Affordable Housing in New Jersey: More of our taxes wasted...

Seriously, dude, please stop (4.00 / 5)

You are polite, you are putting your thoughts out there, and you appear rational.

But this is not a site geared towards all political views like PolitickerNJ or the NJ.com Forums.  It's for discussion of progressive issues, programs and values.

Your posting here pushes other diaries off the list, are not going to convince anyone here, and are just copy and pastes from other sites.

I'm not trying to be a jackass, but to explain why you are wasting your time and going against the intent of this blog.

If you want to hang and do comments, that's great.  We have some more conservative commenters.  But the diaries are gratuitous.

---

by: huntsu @ Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 01:20:36 AM UTC

Do your homework (4.00 / 3)

You know, when I first started responding to this, I was going to do so on the merits. Your complaint about the unfairness of these towns getting $45,000 each to plan for new affordable housing mandates was just weak. That works out to be just over 1 cent per taxpayer -- hardly the worst thing Jerseyans have faced over the last few years.

But then looking at one of your other sites, it struck me that you don't even get what this is all about. The title of your buddy Ed's post is a laugh riot. "Why does the NJ Sports Authority get special treatment by COAH?"

Uh, guys... this has nothing to do with the sports complex known as the Meadowlands. It has to do with the environmentally sensitive wetlands region that the sports complex was named after. And the reason the towns in the region need more money for planning than most is that they have to deal with more strict environmental restrictions than most municipalities.

But why let the facts get in the way of a conservative rant, right?

---

by: Scott Shields @ Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 02:11:32 AM UTC

RE: Seriously, dude, please stop (0.00 / 1)

First thank you for the compliments.  As for my post's being a copy and paste, I only paste in quotes as per the rules of the site and then add my comentary.  As for this site not being geared towards political views, well I have to ask you to look at the other diary postings.  I see more liberal postings which are political.  Are they wrong?  Are they not geared towards the site?  Overall I like the site and hope to keep posting my views and hopefully give another point of view here.  

Thank You

---

by: Cranbury Conservative @ Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 02:27:49 AM UTC

C'MON, FOLKS ... (4.00 / 1)

Pull the plug already on the troll. This guy is playing us for fools, which is glaringly obvious based on this reply. "Why, isn't this site geared to politics? Well, isn't my post political?" Enough already.

---

by: denniscmcgrath @ Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 15:47:09 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

You missed the point (0.00 / 0)

This is not a general politics site, but a progressive politics site.

There are sites out there for general discussion, where the diarists are of all political stripes.

But this is not one of them.  Neither is Red Jersey.  Nor are other sites you post on.  

My advice is, if you want to post here, do it as a commenter.  Doing it as a diarist is just inappropriate and goes against the purpose and the intent of the site.

huntsu would not be a welcome diarist on Red Jersey, and huntsu should NOT be a diarist on Red Jersey.  I have gone there and commented, but I do not write diaries because it goes against what the founders and community want.

We have been respectful with you.  Please be respectful to the purpose of the site.

---

by: huntsu @ Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 11:33:37 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

RE:Do your homework (0.00 / 0)

Your first comment...

That works out to be just over 1 cent per taxpayer -- hardly the worst thing Jerseyans have faced over the last few years.

So you don't mind paying more and more in taxes?  Come on give me a break.  A penny here a penny there, it all adds up.  Do you not realize the Democratic party that runs this State has a spending problem?  

As for your second comment...

But then looking at one of your other sites, it struck me that you don't even get what this is all about. The title of your buddy Ed's post is a laugh riot. "Why does the NJ Sports Authority get special treatment by COAH?"

Actually you don't get it.  Don't you think it is only fair that the Meadowlands which you say is "environmentally sensitive wetlands region" should have the same affordable housing obligations that many other small suburban towns that have environmentally sensitive areas have as well?  However the suburban towns typically have a Republican voting base.  As a result they will not be protected.  The Meadowlands being exempt from their affordable housing obligation is just another example of the political corruption in the New Jersey Democratic Party which runs this state.

So in my opinion my facts are correct and I feel your blinded by liberal bias.

Thank You for your comments.

---

by: Cranbury Conservative @ Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 02:45:41 AM UTC

"in my opinion my facts are correct" (4.00 / 4)

LOFNL!

You're awesome, man! Sorry I didn't get the joke before. I see what you're trying to do now -- make the people who would actually think the type of silliness you're writing look like complete fools. Good work.

That part where you tried to lecture me about "suburban towns" as if I've never been to the state I live in was really funny. So was glossing over the fact that the Meadowlands is one of the most fragile ecosystems in the state. But of course, the funniest part was where you blame the problems of the state on one political party and then sign your posts "open minded and equal." Too much.

Keep on mocking those dittoheads, Cranbury. Funny stuff.

