Tag: global elite plan to urbanize the US

USING THE 80% AREA MEDIAN INCOME HUD RULE TO REDISTRIBUTE WEALTH

The main driver of the US economy is being quietly subdued in plain sight.

We can create all sorts of private investment in the US economy and the stock market will love it. We can create a surge of American jobs and the decreased unemployment rate will bring interest rates down, raising the housing market after a while. But if we make life artificially too easy for our young adults, the lack of passion and enthusiasm for learning and working hard enough will manifest within 3-5 years with less competitive products, unsuccessful innovation, and once again, a huge glut in basic science researchers for the creation of new materials and technology. A workforce that only strives to do what is required and demands a yellow brick road will fail the US irreparably. All of the Trump administration’s economic growth initiatives will have been sabotaged! Not only are our young people compromised in the quality of their basic pre-college education, but they will be even more severely defeated by being handed a richer lifestyle than they could afford on their own.

Since 1981, through the Omnibus Reconciliation Act the 80% AMI category has made it possible for young adults starting out in life to be given government housing assistance to afford 100% area median income market rate housing. Indeed, the largest cohort of subsidized renters (44%) in North Carolina is in the working age group of age 25-50. Single parents with children made up 95% of all families with children. With the recent surge in illegal immigrants taking jobs and housing from our legal population, driving rents artificially high, more and more of our own young adults have been qualifying for this assistance. In 2021, the Urban Institute’s study concluded that about 100,000 young adults (ages 19-25) live in subsidized housing with about a quarter of them living alone, the majority of them with extremely low incomes (at or below 30% AMI).

The National Low Income Housing Coalition estimated in 2024 that in the US there were 10.9 M extremely low income households with only 7.1M units available to them and that construction needs to be ramped up and incentivized by local governments. The <30% AMI cohort of 11 million households end up with only an overall availability of 7.1 million affordable units. The cohort represented with the least availability is the extremely low income (30%) group for which several housing advocate groups are sounding a housing shortage crisis alarm, advocating for building more developments, which house up to 80% units with income groups above 30% AMI. As an incentive, these developers get below market rate loans from the state and tax credits from the federal government. In essence, the city councils and county commissions across the country are using the extremely low income group as justification to build and provide housing for the moderately low income group. As for the funds to do this, whether from local government loans, or bonds sold to investors, it will all eventually be paid for by state property owners in the from of significantly increased property taxes and state user fees. Developers are paid for construction in the form of a percentage of the resultant revenue from rents and tax credits from the federal government proportional to the number and degree of subsidized housing. So, in reality, the financial incentives are all toward building taxpayer assisted apartments for renters not far below the area median income. It will always be more enticing for young people to move into a brand new apartment rather than a smaller older one or a small older single family house without the associated amenities. Not only does this entice young people to perpetually subsist without the motivation to continue their education and strive to climb the economic ladder but it also creates a huge conflict of interest for the elected city councilmembers, the mayor, and the county commissioners, as they approve the use of taxpayer money to house a guaranteed growing voting constituency. If this continues unchecked, for those cities, counties, and states which insist on forcing the property taxpayer to fund the growth of their dependent voting constituency, this will stifle the economic growth of the entire country. Following the demographics of the emerging 50-80% AMI sector will tell the whole story.

Below are charts which depict the magnitude of the problem within the period of 2023 to 2025.

One aspect to note is that the housing authorities and coalitions claim that there is a significant gap between the households <30% AMI or extremely low incomes and available rental units for this group. As there has been an increasing demand from the 50-80% AMI group, the claim is that this group has been taking the units that would otherwise have been available to the <30% group. Obviously this is a fabricated demand that would not exist if they logically prioritized the <30% AMI group in the first place, committing tax dollars where they are needed the most, building separate developments for this group. They state that their overriding priority is to distribute this cohort throughout the community for the sake of diversity and the exposure of the unsubsidized renters to the <30% group. This does nothing but artificially inflate the rates of the unsubsidized group to make up for the subsidized one in terms of sufficient revenue to maintain the development. The logical solution would also include cutting back the subsidized income requirement to 65% and to develop separately for the <30% cohort for a more appropriate level of cost efficiency. Below, is a comparison in terms of the distribution trend over 10 years between a state that is not very compromised, North Carolina, in this fashion and one that is, Washington state, where the taxpayer will continue to subsidize the 65-80% AMI cohort even while the extremely low income cohort continues to grow.

