Rant regarding Community Housing Tenants

[pintobean]

Yesterday night the 11:30pm news did a story about an old man who died in a fire at his Community Housing Complex in Toronto. The news reporter was interviewing other tenants of the complex and asking them whether they felt safe in the building since it had no sprinklers - all of them said that they felt unsafe and wanted the Municipal or Provincial government to force the Community Housing Authority to install sprinklers.

One of the people who was interviewed appeared on camera holding a pet dog, and this really upset me...how on earth can someone who needs to live in subsidized housing still afford to keep and care for a pet dog? I mean this person supposedly can't afford to pay the market rate for an apartment, but somehow they have enough money to buy dog food and pay for vaccines and rabies shots and veterinary treatment? This makes no sense to me. I'd love to have a pet dog, but I know that my lifestyle can't afford it right now. It really makes me angry to see someone who is being supported by my tax dollars spending their money on something like a pet dog.

I say that if someone has so little money that they need to live in subsidized housing, then they should be forced to spend whatever money they do have on necessities, and not luxuries like a pet dog.

Comments?

[AmberMoon]

I half agree with you but the cost to feed a animal is minimual. I can feed my 2 cats on about $20 a month roughly and since they are indoor cats they usually need no medical attention. Its possible he got the pet already with its shots and only needs to feed the animal?

Its the ones who have a beer in their hand or a marijuana's smell on them and asking for a helping hand that get me. How can they afford a 12pk a day or even a bag of pot. ( ps Im not against drinking or smoking if you can afford it )

[UrbanPoet]

I half agree with you but the cost to feed a animal is minimual. I can feed my 2 cats on about $20 a month roughly and since they are indoor cats they usually need no medical attention. Its possible he got the pet already with its shots and only needs to feed the animal?

Its the ones who have a beer in their hand or a marijuana's smell on them and asking for a helping hand that get me. How can they afford a 12pk a day or even a bag of pot. ( ps Im not against drinking or smoking if you can afford it )

maybe its lakerport buck a beer... I alway ssee people on their front porch near regent park sipping back lakeports.

maybe to them... their $1/day coffee is a $1 beer O_O

anyways...
My beef is that when people talk about poorer people they assume that they shouldnt be allowed any luxury in life. Even people with less money deserve other things in life besides mere neccessity to improve their quality of life...

[ephemera]

Having a pet keeps these people's lives together. It doesn't cost that much anyhow. And too many people are taking advantage of ontario housing as it is when there are truly poor families that really need housing.

[AmberMoon]

maybe its lakerport buck a beer... I alway ssee people on their front porch near regent park sipping back lakeports.

maybe to them... their $1/day coffee is a $1 beer O_O

anyways...
My beef is that when people talk about poorer people they assume that they shouldnt be allowed any luxury in life. Even people with less money deserve other things in life besides mere neccessity to improve their quality of life...

Granted its only a buck and Yes i 100% agree they shouldn't live a poverty ridden life with no luxury's just because they cant afford the finer things in life but Im talking about the ones who have say 10 of those $1 beers a day and wonder why they don't have a pot to piss in. I have been there before and know very well what living at a poverty level is like and I can tell you that I did not have luxery's because having them would have kept me in poverty for a very long time. Any extra $$ I could spare was saved for emergencys or savings to allow me to get back on my feet.

One of my husbands family members is in the sub housing and gets xxx amount of money a month to live on, he dosen't work nor drink or drugs but he is very much the type that chooses not to work and will do anything not too. He even went so far as to gain weight on purpose to get more $$. On average he has $20 a month spare after paying his bills from what they give him. This type of person is the type I have no patience for, and he is not alone since a good chunk are similar.

[Kuurgen]

Yesterday night the 11:30pm news did a story about an old man who died in a fire at his Community Housing Complex in Toronto. The news reporter was interviewing other tenants of the complex and asking them whether they felt safe in the building since it had no sprinklers - all of them said that they felt unsafe and wanted the Municipal or Provincial government to force the Community Housing Authority to install sprinklers.