---

by: Scott Shields @ Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:50:05 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Affordable Housing is a Human Right.... (4.00 / 3)

.......we already have  the government spending hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer monies on real estate; it's called the bail outs of Bear Sterns and Fannie May and Freddie Mac and whatever other commercial private entities may soon be deemed "too large to fail".

The standard phrase is, "privatizing profits while socializing losses" in other words, corporate welfare.

As far as I'm concerned, using taxpayer funding to construct millions of new units of quality affordable housing at cost (i.e. no one profits) and then selling/renting them out at cost (or less for the poor/indigent) would be a great thing!

Then again, I believe in 100% universal single payer health care (that means the insurance industry, as it is, is made obsolete.  And I also believe that higher education should be "free" for all who can qualify for admittance to a given school!

Imagine an American where the gap between the top 1% and the bottom 1% wasn't so extreme?

Imagine an America where money, and the aquisition of "more" at any cost,  wasn't God.

You call yourself a "conservative"; I say you've got it backwards....I'm the one trying to conserve human rights, humane values and the biosphere we all must live within.

It's you Rush Limbaugh/George Bush types that have been been giving away the store to the most greedy and ruthless amongst us.

The whole of your allegedly "conservative" agenda is all about the most base greedy selfish materialism masquerading as "free enterprise" and "patriotism" and "traditional values".     It's all a sham.    Look at the hell your Bush and Company have "led" us into.

Yes, the oil companies love Bush, as do the polluters and the banks and the insurance Companies and the military industrial complex and the mortgage brokers etc etc etc.......but the average working class American is getting the shaft in a thousand different ways to pay for the uber "prosperity" of a tiny minority of the most ruthless and greedy.    Nothing good is being "conserved" there.

I would pay a hundred bucks to see and hear George Bush have a series of, say, three 90 minute debates with Ralph Nader......and if Bush was too brain addled to handle it, how about your hero, Rush Limbaugh?

Hey, maybe we can get these guys together and do a PPV program with all profits donated to Habitat for Humanity (a private sector housing provider that isn't funded by taxes ;-)

As for NJ's affordable housing initiatives, they are too little and too late....but better than nothing.

---

by: Nick Lento @ Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 05:18:43 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I gotta give you credit, Nick. (4.00 / 1)

You're one of the few people around that actually could make me want to defend the diarist.

---

by: dennisl @ Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 15:33:09 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Theres no excuse for Usury (0.00 / 0)

I'll give Nick credit on this one, credit for a slam dunk.

Check out my 3 paragraph primer on Polywell Fusion.

---

by: FogerRox @ Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 15:45:37 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

interesting perspective! n/t (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Creed Pogue @ Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 16:01:13 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

To get a better state and country? (0.00 / 0)

No, I do not mind paying more in taxes to get a better state and country.

I also don't mind paying more for a better house and yard.

I also don't mind paying more for a better car.

Taxes are what we pay for the country we have.  For $20,000 out of a $100,000 annual net pay you get an awful lot of services, including safe banking, roads, cops, schools, military, food that won't make you sick, beaches, parks, snow plowing, courts, jails, etc., etc., etc.

Do I want to pay more for less?  No.  But if it takes more to get more, then I will pay it.

---

by: huntsu @ Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 11:36:27 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Affordable Housing (0.00 / 0)

has been a political football for a long time.  Our Mayor thinks affordable housing is for OTHER towns.  He sent a letter to COAH without running it by the Council that says that we are all built out already - after running for re-election by saying that he wanted to "eliminate two family homes" from the town.
Some of the suburban towns you mention have no idea what affordable housing is let alone why we need it.  They need help and guidance in drafting up plans. What is wrong with helping them do that?  It will SAVE $$$ in the long run.

Builders sued towns to get their oversized plans built only to have poorer cities where there were no jobs take the affordable units. We are now finding that connected politicians profited from their associations with "Housing Authorities".  The plots on "The Sopranos" weren't far off the mark.  Dennis Oury himself made a half million off Tenafly by being "assigned" to Tenafly on affordable housing issues.  Just because COAH hasn't aways gotten it right does not mean we cannot try.  

Affordable housing WILL lift the economy.  How can we keep the economy going if we can't even afford rent?

Helping towns CREATE their own COAH plans will help them avoid the costly battles with developers and their Builder's Remedy lawsuits, which - trust me - only benefit the private developers.  The goal here is proper planning, which is necessary to avoid costly developer lawsuits and bad environmental consequences - like we have seen here in Tenafly - where forests have been clear cut because a developer won a lawsuit because Tenafly did NOT have an affordable housing plan ready.  

The Meadowlands Commission is thinking ahead on this one.  You are simply having a knee-jerk reaction.  

One Vote.  Yours.  It really does matter.

---

by: carolh @ Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 13:05:47 PM UTC