Washington Housing Choice Voucher Distribution

Source: HUD

This artificial demand for the <80% AMI subsidy is the result of a globalist economic scheme to bring socialist regimes into local governance and facilitate the re-distribution of wealth across the country, thereby nullifying whatever the efforts of the Trump administration to incentivize traditional family values. The globalists continue to pay into their development and political campaigns, the local media support for the false narratives of deserving free stuff and a turn key living.

If DOGE were to investigate the abuse of the housing safety net laws of the 1970s and 1980s, I emphatically believe that they would find billions of dollars of misplaced government housing assistance. The Obama and Biden administrations did all they could to shrink the disposable income of our young people to create a huge spike in the demand for subsidized housing. This is now the desperate goal of local government housing advocates among mayors and city councils and county commissioners across the country. Now, the resultant lifestyle of deprioritizing home ownership and the accumulation of equity has woven into their culture. The lack of ambition to raise a traditional family has really become a facet of this culture. This is why they are so ripe to vote in a local socialist regime to destroy their economics. It is my fervent prayer that our children develop the spiritual maturity to intervene and stop this evil socialist economic scheme.

The Grand Recovery Theft Is Solidly Underway

What matters to the economic conservative is whether or not his salary increase will afford a reasonable increase in standard of living. The liberal economic voter cares more about whether their standard of living will approach that of the higher economic class while maintaining the same level of employment. For him, the work of a CEO should not be any more valuable than that of a blue collar worker per unit of work whether it be hours or widgets. The crucial difference between the two can be found in the messaging that they receive from both political factions.

If the conservatives fail to meet the liberals where their viewpoint lies, the socialist candy man candidates will win every time. The liberals believe that the economy under the control of the government should afford them a comfortable lifestyle regardless of the value of their work to society. The belief that the “rich” are merely greedy and don’t deserve their wealth, that they set prices too high and don’t pay “their fair share” of the tax burden is simply a social analgesic to the disparity in earnings. So, let’s meet them where they are.

The first question should be how did you arrive into the less than deserved lifestyle? The answer is almost always that the big corporations collude to set prices too high. The response in turn should be that if the prices were too high for too many customers, they would sell less widgets. The second question should be why are their prices that high? The answer is almost always that corporations are greedy, taking advantage of the demand for their goods and services. The explanation should be offered that for every product type, there is a cost to produce. As the manufacturers compete for customers and set prices high enough to make a sufficient profit above the cost of production, but yet low enough to attract enough customers, the industry competitors establish competitive profit margins. this indicates the range of profit that makes a company competitive in that industry.

As the global elites lose their US federal slush funds that flowed through their shadow NGOs, NPOs, and the UN, they are desperately trying to protect their state and local government sources, the paid for elected officials and their obscure welfare networks. It is the global elites that pay the professional activists. It is they that subsidize the Islamists campaigns for city council and mayor, and state legislature. They are the engineers that shape the local political landscape from town aldermen to county commissioner. This is all going on across the country. Their objective is to socialize the US and redistribute its wealth to the poorer nations, rendering our selves economic dependents of our rivals.

