Classism fuels tantrum against public housing

I'll never understand the infantile meanness that fuels grownup crybabies and right-wing bullies like those discussed in this story.

Cincinnati's housing authority recently acquired 8 apartments. But the Cincinnati Enquirer reports, "Families on public assistance will be moving-in, and that isn't sitting well with the neighbors." The apartments are in an otherwise rich neighborhood.

One strong argument for spreading public housing for the poor into relatively affluent areas is that it keeps public housing from being confined to just a few areas where economic improvements are blunted. The rich shouldn't receive all the amenities while the poor get none - especially because the poor are paying for it too.

But this story is less about well-to-do neighbors not sharing than about them not liking the poor at all.

One affluent Cincinnatian lamented, "So I'm paying for all these people shacking up, having all these babies, getting Section 8 and everything free. I'm damn angry."

As if the rich don't shack up and have babies too? There have been countless instances throughout history of members of royal families or entertainment celebrities having children out of wedlock. But when they do it, it's considered "art", because they have money, and public housing residents don't.

And if they're worried about the poor getting "everything free", how come economic improvements are almost never in poor areas?

If the statement by the wealthy Cincinnati resident isn't baldly classist, what is? It's an inane raving of someone who judges people because they are of a lower income group.

Unfortunately, this alarmism over having poor neighbors is harbored by some other folks in that neighborhood too. And believe me, the housing authority has heard an earful from these whiny bigots.

(Source: http://www.kypost.com/content/wcposhared/story/Mt-Lookout-Residents-Not-Happy-With-New-Neighbor/JJyed1z36EWsewGumHu3_A.cspx)