HUD Smoke-Free Proposal - Vanishing Liberty for Low-Income Americans

Started by Solomon Zorn, November 25, 2015, 09:07:21 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Baruch

Unfortunately tobacco users ... aren't too considerate.  But then non-smokers aren't either, they just find other ways to be obnoxious.

Remember, real totalitarianism is very simple ... "everything is forbidden, except for what is mandatory".  The NWO moves swiftly to its final reductio ad absurdum ... mutually assured destruction ... brought about by ... my dictator is better than your dictator.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Solomon Zorn

Quote from: AllPurposeAtheist on November 26, 2015, 02:29:26 PM
Yet another restriction on poverty. Here's the rub. You can live in such a place and refuse to bathe to the point that you can stink out all of your neighbors and there's nothing illegal about it. You can run around all day spraying room 'fresheners' that I find personally offensive and they make it difficult for me to breath with it in the air.  You can have a barbecue daily if you like and burn what is kerosene and have high carbon pollutants permeating the neighborhood with little to no restrictions, but a cigarette?  OH MY GOD WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE!
Hey, want the restrictions? Fine, forfeit the deposit. It's not rocket science, but evicting people who smoke is creating a whole new class of homeless people.  Unless cigarettes are outlawed I think that trying to micro manage people's lives smacks of 'class warfare'.
You hit the nail on the head, APA. And that point about stinky people being worse than tobacco is so true. I had a next-door-neighbor in a building I used to live in...

Quote from: Jason_Harvestdancer on November 26, 2015, 04:49:50 PM
But we're not talking about their homes.  We're talking about how they live in someone else's property.  You can't have liberty without property rights, and they don't have property rights where they live.

He who pays the piper calls the tune.
Your argument only defends the governments authority to limit our liberties, it doesn't address the government's choice to do so.

I've lived here for nine years, and never had a complaint about smoking. So how am I a nuisance? I live alone, so there is no consideration of second-hand smoke danger. In 28 years of smoking in my own apartments, I have never started a fire. So how am I a risk?

It's the health-nazis new way of controlling whom they can (the poor). These fuckers can be as self righteous on the left, as the theocrats are on the right.

Reading it over though, I may have found some hope:
QuoteSubpart G Smoke Free Public Housing
§ 965.651
Applicability.
This subpart applies to public housing units, except for dwelling units in a mixed-finance project. Public housing is defined as low-income housing, and all necessary appurtenances (e.g., community facilities, public housing offices, day care centers, and laundry rooms) thereto, assisted under the U.S. Housing Act of 1937 (the 1937 Act), other than assistance under section 8 of the 1937 Act.
I live in Section 8 housing.
If God Exists, Why Does He Pretend Not to Exist?
Poetry and Proverbs of the Uneducated Hick

http://www.solomonzorn.com

Baruch

This.
"it doesn't address the government's choice to do so" .... the government or a landlord can be lenient or hard ass.  Being a hard ass isn't a right, it is a personality defect.

And Section 8 or not ... real public housing is mostly passe .... it is mostly done thru Section8 for the last 30 years.  Camel nose under the tent in any case ... some legal quack will find a way to extend from X housing to Y housing in a most rational way ;-(  After all, our legal quacks decided that corporations are people.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

doorknob

poor people don't have freedom. they never have and probably never will.

I live in section 8 and I happen to live in a brand spanking new building just built 2 years ago. I'm the first one to live in my apartment. It has always been smoke free since I moved in. I understand that this is how we control poor people but this is nothing new.

I'm more worried that section 8 will be shut down by the government. Our Governor said he was going to eliminate welfare and he practically has. I can barely feed my family by the end of the month and I'm now 3 months behind in electric bills. My situation isn't improving at all any time soon.

This is just one more fuck you to poor people.

Dreamer

#firstworldproblems #CalltheWaambulance

It's a fair rule, and, frankly, I'm surprised it's not been on the books long ago.  Subsidized housing is homes that the government is footing the bill for.  Why should they have to pay so much more to take care of the burns in the carpet and the odors clinging to the walls?  Further, I mean, c'mon...  If you're in subsidized housing, do you *really* have money to burn?

It's laughable to consider this a punishment to the poor.  Smoking isn't good for anyone--and generally, poor people already have poor health (lack of healthcare access, food, etc.)
<br /><br />Individually, we are one drop.  Together, we are an ocean.<br /><br />

Baruch

Quote from: doorknob on November 30, 2015, 07:31:53 PM
poor people don't have freedom. they never have and probably never will.

I live in section 8 and I happen to live in a brand spanking new building just built 2 years ago. I'm the first one to live in my apartment. It has always been smoke free since I moved in. I understand that this is how we control poor people but this is nothing new.

