Conservative premier shows his party’s dedication to the poor and unhoused.
He said his government presented a list of about 40 alternative sites to the municipality, but he didn’t give details to reporters.
Probably because he knew reporters would vet every one of those sites and find numerous issues with many of them.
There are 30 spaces prior to these new areas for hundreds and possibly even thousands of unhoused. The province and city are doing the old…if we can’t see them they don’t exist.
As a side note I just walked by the huge gardens at the Lt governors house two days ago. That’s a great place for an encampment. It never gets used for anything. It’s already maintained by a team of dedicated gardeners and maintenance staff. It has a fence in place already. The house is always empty. Lots of bathrooms and kitchens I bet. It’s perfect.
hahahaha!! Best idea yet!
Protip for him: if you build enough homes, you won’t have to build encampments
He couldn’t do it under Harper as housing minister
premier: “I’ve tried nothing and I’m all out of ideas!”
problem: increasing homelessness nation wide, people complain, wish the homeless would “disappear”
solution: affordable/rent geared housing or free backed with needs based assistance
outcome: tax payers/politicians won’t go for it cause “fuck you, I have mine” continue to complain about the homeless problem and say “it’s a complicated situation”
go back to step one. repeat.
I’m sorry kids but I’m afraid in reality problems don’t just go away on their own. they continue. If you don’t like seeing the homeless or addicts then you need to pay for the solution. you need to push for housing reforms as far as zoning and building goes. you need to push for higher taxes or much better appropriation of funds. insist on better and acceptable social safety nets, of which currently none exist in this country.
Increase taxes now, pay for the solution, pay for the safety nets, lower taxes when solution is achieved and nets no longer required.
If you were a politician I could vote for, I would!
Judging from the way many of my neighbors reacted to a homeless camp moving into a local park, I think there a lot of
peoplehomeowners who would literally jump at the first opportunity to “disappear” unhoused peopleYou say unhoused but you actually mean criminals and addicts.
Wonder why nobody wants them in their neighborhoods. They’re not upstanding citizens contributing to society.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
The homeless “problem” is a direct outgrowth of the housing crisis.
The housing crisis is a direct outgrowth of housing “investors” jacking up prices and rents for 25+ consecutive years without a clear market crash.
The housing crisis can only be resolved with a return to affordability.
A return to affordability would see a housing crash of about 68% Canada-wide, with some markets (Vancouver, Kelowna, etc.) seeing valuation drops of 85% or more.
Remember: the one-third rule states that median housing payments (rent or mortgage) should not be more than one-third of median monthly income, but it also states that median home values should not be more than 3× median annual income.
The second half of that rule indicates that current home values in Kelowna alone - where median home values are just shy of $1M but median incomes as of the 2021 Statistics Canada poll are $35K - means that housing here is 28× that of annual income, or 9× more expensive than it should be.
So for a city like Kelowna to return to a sane and healthy housing market, values would have to crash by a MINIMUM of 89%.
This is what parasitical “investors” - mostly Greatest Generation and Boomers, but as of late no small number of GenX’ers - have done to the housing market.
This is why we are seeing a homeless crisis.