One of the people who was interviewed appeared on camera holding a pet dog, and this really upset me...how on earth can someone who needs to live in subsidized housing still afford to keep and care for a pet dog? I mean this person supposedly can't afford to pay the market rate for an apartment, but somehow they have enough money to buy dog food and pay for vaccines and rabies shots and veterinary treatment? This makes no sense to me. I'd love to have a pet dog, but I know that my lifestyle can't afford it right now. It really makes me angry to see someone who is being supported by my tax dollars spending their money on something like a pet dog.

I say that if someone has so little money that they need to live in subsidized housing, then they should be forced to spend whatever money they do have on necessities, and not luxuries like a pet dog.

Comments?


This angers me more:

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1118713753234_34/?hub=Canada

As does this:


http://www.ontariotenants.ca/electricity/articles/2004/ts-04a31.phtml


I'm sure these things are costing the taxpayers more.

[Peckerwood]

Such an infuriating story indeed...pets in poor people's homes...horrible.

How come these people aren't spending their money on essentials...like crack and heroine?

[boxingday]

Yesterday night the 11:30pm news did a story about an old man who died in a fire at his Community Housing Complex in Toronto. The news reporter was interviewing other tenants of the complex and asking them whether they felt safe in the building since it had no sprinklers - all of them said that they felt unsafe and wanted the Municipal or Provincial government to force the Community Housing Authority to install sprinklers.

One of the people who was interviewed appeared on camera holding a pet dog, and this really upset me...how on earth can someone who needs to live in subsidized housing still afford to keep and care for a pet dog? I mean this person supposedly can't afford to pay the market rate for an apartment, but somehow they have enough money to buy dog food and pay for vaccines and rabies shots and veterinary treatment? This makes no sense to me. I'd love to have a pet dog, but I know that my lifestyle can't afford it right now. It really makes me angry to see someone who is being supported by my tax dollars spending their money on something like a pet dog.

I say that if someone has so little money that they need to live in subsidized housing, then they should be forced to spend whatever money they do have on necessities, and not luxuries like a pet dog.

Comments?

So drinking and smoking is fine.

[naxos98]

Unfortunately, the system as it is currently set up does not create the incentive to work. People who are in these situations typically will get only minimum wage jobs. If they work too many hours, they get their benefits cut. So there decision is do they want to work many hours only to make a little bit more, or do nothing and collect the gov't cheques. When you get money from the government, who wouldn't want to that.

Government assistance should be to help people get on their feet and become productive members of society. But unfortunately there are many that just freeload off the system.

Hard work and delayed gratification are necessary to get your self out of poverty. Not everyone has those personal qualities, so that is why you see people make it out of poverty to become very successful, while others never go anywhere.

[ji2o0k]

This angers me more:
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1118713753234_34/?hub=Canada

As does this:
http://www.ontariotenants.ca/electricity/articles/2004/ts-04a31.phtml
I'm sure these things are costing the taxpayers more.
man................fricking government is made up of a bunch of crooks. How much money has been wasted/stolen from all the scandals and freebies that they get?

Such a joke. You wonder why people are taxed so much in Canada. I am considering a career change, how does one become an MP?

[alkaseltzer01]

all of them said that they felt unsafe and wanted the Municipal or Provincial government to force the Community Housing Authority to install sprinklers.


Comments?

What dumbasses. They are going to come around and complain about the rent hike because the cost of installing sprinklers would be passed down to them.

[Spray]

I went for a weekend doing habitat for humanity stuff at the lakeshore by cherry st, where the "Tent city" was.

These idiots that had a house built for them put a BBQ inside it and ended up burning the whole thing down. While we cleaned up the debris they just sat there drinking.

I'm sure theres a lot of grateful people that get these subsidized housing, but the other half that have this giant sense of entitlement turned me off to the point where that was my last time helping them.