Their tactics have changed since President Trump came into his second term. Rather than to facilitate federal government agency operatives to expand the welfare state, they use their assets to prepare and support their chosen local candidates to reign in socialist local economies and create violent protests against the deportation of their most loyal voting bloc, the illegal migrants. They are still intending to house them and give them full local voting rights. Each bond issue produces a 5-8 year increased tax burden on the property owner. In North Carolina, the $80M bond issue of 2020 was covered in part by Biden’s American Rescue Plan to the tune of $556,224,453. With that being no longer available in 2026, local governments will tax the private sector to death and chase corporations out of the blue cities and states in order to economically enslave the renters. They will tax seniors out of their homes and into apartments and condos. They will waste no time going after single family homeowners to tax them out of their homes. Their interest is in acquiring an increasing high density voting constituency that can be secured with all kinds of expensive services like mental health, health insurance, and rent assistance, all on the increased revenue of maximized property taxes. The city councils attract developers by offering them loans at below market interest rates and federal tax credits for each subsidized unit they make possible. The legal stipulation is that the development must make 40% of the units available to families earning less than 60% of AMI or 20% of the units available to less than 50% AMI. Households earning from 50 to 80% of AMI also are being given the same living standards as those paying full rent income assistance to afford rent so that their rent does not equal more than 30% of their income. What this means is that taxpayers, in one way or another are going to subsidize housing those that make just a bit less than average more and more as this housing demand explodes. In Raleigh, the waitlist has been closed since June 6, 2025 because of the inability to match demand with existing vacancies. In North Carolina, this means that those earning $38,940 will take the same apartment with government assistance as those earning $48,300. This scheme leads to long term, if not permanent dependence on the taxpayer. They strategically place developments on the perimeter of the city and very often annex land and buildings on the adjacent county property, bringing urbanization further and further out into the rural areas, bringing subsidized units with them. This inevitably limits the wealth producing families in each locality, thereby limiting the economic growth of our towns and cities. Their ultimate plan is to grow medium sized cities into huge city centers, creating an ever increasing government dependent democrat voting bloc.

If the conservative young adults don’t act, North Carolina will become a prime example. According to the NC Home Builders Association there is a 150,900 subsidized “housing supply gap”, in both urban and rural communities, 89,479 rental units and 61,421 units for home ownership. This gap is made up of families making less than 80% of their AMI, families in homes that are in disrepair and renters that are in buildings in disrepair. The report totally excluded the homeless sector. There were, according to an HUD study, 11,626 homeless individuals, including children that were sheltered and unsheltered in 2024. With a current vacancy rate of 1% of the 67,506 tax credit or government subsidy units and a waitlist of 44,236 households, the HUD solution is for the state to move them into brand new apartment buildings, units that are affordable to the local AMI. The vacancy rate for market rate units is 6% and corresponds with 6% of the overall waitlist. Those with a 40 to 80% AMI comprise 54% of the waitlist while those with less than 40% AMI comprise 40% of the waitlist. The NC Treasurer approved in September 2025 another $80 million in bonds for Raleigh to build an additional 2,000 units in the next 2-3 years, with more and more developments along the perimeter of the city. The market rate units of these developments will also be game for conversion to subsidized units as the waitlist grows.

This is just the beginning! There will be a dangerous cycle of rising market rate rents causing inflated housing prices, causing more families below the 80% AMI category. This is the urbanization and socialization of the entire country intended by the globalist led local governments. The more it grows the harder it will be to stop. Not all families currently making less than 80% of AMI need to be moved into new market rate apartments at property owner’s expense! Many more existing homes and apartment buildings can be repaired and renovated. Less expensive homes and apartment buildings could be built specifically for subsidization. Contrary to the myth that homelessness is due to lack of housing, homelessness is due to lack of adequate and competent mental health facilities, to mandatory addiction recovery programs, and up to recently, the unchecked availability of cocaine and fentanyl. Merely housing those that have addiction and employment problems will merely spread the crime and vandalism into otherwise low crime areas. It will propel a subculture of low productivity and development among our young adults, our most precious human resource gone to waste!

