Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRitsman
I think people should have a right to live where they can be mobile and live an enjoyable life. A big issue in North America is that those lower income résidents get pushed to places where they are less mobile. See senior citizens who end up living in retirement residents and such on the periphery if the city. Gentrification is not a bad word necessarily if that gentrification is used properly, but simply arguing it's great because it pushes the people that make a society difficult out is a little bit sociopathic. Nobody wants those on the fringes living next to them, but these are human beings and they deserve respect. Saying "well you're poor, so go live a 75 minute commute from you retail job" is a terrible reality of North American individualism; "fuck yours, got mine".
It's easy to say "just move somewhere else" but not everyone does that as easily as you might. In addition there's limited other cities in Canada to move to. It's not like Europe where a small town of 35,000 is a walking and cycling dream. 35,000 person towns are farmland with kilomètres between houses.
Many good European cities incorporate affordable housing, social housing and market housing into most developments to ensure there is housing stock for majority of people in an area. See: https://youtu.be/-sA2LeHTIUI |
I think I just fundamentally disagree with you. I do not believe it is your right to live wherever you like. You have to work, earn money, and pay the market rate to live in premium areas. Subsidizing housing is absolutely the wrong approach that leads to undesirable areas that are not good for a city. It leads to economic stagnation and general degeneration, as we have so clearly seen in downtown Hamilton.