• SamuelRJankis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    The title of the article seems to insinuate some type of charity on the landlord’s part but it seems like it’s very clearly just business a transaction.

    He said he was approached by several housing agencies asking if he would be willing to rent units to their clients and because of the promise of guaranteed rent and access to the city’s landlord damage fund, he agreed.

    “When the agencies came to me and said the rents are guaranteed, that was a big selling point,” Dagenais said.

    • psvrh@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Imagine if the city/province just built housing, instead of bribing developers and landlords?

      You know, like they used to before we had a housing crisis.

      • Ookami38@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Right? This issue only exists because there’s someone with the goal of making money involved. If your goal is to help someone, then it doesn’t really matter that it’s costing a bit. Remove the financial consideration, and it’s a lot easier to stomach “a mentally challenged person vandalized some stuff, but they’re not living on the streets anymore and can actually start getting help”.

    • jadero@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      I agree, but a big part of whatever problems there are with this program is that the various agencies aren’t actually holding up their end of the bargain.

      The program really should be primarily true social housing, not this public-private partnership, but the checks and balances should at least work.