A Constitutional Solution

The only absolute defense against the socialization of the US will be the property owner signature. When a large enough petition arrives on the desk of a state elected official in sufficient numbers, it will reverse the role of the property owner as the economic slave to that of the local government being a rightful fiduciary servant of the property owner. Rather than using this revenue to maintain and improve local government services so as to optimize market property values, city councils and county commissioners are using it to subsidize housing while creating powerful incentives for migrants to locate themselves in more and more expensive communities. It is now imperative for the local property owners to demand oversight of where their taxes are actually going. This means petitioning state legislators to write new oversight and transparency laws. The actual process of local government establishing subsidized housing affords the active conservative voter a few opportunities to fight the explosive pace of subsidized developments. Notice that in the schematic below, knowledge of this process affords such opportunities.

A sample petition may look like this:

Dear (senator, representative) ,

As it had been understood in the past that local governments stood for the purpose of serving in the best interest of their property owners, this is no longer the case. Their primary focus now is to facilitate the influx of permanent legal and illegal renters. Consequently now, there is a conflict of interest between our city councils, county commissioners and the responsible stewardship of our property taxes. The whole system is fashioned to create an artificial demand for subsidized housing. I tis being subsidized on the backs of property owners that will bare the resultant tax burden.

We implore you to write legislation that effectively limits the use of our taxes as collateral for financing subsidized housing. Although we certainly do not want truly incapable individuals and families to not be safely housed, we vehemently oppose the moral argument of income inequality, allowing those who simply refuse to develop comparable abilities to earn an equal lifestyle to those that do. We also implore you to write the legislation that not only discriminates by income levels but limits such housing to 60% of area median income (AMI) and is not afforded the exact same living standards as those who are unsubsidized. We are currently incentivizing too many of our young adults to become long term dependents for their housing amongst other services.

references:

  1. North Carolina Justice Center https://www.ncjustice.org/publications/fact-sheet-impact-of-the-american-rescue-plan-on-north-carolina/
  2. The Demographic Statistical Atlas Of The United States https://statisticalatlas.com/state/North-Carolina/Overview
  3. Achievable https://app.achievable.me/study/finra-series-7/learn/municipal-debt-general-obligation-bonds-the-basics
  4. Housing Gap Analysis, Bowen National Research https://ncchamber.com/wp-content/uploads/Housing_Supply_Gap_Analysis.pdf
  5. Housing Affordability Among Renters and Owners in NC, Carolina Demography https://carolinademography.cpc.unc.edu/2025/11/17/housing-affordability-among-renters-and-owners-in-nc/
  6. Housing Bonds, NC State Housing Financing Agency https://www.ncsha.org/advocacy-issues/housing-bonds/
  7. Local Conduit Issuances of Affordable Housing Bonds in North Carolina: The Basics httphttps://canons.sog.unc.edu/2023/09/local-conduit-issuances-of-affordable-housing-bonds-in-north-carolina-the-basics/
  8. New Research Shows North Carolina Has a 764,000 Unit Housing Gap https://www.nchfa.com/news/policy-matters-blog/new-research-shows-north-carolina-has-764000-unit-housing-gap
  9. Housing Affordability & Supply https://www.nar.realtor/sites/default/files/2025-05/2025-housing-affordability-and-supply-05-15-2025.pdf
  10. § 159-61.  Bond referenda; majority required; notice of referendum; form of ballot; canvass. https://www.ncleg.net/enactedlegislation/statutes/html/bysection/chapter_159/gs_159-61.html
  11. Open Meetings and the Public’s Right to Speak https://canons.sog.unc.edu/2011/11/open-meetings-and-the-publics-right-to-speak/
  12. State debt: How and why US states borrow money https://journalistsresource.org/economics/state-debt/
  13. Local Government Commission OK’s $300 Million in Bonds for Raleigh Outer Loop https://www.nctreasurer.gov/news/press-releases/2025/04/02/local-government-commission-oks-300-million-bonds-raleigh-outer-loop
  14. RHA Waiting Lists https://rhanc.gov/waiting-list/