Never Seen so many housing projects

I think Singapore probably holds that title.

New York has a really lot of housing projects because our housing projects are very successful ... they have huge waitlists to get in, and the turnover is very low. That, despite massive corruption and ineptitude in their management, and the fact that their tenants pay more in subsidized rent than I paid in common charges for a brand new condo a ten years ago.

Alan, I think we really did find rurus.

hi rufus

NYC DOES have more projects than other large cities. Almost all other US large cities have torn them all down and replaced them with mixed-income housing and vouchers, or just vouchers. This is a fact. They generally are gone in Atlanta, Dallas, SF, LA, Chicago...

"New York has a really lot of housing projects because our housing projects are very successful ... they have huge waitlists to get in, and the turnover is very low."

That doesn't say very much.... could just be that they're horrible, but the alternative is even worse.

If we call that, plus the crime, plus the crazy costs to the city, if that's success.... well...

Actually, turnover being low to me means horribly unsuccessful. It means people are kept in poverty.

Yes, you're right: it's not ideal. But it's better than the alternative (as you recognize). And as such, they're a success. If it were not only better than the alternative, but outright luxurious or flawless, it would certainly mean that too much taxpayer money is being spent on it.

What would make it ideal (better than successful without being excessive) is if the government brought in forensic accountants and high-level law enforcement to clean up NYCHA administration.

How is the alternative worse? LA and SF are a million times better for having gotten rid of them.