I'm more worried that section 8 will be shut down by the government. Our Governor said he was going to eliminate welfare and he practically has. I can barely feed my family by the end of the month and I'm now 3 months behind in electric bills. My situation isn't improving at all any time soon.

This is just one more fuck you to poor people.

The purpose for eliminating the Middle Class ... is to make more poor people.  So control of poor people is the leading edge of controlling everyone.  And the reason for the control isn't because of concern for the general welfare ... the plutos don't believe in welfare!  It is because sado-masochism is the lowest common denominator of human civilization.  The plutos get to play the sadists.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Solomon Zorn

Quote from: doorknob on November 30, 2015, 07:31:53 PMI'm more worried that section 8 will be shut down by the government.
And yet some of my elderly Christian neighbors are Republicans! Are they so stupid, that they will bring about the demise of the very thing that makes it possible for them to live, in such a well-cared-for property, for such a low price?  :41:
If God Exists, Why Does He Pretend Not to Exist?
Poetry and Proverbs of the Uneducated Hick

http://www.solomonzorn.com

Solomon Zorn

Quote from: Dreamer on December 01, 2015, 01:52:34 AMWhy should they have to pay so much more to take care of the burns in the carpet and the odors clinging to the walls?
They replace the carpet, and paint the walls, every time somebody moves out. Regardless of whether they were smokers or not. You may be overestimating the turnover rate (these buildings are hard to get into, and people don't leave them frequently).

Besides, as APA pointed out, there is a security deposit intended to cover any damages. Let a smoker pay a higher security deposit. Problem solved.

Quote from: Dreamer on December 01, 2015, 01:52:34 AMIt's laughable to consider this a punishment to the poor.
It's laughable to someone not living under their rules.

Quote from: Dreamer on December 01, 2015, 01:52:34 AMSmoking isn't good for anyone--and generally, poor people already have poor health (lack of healthcare access, food, etc.)
Yeah, those dirty unhealthy poor people shouldn't be allowed to indulge in their filthy unhealthy habits. Why should they have the same rights as the rest of us? They're just second-class citizens, on the government titty, so let's treat them like children.
If God Exists, Why Does He Pretend Not to Exist?
Poetry and Proverbs of the Uneducated Hick

http://www.solomonzorn.com

Solomon Zorn

Another thought occurs to me: how much of the savings predicted will be offset by the costs of evicting people, who quit, then backslide and smoke in secret, till their righteous neighbors rat them out? Isn't it a pretty picture? Yet, it's not beyond the possible futures for me, and many other lifelong tobacco users.
If God Exists, Why Does He Pretend Not to Exist?
Poetry and Proverbs of the Uneducated Hick

http://www.solomonzorn.com

Solomon Zorn

One more thing: no smoking within 25 feet of the structure, is patently absurd. Even if I were to concede the sanctity of my living-room, I won't concede my balcony. The outdoors is the outdoors. Whereas 8 or 10 feet from a public entrance is reasonable, restricting my balcony is not.
If God Exists, Why Does He Pretend Not to Exist?
Poetry and Proverbs of the Uneducated Hick

http://www.solomonzorn.com

Dreamer

Quote from: Solomon Zorn on December 01, 2015, 08:36:50 AM
They replace the carpet, and paint the walls, every time somebody moves out. Regardless of whether they were smokers or not. You may be overestimating the turnover rate (these buildings are hard to get into, and people don't leave them frequently).

Besides, as APA pointed out, there is a security deposit intended to cover any damages. Let a smoker pay a higher security deposit. Problem solved.
It's laughable to someone not living under their rules.
Yeah, those dirty unhealthy poor people shouldn't be allowed to indulge in their filthy unhealthy habits. Why should they have the same rights as the rest of us? They're just second-class citizens, on the government titty, so let's treat them like children.

I live in subsidized housing.  The rules where I live are enforced, so the turnover is fairly high.  Other subsidized housing in my city has low turnover because they don't give a shit about the rules.  I purposefully chose this specific complex because I wanted people to be kicked out if they routinely refuse to follow the rules.

I'm not paying for where I live--consequently, I do not feel entitled to the same rights as if I was paying fair market value or owned my home.  They do not routinely replace the paint and carpet unless a person has lived here for two years or more.  Fixing the damage done by smokers is far more costly and requires more extensive repairs--I know that is the case here; the manager complains about it.

