Scumbag landlords - taking rent aid to the poor and not paying city taxes

[jt1]

Anyone know Richard Radner or his father. Absolute scumbags that need to be imprisoned. Hopefully karma does exist and these guys have something horrific befall them.

I'm curious, from an ethics perspective, could this attorney lose his license or be censored by the State Bar.

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20140328/METRO01/303280040/Detroit-landlords-cash-rent-aid-ignore-tax-bills

[Honky Tonk]

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...nore-tax-bills

Anyone know Richard Radner or his father. Absolute scumbags that need to be imprisoned. Hopefully karma does exist and these guys have something horrific befall them.

I'm curious, from an ethics perspective, could this attorney lose his license or be censored by the State Bar.

Ask Cushionberry.......

[jt1]

Ask Cushionberry.......

Or Monica Conyers.

[MikeyinBrooklyn]

Why is the state paying anyone's rent, let alone lots of people's rent? And yes, the landlords in question are dirtbags. People behind on taxes should be ineligible to bid at government property auctions, or to register any new property purchases. And professional license granting/renewal should be blocked until a binding repayment plan is entered into.

[EastsideAl]

Why is the state paying anyone's rent, let alone lots of people's rent?

Ummmm... oh I don't know, perhaps because there are lots of poor families in Detroit, Michigan, and the USA who cannot fully afford prevailing rents and may otherwise be left homeless?

The Housing Choice Voucher Program is actually a federal program administered by HUD, with money granted to programs established in each state. It was set up as a way to move away from public housing, Section 8 direct payments, and homeless shelters, and towards a needs- and choice-based private market approach to housing problems.

This means that prospective tenants apply for and are granted a certain voucher subsidy amount, and then must seek out and arrange their own housing from private landlords. The voucher subsidy for some percentage of the rent [[which is based on tenant income and the market-level rent) is then paid to the landlord. The idea was conceived as a market- and choice-based solution for housing similar to school choice voucher programs.

Of course, the program is supposed to be managed at the state level to prevent the kind of fraud and abuse that apparently happened here.

[Honky Tonk]

Of course, the program is supposed to be managed at the state level to prevent the kind of fraud and abuse that apparently happened here.

They explain it right there:

"No monitoring of taxes
State officials said they don’t check for tax debt because there is no federal requirement to do so."

[corktownyuppie]

Why is the state paying anyone's rent, let alone lots of people's rent? And yes, the landlords in question are dirtbags. People behind on taxes should be ineligible to bid at government property auctions, or to register any new property purchases. And professional license granting/renewal should be blocked until a binding repayment plan is entered into.

Agree with Eastside Al. It was put in to add a private-component to assisted housing. It would force landlords to compete to offer quality housing to meet the ever-changing needs of the poor in exchange for a guaranteed rent check.

The system is actually a pretty good one, save for the fact that you should be able to put a lien on those state payments so they go straight to the city until all debts are paid back.

The requirements for individuals to qualify for Section 8 aid are very strict, and when they screw up with behavior, drug abuse, etc, they're cut off instantly. And there are thousands of people who are quality tenants that are ready to take their place.

[MikeyinBrooklyn]

Except for those with severe mental or physical disabilities and the indigent eldery, all housing aid should fall into two categories: emergency shelters [[battered women, suddenly displaced families), and placement into either public housing or a subsidized private home. In the latter, there should be substantial restrictions and requirements including: all kids 5-18 must be in school until graduated, no amenities [[air conditioning, no cable or satellite TV, video game systems, drug testing for the applying individual, immediate eviction for anyone convicted of any felony going forward, and maximum 2 year stay). Humans aren't zoo animals to be kept in their safe cage. Providing anyone with everything they need takes their need to live their life away from them.

I have a serious suggestion: since real estate in Detroit is exceptionally cheap, we should buy a house for every existing family in need of housing assistance. Those currently in a city owned public housing unit should have the unit sold to them for $1, with low HOA fees to kick in a year later for maintenance. Make them a homeowner, and then end public housing, except for emergency shelters.

[DetroiterOnTheWestCoast]

I say no heat or water either!

[Richard]

“It’s like a never-ending battle,” said Hunter, who added he’s lost money on non-Section 8 rentals. “You can’t let a property sit dormant for a week. It’s not like that in Livonia.”

