Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The PP is incorrect. People are allowed to self certify in DC without ID.

Upper NW has an area in which vouchers are funded at 187% of HUD market rate, highest in the nation.

You are confusing the DC Housing Authority with homelessness services. They are completely separate programs.

I'm not confusing anything. It is an overlapping population.

https://dhs.dc.gov/page/services-individuals-experiencing-homelessness

https://www.foresthillsconnection.com/home-front/opinion-the-dc-housing-vouchers-system-is-broken-its-on-the-mayor-to-fix-it/

https://thedcline.org/2022/07/22/why-has-dc-used-only-one-fifth-of-this-years-new-housing-vouchers-so-far/ - This guy who came to DC for job that did not pan out - why not go back where there was a lower cost of living or where he had a support network?

First, how do you know he came from a lower COL area? Second, it costs money to travel. Either you have to have a car and money for gas, or money for a train or bus or plane ticket. Not everyone has that. Then you are assuming that he has a support network wherever he came from that could help him. Not everyone has that.

NP and I am worried this will sound snarky but I mean it seriously- why don’t we offer free travel for those who want to move or could have better opportunities in a lower COL area? We give people crossing the border illegally free travel around the country. Why not our citizens who are in housed and can afford a better quality of life elsewhere.

Anonymous wrote:It also amazes me that in DC, landlords will sooner let an apartment or storefront go unoccupied for an entire year than god forbid lower the rent by 10% or something. Everything's gotta be "luxury" and "top dollar" which adds so much fat that they can afford to sit on empty unrented spaces. That's just wrong.

I live in Arlington along Columbia Pike and there are storefronts that have been empty for years as developers built new mixed residential buildings. Like PP said, they would rather it sit empty than rent it for a little less. As a result, we ended up losing a lot of business that has only come back in the last few years. And retail spots in the older buildings always have a high fill rate while the new buildings sit empty.

It also amazes me that in DC, landlords will sooner let an apartment or storefront go unoccupied for an entire year than god forbid lower the rent by 10% or something. Everything's gotta be "luxury" and "top dollar" which adds so much fat that they can afford to sit on empty unrented spaces. That's just wrong.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The PP is incorrect. People are allowed to self certify in DC without ID.

Upper NW has an area in which vouchers are funded at 187% of HUD market rate, highest in the nation.

You are confusing the DC Housing Authority with homelessness services. They are completely separate programs.

I'm not confusing anything. It is an overlapping population.

https://dhs.dc.gov/page/services-individuals-experiencing-homelessness

https://www.foresthillsconnection.com/home-front/opinion-the-dc-housing-vouchers-system-is-broken-its-on-the-mayor-to-fix-it/

https://thedcline.org/2022/07/22/why-has-dc-used-only-one-fifth-of-this-years-new-housing-vouchers-so-far/ - This guy who came to DC for job that did not pan out - why not go back where there was a lower cost of living or where he had a support network?

First, how do you know he came from a lower COL area? Second, it costs money to travel. Either you have to have a car and money for gas, or money for a train or bus or plane ticket. Not everyone has that. Then you are assuming that he has a support network wherever he came from that could help him. Not everyone has that.

There are a lot of a-hole cops, mayors and sheriffs who pull Greg Abbott stunts like rounding up their homeless in their own town and putting them on a bus with a one-way bus ticket to DC.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't it crazy to accommodate so many in DC, why can't federal government give them incentives to go to areas where cost of living is low and entry level jobs in abundance?

They definitely do this but many people understandably don’t want to move away from family/friends, especially to more rural places that have far fewer available resources like child care, mental health care, etc.

The demographics of my hometown in Western Pennsylvania changed a great deal due to the importation of Section 8 families from DC, Philly, and other cities. It’s big time Trump country though and I sure wouldn’t want to live there as a minority, poor or not.

