system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV: Section 8 housing does nothing to bring people out of poverty and destroys communities in the process.

I understand the argument for section 8 housing. If people are moved out of an impoverished area, they'll do better. 

This is a completely flawed argument. I'm not even going to touch the " you can take the person out of the ghetto, but you can't take the ghetto out of the person". It is true culture doesn't disappear if you pack a uhaul, but it's over-simplistic. 

Living in East Bay, CA I have seen an increase in rental properties. Properties that were formerly owned are now rented, and section 8. I can really deduce this without referencing too much data. The average income for the area is $40k and the average house rental is $1600/ mo. (The subsidy raises prices). 

I'd love to get ahold of stronger data than just deducing the increase (HUD doesn't have any data posted), but it really isn't rocket science that these former foreclosures are rentals. A realtor friend said anything under 300k in value is becoming rental property. 

The town that was hardest hit near me has seen a substantial rise in crime. 16 murders so far this year; up 600% before 2007. With all of these over-priced rentals (has to be section 8) and the murder rate spiking, I have to conclude section 8 housing does more damage than fixes.
gpt
In many areas, section 8 housing is an alternative to vacant/crack houses.  If it is the "lowest-common denominator" of rental property then it's better than nothing from a developer's standpoint.  Abandoned buildings are not going to attract a higher-caliber tenant.

By the way, the Section 8 program is very tightly-regulated.  Landlords who rent Section 8 housing get reliable payment of rent, and the government inspects the property annually and it must meet specific quality/safety guidelines to qualify.  Also Section 8 tenants **must not violate their lease or else they can lose Section 8 qualification permanently.** that's a huge deal.  A typical landlord has a lot more power and control over S8 tenants than a normal rental situation. 

I think what criticisms you have with Section 8 housing are more a function of bad landlords than the program itself.  A bad landlord can rent to crappy people, but at least under Section 8 there are additional checks-and-balances that can ensure the tenants and the property are in order and a productive part of the community.

As far as whether or not S8 keeps people down, that is a pretty tired argument that has been debunked.  The exception does not prove the rule.  The government has a large array of checks-and-balances and performance requirements in order for people to qualify and stay on any entitlement program.  The notion that this stuff falls from the sky to anybody who wants it is simply not true.   Also note that one major reason for the program is to not let children suffer because their parents can't/won't work.   Also the S8 program gives special preference to: people being age 62 or older, being a U.S. Armed Services veteran, widow or widower, working more than 42 hours per week,  being disabled,  having U.S. citizenship or legal immigrant status,  currently residing in a shelter, and having children.. because children should not have to suffer because their parents cannot provide.