much more than basic living expenses. They probably should’ve just tossed him out on the street, right?

  5. Hey Anon 10:21 I want to live in a 2,500 sq foot loft in DUMBO. I am willing to contribute $1,000/mo and I expect you and Anon 9:56 to subsidize the rest of my rent for the next 30 years. And you two better not dare try to tell me how and where I can live.

    What’s heartless and immoral is to support a policy that robs a man of the god given ability to do for himself. Anon 10:44 got it right. Unless someone is handicapped or mentally retarded (which I am sure the Post would have mentioned if it was the case) it not heartless to demand that after 29 years, I repeat 29 years, they be able to stand on their own two without some govt. enforced subsidy.

    “Few things can help an individual more than to place responsibility on him, and to let him know that you trust him.”
    – Booker T. Washington

  6. and wasn’t it you, Eryximachus, who was whining the other day about how hard it is for 20-somethings who BARELY make “six figures” and whose parents are too poor to help, to find living space?

    Shouldn’t you should be heading out to that trailer park in Podunk?

1 2 3 4 5