Watch Out Suburbs! “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Rule,” (AFFH) is Coming! | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 44861234 United States 07/30/2015 08:49 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
PlasticDuck User ID: 62641900 United States 07/30/2015 09:42 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
ar-15 nut User ID: 44044090 United States 07/30/2015 09:49 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 25334351 United States 07/30/2015 10:32 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
eatinmraw User ID: 61351661 United States 07/30/2015 10:49 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | shit...this had been goin on south of Seattle for decades. go ahead and stomp...cry and post your displeasure...but you're all a little late for whining now. you know you're not doin anything about it nor can you. just lube up good...bend over and get it over with. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 69713816 United States 07/30/2015 11:57 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
goldielucks User ID: 67448521 United States 07/30/2015 01:01 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 59601688 United States 07/30/2015 01:09 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 35780720 United States 07/30/2015 01:16 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | however...this is what happens when affirmative action based "academia" corrupts all reason, even though said reason was paid for with the blood and pain of multiple generations.... Read the words of Adams, Jefferson for reference... PS..this s something the Heir Fraud has never done...no doubt |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 68953763 United States 07/30/2015 01:18 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Chrit User ID: 30412676 United States 07/30/2015 02:13 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Extensive studies have been done. People want to live with people in their own income bracket. Someone with a 1982 rusty Honda does not want to watch their neighbor drive the corvette to work every day. People also tend to want to live with people they feel comfortable with. If you are a single mother on food stamps with no job and three kids you do not want to live next to a married couple with 6 kids in private school who earned full scholarships. There is no common ground where you would feel included in the neighborhood. If anything the single mother would feel bad she can not provide the same lifestyle the neighbors kids get. It would make things seem that much worse for the single mother. The grass is always greener on the other side, especially when your neighbor brings home $100k more then you a year, now you just get it rubbed in your face on a daily basis. The government wants to say that "where people live" is the tangible difference that creates disparages in life styles of equal income families. But it is not, trailer park trash is going to be what it is no matter where you put it. The trailer park person wants to live in the trailer park next to the person they relate to. You can take the kid out of the city but you can't take the city out of the kid is another way of putting it. So example; Say I grow up in a poor suburb, I'm not going to move to a poor inner-city suburb when I hit 25 and am making money. On the same note the inner-city kid does not want my suburban life, they don't want to walk 3 miles to the store, the idea is foreign to them. So when we grow up we will stay where we are comfortable. I'm only human, it's my biggest flaw. We must all realize a sink a chair and a pillow are all luxuries of home and a soldiers helmet takes the place of all three. |
ac User ID: 69690359 United States 07/30/2015 03:40 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Whiskey*Tango User ID: 69905168 United States 07/30/2015 04:41 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 49509890 United States 07/30/2015 05:11 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 69090847 United States 07/30/2015 05:43 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | President Obama and a famous Castro brother are uniting to subjugate American suburbs with the unlawful “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Rule,” (AFFH) and no one in the mainstream media seems to care. Quoting: prisonerno6 “In significant measure, the rule amounts to a de facto regional annexation of America’s suburbs,” National Review’s Kurtz writes. Here’s how, he says: AFFH obligates any local jurisdiction that receives HUD funding to conduct a detailed analysis of its housing occupancy by race, ethnicity, national origin, English proficiency, and class (among other categories). Grantees must identify factors (such as zoning laws, public-housing admissions criteria, and “lack of regional collaboration”) that account for any imbalance in living patterns. Localities must also list “community assets” (such as quality schools, transportation hubs, parks, and jobs) and explain any disparities in access to such assets by race, ethnicity, national origin, English proficiency, class, and more. Localities must then develop a plan to remedy these imbalances, subject to approval by HUD. Through the AFFH rule, HUD will use the power of the purse like a sledge hammer to bludgeon suburbs into submission. As Kurtz explains: By obligating all localities receiving HUD funding to compare their demographics to the region as a whole, AFFH effectively nullifies municipal boundaries. Even with no allegation or evidence of intentional discrimination, the mere existence of a demographic imbalance in the region as a whole must be remedied by a given suburb. Suburbs will literally be forced to import population from elsewhere, at their own expense and in violation of their own laws. In effect, suburbs will have been annexed by a city-dominated region, their laws suspended and their tax money transferred to erstwhile non-residents. And to make sure the new high-density housing developments are close to “community assets” such as schools, transportation, parks, and jobs, bedroom suburbs will be forced to develop mini-downtowns. In effect, they will become more like the cities their residents chose to leave in the first place. The most compelling criticism of the proposed rule came in a a letter dated September 17, 2013 and signed by three members of the U.S Commission on Civil Rights, Abigail Thernstrom, Vice Chair, Peter Kirsanow, Commissioner, and Todd Gaziano, Commissioner, who destroyed the disparate impact theory when they wrote: The underlying flaw in this proposed rule lies in its repeated use of the term “segregation” to describe housing patterns in which members of racial or ethnic groups are concentrated in particular areas. Legal segregation has been dead for over forty years. Geographic clustering of racial and ethnic groups is not in and of itself an invidious phenomenon. Referring to contemporary housing patterns as “segregation” trivializes the horror of legal segregation that existed in the United States for over half a century. . . The Fair Housing Act Does Not Authorize the Use of Disparate Impact Theory We realize that HUD recently promulgated a rule enshrining disparate impact theory in its regulations. Nevertheless, we must reiterate here what we have previously stated elsewhere: disparate impact claims are not cognizable under the Fair Housing Act. As a result of this regrettable arrogation of power, the entire proposed rule is built upon sand. Rather than focusing on incidents of disparate treatment against members of protected classes, the proposed rule transforms people with middle-income levels or below into a protected class based simply on disparate impact. We certainly oppose disparate treatment in housing because of membership in a protected class. However, the proposed rule’s focus on disparate impact and the almost complete absence of a discussion of disparate treatment suggests that people are being discriminated against on the basis of their pocketbooks. Or, as we used to call it, “living within your means.” To argue that housing discrimination is pervasive because members of a protected class are less likely to be able to afford housing that is the size they want or in a more genteel area is bizarre. The new AFFH rule is an unlawful regulation because, as Thernstrom, Gaziano, and Kirsanow confirm, “The Fair Housing Act does not authorize the use of disparate impact theory.” That five members of the Supreme Court decided to import the disparate impact theory into the Fair Housing Act in Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project, Inc., as Justice Thomas noted in his dissent, does not make it any less so. As a consequence, elected state and local leaders are well within their rights to tell the Department of Housing and Urban Development to “take this regulation and shove it.” [link to www.breitbart.com] let the one passing this start with their neighborhoods FIRST! |