[CYP3A4]

Well, some of th tenants in community housing are elders, take the victim of that fire for example. They are too poor to live in retirement homes so they have to resort to living in community housings. Pets makes great companions, I don't see anything wrong with that.

maybe its lakerport buck a beer... I alway ssee people on their front porch near regent park sipping back lakeports.


LOL, buck-a-beer and buck-a-pot

[boxingday]

Well, some of th tenants in community housing are elders, take the victim of that fire for example. They are too poor to live in retirement homes so they have to resort to living in community housings. Pets makes great companions, I don't see anything wrong with that.



LOL, buck-a-beer and buck-a-pot

What is sad is people don't know retiremants home can be cheaper then community housing.If they have no more or very little they more or less are charged $50 per month.

[CYP3A4]

What is sad is people don't know retiremants home can be cheaper then community housing.If they have no more or very little they more or less are charged $50 per month.

Its not always about the money. People are living longer. Number of retirement homes is limited. This make long waiting list.

[pintobean]

Well, some of th tenants in community housing are elders, take the victim of that fire for example. They are too poor to live in retirement homes so they have to resort to living in community housings. Pets makes great companions, I don't see anything wrong with that...
Good point.

Unfortunately the woman they showed on the news with the dog was a slightly overweight, white woman in her mid-thirties. She was pretty well-spoken, so I doubt that she had any sort of mental disability, and based on what I saw, she didn't appear to have any sort of physical disability either.

My point is that if she had been televised with a bottle of beer in her hand or smoking a crack pipe, people would be hysterical (even if she said she only spent $20 a month on beer/crack); if she had been televised driving away in a BMW or watching a 46" Sony LCD, people would be saying it's unfair that she gets to live in affordable housing when she can afford beer, or crack, or a Beemer or a Sony LCD...yet for some reason, nobody seems to care that she had a pet dog that probably costs her way more than $20/month.

[CYP3A4]

Unfortunately the woman they showed on the news with the dog was a slightly overweight, white woman in her mid-thirties. She was pretty well-spoken, so I doubt that she had any sort of mental disability, and based on what I saw, she didn't appear to have any sort of physical disability either.


Agree wholeheartedly. People should not rely on community housing for longer than needed.

[chickenbones]

You shouldn't just blame the people who live there. News reporters always try to over sensationalize things for their own benefit. They want to blow up a story as much as possible.

I mean I don't have sprinklers in my house either, nor did I have them in my apartment. A friend's $400K + Condo don't have sprinklers.

They are making it seem like the city is dumping poor people in unsafe housing where they would burn to death 'cus poor people don't deserve sprinklers.....

[MrBurns]

I'm sick and tired of having to take care of losers and poor people. I work, anyone else not ******** can as well. Otherwise have their families take care of them or just let them die.
End of rant.

[boxingday]

I'm sick and tired of having to take care of losers and poor people. I work, anyone else not ******** can as well. Otherwise have their families take care of them or just let them die.
End of rant.

1)There are people due to medical reason that can not work.Yes there are people who can work but abuse the system.

2)I have no issues with paying for people who can't work.

[danfromwaterloo]

Yesterday night the 11:30pm news did a story about an old man who died in a fire at his Community Housing Complex in Toronto. The news reporter was interviewing other tenants of the complex and asking them whether they felt safe in the building since it had no sprinklers - all of them said that they felt unsafe and wanted the Municipal or Provincial government to force the Community Housing Authority to install sprinklers.

One of the people who was interviewed appeared on camera holding a pet dog, and this really upset me...how on earth can someone who needs to live in subsidized housing still afford to keep and care for a pet dog? I mean this person supposedly can't afford to pay the market rate for an apartment, but somehow they have enough money to buy dog food and pay for vaccines and rabies shots and veterinary treatment? This makes no sense to me. I'd love to have a pet dog, but I know that my lifestyle can't afford it right now. It really makes me angry to see someone who is being supported by my tax dollars spending their money on something like a pet dog.

I say that if someone has so little money that they need to live in subsidized housing, then they should be forced to spend whatever money they do have on necessities, and not luxuries like a pet dog.