I live under the rules.  It's ridiculous to act as if this is a war on the poor, restricting their smoking in government-owned properties.  Waa waa

<br /><br />Individually, we are one drop.  Together, we are an ocean.<br /><br />

Solomon Zorn

Quote from: Dreamer on December 01, 2015, 11:55:23 AM
I live in subsidized housing.  The rules where I live are enforced, so the turnover is fairly high.  Other subsidized housing in my city has low turnover because they don't give a shit about the rules.  I purposefully chose this specific complex because I wanted people to be kicked out if they routinely refuse to follow the rules.

I'm not paying for where I live--consequently, I do not feel entitled to the same rights as if I was paying fair market value or owned my home.  They do not routinely replace the paint and carpet unless a person has lived here for two years or more.  Fixing the damage done by smokers is far more costly and requires more extensive repairs--I know that is the case here; the manager complains about it.

I live under the rules.  It's ridiculous to act as if this is a war on the poor, restricting their smoking in government-owned properties.  Waa waa
I pay 1/3 of the rent where I live. I live with the elderly, and unless someone dies or moves to a nursing home, they don't move out. The rules where I live are strictly enforced as well. But "NO SMOKING" isn't currently one of the rules, and I see no reason it should be. Any additional costs to refurbishing an apartment when a smoker moves out, should easily be covered by an increased security deposit for smokers. It is a war on the poor. You're just to much of a pussy to care.
If God Exists, Why Does He Pretend Not to Exist?
Poetry and Proverbs of the Uneducated Hick

http://www.solomonzorn.com

TomFoolery

Quote from: Solomon Zorn on December 01, 2015, 03:09:34 PM
It is a war on the poor. You're just to much of a pussy to care.

When I think of "war on the poor," I think about things like denying poor people adequate healthcare or nutritious food. I think of kids in poor neighborhoods getting shitty educations. I think of food deserts and malnutrition and shutting down Planned Parenthood. I think of the shitty sign I saw just this morning at the grocery store that says WIC no longer covers 2% milk for whatever asinine fucking reason. I don't think of smoking. Of all the injustices suffered by the poor in America, if smoking in a government subsidized apartment is the hill you want to stand on and beat your chest, then I don't even really know what to say.

It would be a war on the poor to say that you can't buy cigarettes at all if you're receiving government assistance. It's not a war on the poor to say you can't smoke in an apartment that the government owns and helps you pay for.
How can you be sure my refusal to agree with your claim a symptom of my ignorance and not yours?

_Xenu_

Quote from: TomFoolery on December 01, 2015, 04:07:42 PM
It would be a war on the poor to say that you can't buy cigarettes at all if you're receiving government assistance. It's not a war on the poor to say you can't smoke in an apartment that the government owns and helps you pay for.
I'm going to have to stand with Solomon here. While I'm not section 8, many in my complex are and I have my own rights to consider here. If this comes about, i will no doubt be subjected  to the same rule even though I am not being subsidized. Besides, considering the history of the anti-smoking movement and their obvious eventual goals, this looks to me like a step to criminalize all smoking in all indoor places, including privately owned houses.
Click this link once a day to feed shelter animals. Its free.

http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com/clickToGive/ars/home

Hakurei Reimu

Let me point out something: low income housing is something we have to deal with or there would be more homeless. If you are on section 8 assistance, you are literally a few steps removed from being a piss-soaked hobo, out on the streets pushing a cart around. You don't even own the space you live in, and you don't even pay the full amount it takes to rent it. As a tenant, you are expected to take good care of your apartment. As a person on assistance, you are expected to take steps to see that you still deserve to have it. Furthermore, a lot of these low-income housing complexes where you can get section 8 assistance are pretty much contractually obligated to make them available to qualifying people; the space you are occupying is essentially reserved for people with low-income; when you leave, someone else is going to be taking your place and have very little choice in the matter.

Now, I know that most of you smokers out there don't realize this, but your habit stinks up everything you touch. I can tell when a smoker has passed me by. I can tell instantly that one of a house's residents is a smoker. I can smell the stink on clothes that have been through the wash a dozen times that a smoker owned them at one point. It's really that unpleasant and penetrating. You guys smell like burnt asphalt, and everything you own smells the same way. Every time I rented an apartment, I preferred apartments previously rented by the non-smokers', every damn time, because the smokers' plots stink that much.

Yes, that means you permanently devalue every property you own or rent. You make every homeowner/tenant after you have to suffer your stink. One can make a case that smoking in any building is vandalism.

When you own your own domicile, or at least earn enough money to rent out one of your own choosing, then you get to bitch about your rights to stink up the place. Until then, get your complaints out of here.
Warning: Don't Tease The Miko!
(she bites!)
Spinny Miko Avatar shamelessly ripped off from Iosys' Neko Miko Reimu