Moving low-income people did not improve their lives. Repeat it???

Obama has a new initiative to move racial-minority people to the suburbs to improve their living conditions, incomes and school results. But this was tried by Pres. Clinton, called MTO, “Move to Opportunity," and it didn’t work. People did not go off welfare; indeed, use of food stamps went up. School results did not improve. And crime followed them to the suburbs! We know because the results I am citing were carefully collected by the Dept of HUD over fifteen years in a 187-page 2011 report.

Why is Obama repeating an experiment that failed? It will not benefit the low-income people. That has been proven. So why is He doing the same thing again? The Hill

 More at Investors Business Daily

Social Engineering: President Obama's new suburban integration plan won't just harm the middle class by reducing safety and property values. It won't even provide the economic benefits it promises to relocated minorities.

We know this because HUD already tried a similar experiment under President Clinton of resettling urban poor in the suburbs. It failed, as a HUD study reveals.
From 1994 to 2008, HUD moved thousands of mostly African-American families from government projects to higher-quality homes in safer and less racially segregated neighborhoods. The 15-year experiment, dubbed "Moving to Opportunity Initiative," or MTO, was based on the well-intentioned notion that relocating inner-city minorities to better neighborhoods would boost their employment and education prospects.

But adults for the most part did not get better jobs or get off welfare. In fact, more went on food stamps. And their children did not do better in their new schools.
The 287-page study sponsored by HUD found that adults who relocated outside the inner city using Section 8 housing vouchers did not avail themselves of better job opportunities in their new neighborhoods, and saw a "sizable negative impact on annual earnings."

"Moving to lower-poverty neighborhoods does not appear to improve education outcomes, employment or earnings," the study concluded.Even then-senior HUD official Raphael Bostic, a black Obama appointee, admitted in a foreword to the 2011 study that families enrolled in the program had "no better educational, employment and income outcomes."

Worse, crime simply followed them to their safer neighborhoods. "Males ... were arrested more often than those in the control group, primarily for property crimes," the study found.