Comments?

This is still a free country - just because they're not paying as much for rent doesn't mean that they're owned by the government.

As a student, you had the government chipping in 8K a semester for your university education. Does that mean that all of your money as a student should have been spent on necessities (ie. no beer, condoms, or cover charges)?

I think we all realize the answer to that question.

[alkaseltzer01]

This is still a free country - just because they're not paying as much for rent doesn't mean that they're owned by the government.

As a student, you had the government chipping in 8K a semester for your university education. Does that mean that all of your money as a student should have been spent on necessities (ie. no beer, condoms, or cover charges)?

I think we all realize the answer to that question.

Yah, it means the $8k should be spent on school related expenses.

Beer, condoms and cover charges would come out of income such as a part time job.

[pintobean]

...As a student, you had the government chipping in 8K a semester for your university education. Does that mean that all of your money as a student should have been spent on necessities (ie. no beer, condoms, or cover charges)?
The difference is that the government chipped in $8,000 for every University student.

Affordable housing is not available to everyone; only a select few people get it...when those select few people then turn around and say "Gee, I don't have to worry about rent anymore, I may as well go out and spend my money to buy frivolous things", it's a slap in the face to all those people who work hard to pay their own way and therefore can't afford to spend money on frivolities.

As far as I'm concerned, if you're receiving government money that only a select few people are entitled to, then you become accountable to all the people who are funding your handout.

The bottom line is that if the woman I'm ranting about had to pay $1350 for rent every month, then she'd very likely not own a dog at all...if the government decides to step in and say that they'll cover $1000 of her $1350 rent, then there should be some checks and balances in place that prevent the woman from spending the extra $1000 that she'll have in her pocket on non-necessities like pets, fancy hairdos, nail salons and beer.

[pupazzo]

Poor people are like that. They always have to have a big dumb dog, big screen TV and plenty of beer in the fridge even if they live in their own crap lol

[Narci]

Living in a community housing complex doesn't mean your poor. For all you know, they could have a cash paying job that the gov does nto know about.

[danfromwaterloo]

The difference is that the government chipped in $8,000 for every University student.

...assuming you're a Canadian.


As far as I'm concerned, if you're receiving government money that only a select few people are entitled to, then you become accountable to all the people who are funding your handout.

Do you realize how many "select few people" the government gives money to? Do you realize how many grants the government gives out during the course of the year?

-students
-minorities
-poor people
-people that live up north
-old people
-disabled people
-artists
-cultural groups
-political groups
-parents
-athletes

This list is by no means exhaustive. So because each one of these groups gets money, they should have to spend all their money on necessities? That's unreasonable. The money is given to help improve their quality of life. In fact, I would argue, the money is given to allow the poor to go buy frivolties. The government wants EVERYBODY to be able to afford frivolties, not just rich(er) people.


The bottom line is that if the woman I'm ranting about had to pay $1350 for rent every month, then she'd very likely not own a dog at all...if the government decides to step in and say that they'll cover $1000 of her $1350 rent, then there should be some checks and balances in place that prevent the woman from spending the extra $1000 that she'll have in her pocket on non-necessities like pets, fancy hairdos, nail salons and beer.

Wow, so companionship is a luxury. Were you born in a Saigon prison? Let the poor person have a friend. I'd object to a REAL frivolity; this just makes you look heartless and bitter.

[dragon_drift]

companionship goes a long way.

MPs get free lunch, so that they can be well fed? How about students with no income get free lunch, so that they can be well fed and productive in school?

Politics is full of crap.

[LeeBoA]

why don't you complain elsewhere... this is a stupid topic imo.... Maybe he loves dogs? Its not a luxury to have a dog.

[boxingday]

Living in a community housing complex doesn't mean your poor. For all you know, they could have a cash paying job that the gov does nto know about.

As a rule cash paying jobs don't pay that well.

[HowEver]

People with pets are generally happier, live longer, and have fewer health problems overall. Families with pets are generally happier also.

