Apparently, working hard to set one’s family up in a nice neighborhood is unacceptable in Obama’s America. Obama’s Department of Housing and Urban Development has finalized a rule that would allow them to promote the building of subsidized low-income housing in affluent neighborhoods in order to promote a warped sense of diversity.
The crusade to fundamentally change America on every level for the worse continues ever forward…
As a child, I moved around a lot. Different schools, different neighborhoods. One thing each house had in common, though, was that it was always in a decent neighborhood. My parents made sure of that. It was supremely important to them that the neighborhoods in which my brother and I grew up were safe and relatively nice.
For many, that is the goal. However, via executive edicts, the Obama Administration will be adulterating nice neighborhoods with low-income housing. While that does not guarantee an infusion of “bad” people, it guarantees an inherently unequal set of circumstances. Many who have made a serious of poor choices in life will now be able to enjoy the benefits previously reserved for those who busted their humps to locate their families in affluent neighborhoods. Not only will taxpayers be fronting this bill, but these neighborhoods will likely see a sharp spike in the kinds of crime often associated with subsidized housing.
“HUD is working with communities across the country to fulfill the promise of equal opportunity for all,” a HUD spokeswoman said. “The proposed policy seeks to break down barriers to access to opportunity in communities supported by HUD funds.”
Of course, the HUD spokeswoman is incorrect; she promises a fulfillment of equal opportunities. However, what this plan is aimed at is the creation of equal outcomes, regardless of decisions made by a person or their education level, employment history or overall abilities.
Arizona Republican Congressman Paul Gosar blasted the absurd rule, saying that the Obama Administration “shouldn’t be holding hostage grant monies aimed at community improvement based on its unrealistic utopian ideas of what every community should resemble.”
Gosar, who is leading an effort to block the executive edict in the House, continued, “American citizens and communities should be free to choose where they would like to live and not be subject to federal neighborhood engineering at the behest of an overreaching federal government.”
“This rule is not about forcing anyone to live anywhere they don’t want to,” said Margery Turner, senior vice president at the Urban Institute, a liberal think tank. “It’s really about addressing long-standing practices that prevent people from living where they want to.”
“In our country, decades of public policies and institutional practices have built deeply segregated and unequal neighborhoods,” Turner added.
It’s undeniable that people should be able to live where they want if they can afford it. However, do people have a God-given right to reside in neighborhoods that they simply cannot afford? Liberals may object to the poor having to live in federally-funded housing in poor neighborhoods, but the central question remains: what is so unfair about that?
Likewise, I cannot afford a Ferrari. Therefore, is it unfair that only the rich are allowed to drive Ferraris? Should the government pay the bulk of a Ferrari’s price tag for me out of a warped sense of social justice? Do I have a right to drive any car I wish?
No, that would be absurd. But somehow, this administration applies this level of insane logic to housing.