From The Detroit News: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...#ixzz2xIMmQrzP

So why does he not do section 8 in Livonia? I guess either you do not crap in your own back yard or he would never be allowed to operate.

See,you guys say that property is worth nothing in the city,but it is,you just need to value money over anything else and not care about the aftermath you leave for others.

The taxes are the part that gets me,his assessment was dropped to $800 non homestead which would make homestead around $600 which would be in line all things considered and should encourage growth.

I believe this auction was the first that you could not buy if you owed back taxes which would have stopped a lot of the careless speculation.

Interesting to see an investigation as to if that was followed through.

[MikeyinBrooklyn]

I say no heat or water either!

Yes, I know that some people on the left do equate things like cable TV and air conditioning with necessities, and that's where the problem starts. But it is wrong.

First, no taxpayer should have to fork over money for someone else's creature comforts. Especially when some taxpayers can't afford them! Food and shelter for those that need it? Yes, although we can debate what the best ways to achieve that are.

Second, when you make being in public accommodations very comfortable you eliminate a major incentive to improve your life.

When I lived in NYC, I worked for a number of years in West Chelsea. Among well-to-do condos and galleries, there were also housing projects. Those buildings had window AC units and DISH satellites, and many residents had pets. I lived my first 4 years in NYC without AC, and I never bought a TV. It does not inhibit your life not to have them; it makes it a little less comfortable. Buy the comforts of life with your own money!

Aside from landlord corruption and governmental incompetence highlighted in the article, we should not overlook the larger issue that occurs when a large number of people aren't even given a reason to try and provide for themselves. That is a larger problem than anything, and more for the tenants than anyone else.

[Bigb23]

I say no heat or water either!

And no emergency cellphone, candles for light for non-payment of electricity by absent landlords, or food for more than six months because of the great corporate economy fostered by the too big to fail banks.
23 Billion in bonuses in 2013, thanks, Wall Street.

[[Please correct me if wrong.)

[EastsideAl]

Except for those with severe mental or physical disabilities and the indigent eldery, all housing aid should fall into two categories: emergency shelters [[battered women, suddenly displaced families), and placement into either public housing or a subsidized private home. In the latter, there should be substantial restrictions and requirements including: all kids 5-18 must be in school until graduated, no amenities [[air conditioning, no cable or satellite TV, video game systems, drug testing for the applying individual, immediate eviction for anyone convicted of any felony going forward, and maximum 2 year stay). Humans aren't zoo animals to be kept in their safe cage. Providing anyone with everything they need takes their need to live their life away from them.

Hey, let's bring back the workhouses, and the debtor's prisons too! That'll properly punish and straighten out those uppity poor folk for their audaciousness of being in poverty. "Please sir I want some more..... WHAT! ASK FOR MORE?!?" There will sure be no extra measures of gruel given in Mikeyland, right? Lest those semi-starving bellies go soft.

You know this not about "creature comforts", right? It's about goddamn rent so children have a hopefully decent place to live. Or is that too much "creature comfort" for you too? Anyway, I thought an entitled heartless never-troubled libertarian creep like yourself, who seemingly believes that every human problem can be solved simply by applying the invisibly crushing hand of the market, would look favorably on such a market-based solution that rewards private initiative with profit.

[Hermod]

I firmly believe that the government should be the houser, feeder, and employer of last resort. No one should be without a roof over their head or sufficient food to eat. Now the "house" might not be exactly what or where the mendicant wants it and the food might be lamb stew instead of burgers and fries. The employment might not be to his liking either.

While we do need apartments or homes for families with children, the single poor and homeless can be housed more cheaply and efficiently in a dormitory type setting. There are quite a few closed military bases whose barracks would make housing for the urban single homeless.

[Richard]

It is kinda like food stamps,100 are collecting out of those 100, 25 are scamming ,the loss of the 25 is the cost of doing business to help the 75.

It is the scamming of the tax system that irks me,complain about non enforcement of property damage but yet starve the system in place to protect your investment.

[DetroiterOnTheWestCoast]

I rather house the poor than give billionaires millions upon millions of dollars to build arenas.

[Richard]

I firmly believe that the government should be the houser, feeder, and employer of last resort. No one should be without a roof over their head or sufficient food to eat. Now the "house" might not be exactly what or where the mendicant wants it and the food might be lamb stew instead of burgers and fries. The employment might not be to his liking either.