So think of the reduced strain on the health care and social net systems. People with pets save the rest of us money.

As for the post-secondary student paying $8K a year in tuition: keep in mind that the student only pays a portion of the cost of their studies. Governments kick in at least 75% of the cost. So perhaps students could whinge a little less, unless they are willing to have their tuition quadrupled so that they are less of a burden on society...

[JAGpilot]

They is why I do not support "welfare". Unemployment insurance while your trying to find a job is one thing and so is disability but what reason does someone have to NOT work or try to get a job other than disability? No reason at all... Why should the gov't pay you to do nothing when your perfectly capable of doing it!

[Narci]

As a rule cash paying jobs don't pay that well.

I beg to differ. I had a friend's friend's family who ran a business that deals with cash only. Her family made food stuff and dinner that are frozen and sold in mostly asian supermarkets. They made some pretty good coin while living in community housing.

[Bazooka Joe]

As a pet owner, I think it's unfair for pets to be in lower income familes (especially government assisted). Who's it unfair to? The animal. I doubt there's statistics for this, but subjectively those I've known to live in Community Housing are considerably less likely to have their animals fixed, to feed them higher quality food, or to provide even basic medical care for them (flea prevention, heartworm prevention, teeth cleaning). Additionally, I would imagine the animals are less likely to attend formal obedience.

Pets cost a lot of money. If someone is unable to meet their basic needs then I don't think they should be attempting to provide for the basic needs of another creature.

[boxingday]

I beg to differ. I had a friend's friend's family who ran a business that deals with cash only. Her family made food stuff and dinner that are frozen and sold in mostly asian supermarkets. They made some pretty good coin while living in community housing.

I do not think will agree on good money.I mean $40-80 grand.

[Narci]

I do not think will agree on good money.I mean $40-80 grand.

I never asked how much they made from it. My friend said they made really good money though.

That's pretty good money considering they don't declare it as income so no tax AND they get gov assisted housing.

[boxingday]

I never asked how much they made from it. My friend said they made really good money though.

That's pretty good money considering they don't declare it as income so no tax AND they get gov assisted housing.

Ya really good money could be $10,000 tax free.There are major drawy back with cash.

No laws to protect the workers.
No ei.
No cpp.
No workmans comp.

[wisdom_kid]

People ripping the government off by going on welfare and E.I. even when they can get a job are a burden to our society. My dads friend from Saudi Arabia came to Canada 2 years ago, he got a job at some company and soon left saying that he can sit at home and get money through E.I. and his children's child tax.
These type of people are more of a burden to our society, than someone keeping a dog and living in community housing.

[danfromwaterloo]

As a pet owner, I think it's unfair for pets to be in lower income familes (especially government assisted). Who's it unfair to? The animal. I doubt there's statistics for this, but subjectively those I've known to live in Community Housing are considerably less likely to have their animals fixed, to feed them higher quality food, or to provide even basic medical care for them (flea prevention, heartworm prevention, teeth cleaning). Additionally, I would imagine the animals are less likely to attend formal obedience.

Pets cost a lot of money. If someone is unable to meet their basic needs then I don't think they should be attempting to provide for the basic needs of another creature.

I hardly think it's unfair to the animal to live in a poor household - consider the alternative: a poor family, who might not be able to afford veternarian bills, or the needle that they'd receive because our SPCA is already too crowded. And if they get these animals from the SPCA, they've already been fixed.

Formal obedience classes aren't a requirement of dog ownership - I've had three dogs in my life, and not one of them have ever needed it. If you read a book on it, you can train your dog yourself quite effectively.

I can't believe we're arguing over whether a poor person should have a pet, when pets are far cheaper than, say, children. And I hope that people aren't advocating castrating poor people just because they're poor...

[pintobean]

I can't believe we're arguing over whether a poor person should have a pet...
I can't believe how you keep oversimplifying the issue.
My concern is not with poor people owning pets.