So they want to stick around DC for "friends and family" yet those friends and family obviously haven't done a damn thing for them and aren't helping, given they're homeless.
Doesn't really sound like a viable reason. Meanwhile there are a lot of homeless in DC who aren't from DC for whom that reasoning doesn't apply. By "friends and family" they probably mean the people they get their drugs from.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The PP is incorrect. People are allowed to self certify in DC without ID.

Upper NW has an area in which vouchers are funded at 187% of HUD market rate, highest in the nation.

You are confusing the DC Housing Authority with homelessness services. They are completely separate programs.

I'm not confusing anything. It is an overlapping population.

https://dhs.dc.gov/page/services-individuals-experiencing-homelessness

https://www.foresthillsconnection.com/home-front/opinion-the-dc-housing-vouchers-system-is-broken-its-on-the-mayor-to-fix-it/

https://thedcline.org/2022/07/22/why-has-dc-used-only-one-fifth-of-this-years-new-housing-vouchers-so-far/ - This guy who came to DC for job that did not pan out - why not go back where there was a lower cost of living or where he had a support network?

First, how do you know he came from a lower COL area? Second, it costs money to travel. Either you have to have a car and money for gas, or money for a train or bus or plane ticket. Not everyone has that. Then you are assuming that he has a support network wherever he came from that could help him. Not everyone has that.

That seems like a safe assumption. There aren't many higher COL areas. New York, Honolulu, and San Francisco. That's about it.

Exactly. Maybe Los Angeles too.

It's even safer to assume that Doug and his ilk didn't come to DC from Honolulu, for geographic logistical reasons that should be obvious.

Doug came from a cheaper place -- implied, with fewer jobs -- and Doug should go back to where he came from and take advantage of any services there. Maybe he would not "need" to live in a tent, there, because there is more occupancy

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The PP is incorrect. People are allowed to self certify in DC without ID.

Upper NW has an area in which vouchers are funded at 187% of HUD market rate, highest in the nation.

You are confusing the DC Housing Authority with homelessness services. They are completely separate programs.

I'm not confusing anything. It is an overlapping population.

https://dhs.dc.gov/page/services-individuals-experiencing-homelessness

https://www.foresthillsconnection.com/home-front/opinion-the-dc-housing-vouchers-system-is-broken-its-on-the-mayor-to-fix-it/

https://thedcline.org/2022/07/22/why-has-dc-used-only-one-fifth-of-this-years-new-housing-vouchers-so-far/ - This guy who came to DC for job that did not pan out - why not go back where there was a lower cost of living or where he had a support network?

First, how do you know he came from a lower COL area? Second, it costs money to travel. Either you have to have a car and money for gas, or money for a train or bus or plane ticket. Not everyone has that. Then you are assuming that he has a support network wherever he came from that could help him. Not everyone has that.

That seems like a safe assumption. There aren't many higher COL areas. New York, Honolulu, and San Francisco. That's about it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The PP is incorrect. People are allowed to self certify in DC without ID.

Upper NW has an area in which vouchers are funded at 187% of HUD market rate, highest in the nation.

You are confusing the DC Housing Authority with homelessness services. They are completely separate programs.

I'm not confusing anything. It is an overlapping population.

https://dhs.dc.gov/page/services-individuals-experiencing-homelessness

https://www.foresthillsconnection.com/home-front/opinion-the-dc-housing-vouchers-system-is-broken-its-on-the-mayor-to-fix-it/

https://thedcline.org/2022/07/22/why-has-dc-used-only-one-fifth-of-this-years-new-housing-vouchers-so-far/ - This guy who came to DC for job that did not pan out - why not go back where there was a lower cost of living or where he had a support network?

First, how do you know he came from a lower COL area? Second, it costs money to travel. Either you have to have a car and money for gas, or money for a train or bus or plane ticket. Not everyone has that. Then you are assuming that he has a support network wherever he came from that could help him. Not everyone has that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't it crazy to accommodate so many in DC, why can't federal government give them incentives to go to areas where cost of living is low and entry level jobs in abundance?

Or repopulate dying towns.