While we do need apartments or homes for families with children, the single poor and homeless can be housed more cheaply and efficiently in a dormitory type setting. There are quite a few closed military bases whose barracks would make housing for the urban single homeless.

I agree with you on that,but at the same time add some skills training to allow or at least a chance to make a better life.

St Petersburg Fl has a faith based tent city sorta thing with strict rules,the key is to have something close enough to the city for those working to be able to be mobile. They are landlocked though because of the NIMBY thing.

[EastsideAl]

I rather house the poor than give billionaires millions upon millions of dollars to build arenas.

Yeah, and there's that too. But you must know that poor people receiving government help = scammers, while rich people receiving government help = forward thinking entrepreneurs.

So those most favored by our economic and political system, and by life in general, get rewarded with free money, seemingly endless tax breaks, and paeans to their moneyed greatness. While those who have been deeply disadvantaged, damaged, and had their opportunities severely restricted by our magic disappearing economy get excoriated for their "dependency" for simply trying to have a decent place for themselves and their children to live, and told they should be subjected to all kinds of punitive measures for their unseemly poverty. Sackcloth and ashes indeed. What a sick, mean bunch of bastards we've become.

[Johnnny5]

How about we get back to discussing these scumbag landlords conning the system and leave the argument for/against publicly funded housing for another thread?

[MikeyinBrooklyn]

Hey, let's bring back the workhouses, and the debtor's prisons too! That'll properly punish and straighten out those uppity poor folk for their audaciousness of being in poverty. "Please sir I want some more..... WHAT! ASK FOR MORE?!?" There will sure be no extra measures of gruel given in Mikeyland, right? Lest those semi-starving bellies go soft.

You know this not about "creature comforts", right? It's about goddamn rent so children have a hopefully decent place to live. Or is that too much "creature comfort" for you too? Anyway, I thought an entitled heartless never-troubled libertarian creep like yourself, who seemingly believes that every human problem can be solved simply by applying the invisibly crushing hand of the market, would look favorably on such a market-based solution that rewards private initiative with profit.

Eastside, do you really think limiting entertainment options and not allowing AC is the equivalent of a forced labor situation or debtors prison?

As for creature comforts, I am merely saying that someone living on the public dime should not be allowed to live in unnecessary comfort. And I did post real ideas for helping people: have temporary emergency shelters [[also coupled with aggressive social services), and outright give those in public housing their units, rendering them homeowners. I also said that there should be significant restrictions and responsibilities on people who live in public housing. Having read the Dickens canon, I can't quite see cruelty in those proposals. But that begs the question: is asking for someone to agree to responsible behavior to live at taxpayer expense in and of itself cruel?

[MikeyinBrooklyn]

Here's a question for those on the left here, and I am being entirely serious: What is your plan to get people out of poverty? We have seen it more than adequately demonstrated that the welfare-industrial complex can sustain poverty, but how does it end it? I would argue that when you perpetually provide for someone's needs [[plus some of their non-necessitites, too) without providing a requirement for them to actively work for their own betterment, you have in fact trapped more people in poverty than a Dickens villain ever did. Hating Mike Ilitch, Rick Snyder, the Koch Brothers and Fox News notwithstanding, how would you get people out of poverty?

[softailrider]

Anyone know Richard Radner or his father. Absolute scumbags that need to be imprisoned. Hopefully karma does exist and these guys have something horrific befall them.

I'm curious, from an ethics perspective, could this attorney lose his license or be censored by the State Bar.

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20140328/METRO01/303280040/Detroit-landlords-cash-rent-aid-ignore-tax-bills

The late Gilda Radnor's brother.

[GUSHI]

Wow some people know how to work they system.

[Bham1982]

In Detroit, Sec. 8 is a scam. Market rates are already among the lowest in the country, so it's just a subsidy to landlords. If you can't afford a measly $200 a month market rents then there's no point in the govt. paying some rich dude in West Bloomfeld $1200 rent for a house used by the broke-ass tenant.

[Bham1982]

banks.
23 Billion in bonuses in 2013, thanks, Wall Street.

[[Please correct me if wrong.)

And this has to be the biggest logical reasoning fail. A U.S. industry produces big salaries [[and big tax receipts to Uncle Sam) therefore a corrupt program benefitting rich landlords and exploiting the poor should be allowed to continue. Huh?