It's way too complex and nuanced a subject for DCUM but the lack of population mobility - for which there are sometimes good reasons - is one of the problems we face as a country.

We should also build low income housing directly instead of using section 8. Section 8 just ends up increasing rents. Can't we take what we've learned from the problems with "projects" and section 8 and try something new. Some sort of middle ground where we build it but create a process to transfer ownership to the tenants over time.

Yes dust off the failed 1960’s policies.

Should we continue with the failed 1980's policies? Or go back to failed 1930's policies?

They've all failed. We need to take the parts of each policy that worked and remix them into something new.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't it crazy to accommodate so many in DC, why can't federal government give them incentives to go to areas where cost of living is low and entry level jobs in abundance?

Or repopulate dying towns.

It's way too complex and nuanced a subject for DCUM but the lack of population mobility - for which there are sometimes good reasons - is one of the problems we face as a country.

We should also build low income housing directly instead of using section 8. Section 8 just ends up increasing rents. Can't we take what we've learned from the problems with "projects" and section 8 and try something new. Some sort of middle ground where we build it but create a process to transfer ownership to the tenants over time.

Yes dust off the failed 1960’s policies.

Anonymous wrote:Isn't it crazy to accommodate so many in DC, why can't federal government give them incentives to go to areas where cost of living is low and entry level jobs in abundance?

They definitely do this but many people understandably don’t want to move away from family/friends, especially to more rural places that have far fewer available resources like child care, mental health care, etc.

The demographics of my hometown in Western Pennsylvania changed a great deal due to the importation of Section 8 families from DC, Philly, and other cities. It’s big time Trump country though and I sure wouldn’t want to live there as a minority, poor or not.

Anonymous wrote:There have been times when I lived out of my car for a few months, there have been times when I had to move somewhere else because it was too expensive. I don't get why there is some kind of expectation that the jobless and homeless somehow need to be subsidized to live in the most expensive parts of the country.

Particularly as many who bust their asses and work in the area have a hard time being able to afford to live here.

It sure decrease availability and increase cost of renting/owning properties for middle class busting their backs to afford housing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't it crazy to accommodate so many in DC, why can't federal government give them incentives to go to areas where cost of living is low and entry level jobs in abundance?

Or repopulate dying towns.

It's way too complex and nuanced a subject for DCUM but the lack of population mobility - for which there are sometimes good reasons - is one of the problems we face as a country.

We should also build low income housing directly instead of using section 8. Section 8 just ends up increasing rents. Can't we take what we've learned from the problems with "projects" and section 8 and try something new. Some sort of middle ground where we build it but create a process to transfer ownership to the tenants over time.

NYC tried exactly that about 40 years ago. Guess what's happening now with those properties?

Those that are located in neighborhoods that have significantly gentrified are now available only to rich retirees and trustfunders because those are cash only deals; no bank will give a mortgage for something that has income based sales restrictions. The rest are in dire straits because the maintenance and upkeep cost money and the tenants do not have enough money to keep their buildings in good shape.

There has to be a way to learn from what when wrong and try again because the current system isn't very good and has lots of externalities. That system isn't perfect but it's simple. As long as new units get built to replace those that graduate it would solve a lot of problems.

Section 8 drives up rents because it sets baseline level but is calculated by using an average. Therefore it's constantly increasing. Each time it increases all the other levels adjust accordingly to maintain relative value. It's a systemic error.

Rent Control meanwhile disincentives construction, upkeep, and property sales especially considering the section 8 induced price spiral happening in the rest of the market.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't it crazy to accommodate so many in DC, why can't federal government give them incentives to go to areas where cost of living is low and entry level jobs in abundance?

That's exactly what they should be doing.

Sounds like homesteading out west. But we'd have to collectively see the poor as people that we care about.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't it crazy to accommodate so many in DC, why can't federal government give them incentives to go to areas where cost of living is low and entry level jobs in abundance?

That's exactly what they should be doing.

You broke it, you bought it.