My concern is with poor people who earn such small paycheques that the government has to literally give them a free place to live, and then they turn around and spend some of their small paycheques on an unnecessary expense like a pet...while people like me earn too large of a paycheque to even dream of qualifying for free government housing, but then we have to spend such a large chunk of our paycheques on rent/mortgage payments that we literally can't afford an unnecessary expense like a pet.

Do you not see the unfairness in this scenario?

[andrew2good4u]

I can't believe you can talk about people in Community Housing in such a horrible way. Unless you've lived there yourself, you'll never understand. Aside from the extreme cases, many people in housing are immigrants who came to Canada for a better life for themselves and their children. Most people in housing do work and make quite a bit of money. The problem is that housing charges you rent based on what you make. More often, they leave the residents with little money to save up for a house. That is why most people are stuck in social housing for so long.

As for the people who take advantage of the ****** system, everywhere you go you find the same thing. Lots of people do their best to capitalize on certain system's faults.

What about people who do NOT need OSAP, but insist on lying and taking out huge loans just to cash in on the interest. That money could be going to people who need it more.

Either way, i'm done my rant. Just make sure you look at things from both sides before you make general statements about people. It's really unfair.

[15-20_God]

Do you not see the unfairness in this scenario?

totally dude. poor ppl shouldn't have any rights, heck if they are poor it should be illegal for them to have children let alone a dog. if they can't afford food for themselves how are they going to afford food for their children.

[pintobean]

totally dude. poor ppl shouldn't have any rights, heck if they are poor it should be illegal for them to have children let alone a dog. if they can't afford food for themselves how are they going to afford food for their children.

Thanks 15-20_God for your requisite sarcastic* comment.

*Stupid
*Ass
*Response
*Cuz
*A
*Smarter
*Theory
*Is
*Complicated to put together and my small mind can't work that hard

[15-20_God]

Thanks 15-20_God for your requisite sarcastic* comment.


i don't know how its sarcastic when i am agreeing with you.

[danfromwaterloo]

Thanks 15-20_God for your requisite sarcastic* comment.

*Stupid
*Ass
*Response
*Cuz
*A
*Smarter
*Theory
*Is
*Complicated to put together and my small mind can't work that hard

Gotta love acrostic poetry. Except you didn't do it right - unless the real word is sarcastictptamsmcwth. Which its not.

FAIL. Back to the ghetto for you! Thx. Leave your dog in the bin next to the door.

[PCDawg]

There's nothing you can really do. There's so many loopholes in the system that you can pretty much find ways into getting these housing units.

I know of someone that lives in a government housing unit in Scarborough.
She brought a used 2002 Acura MDX with cash (just this year) and brought her kids a Nintendo Wii and two Nintendo DS lites for christmas. not small chump change I tell you.

These housinc complex are also so run down that they are not equiped with proper sprinklers. She had a friend that also lived in a government subsidized unit in North York and her townhome burnt down to the ground in the summer of 2007. Lost everything, luckily she and her family was not home as they stayed over at a family's home that weekend. They were shocked when they arrived home to see it burnt to the ground. The fault was bad eletrical wires that caught on fire in the living room.

[danfromwaterloo]

There's nothing you can really do. There's so many loopholes in the system that you can pretty much find ways into getting these housing units.

I know of someone that lives in a government housing unit in Scarborough.
She brought a used 2002 Acura MDX with cash (just this year) and brought her kids a Nintendo Wii and two Nintendo DS lites for christmas. not small chump change I tell you.

These housinc complex are also so run down that they are not equiped with proper sprinklers. She had a friend that also lived in a government subsidized unit in North York and her townhome burnt down to the ground in the summer of 2007. Lost everything, luckily she and her family was not home as they stayed over at a family's home that weekend. They were shocked when they arrived home to see it burnt to the ground. The fault was bad eletrical wires that caught on fire in the living room.

They don't deserve proper safety protection - that's frivolity that apparently poor people don't deserve. If there's a fire, they can just put it out with their beer. ;)

[pintobean]

...These housinc complex are also so run down that they are not equiped with proper sprinklers...
Holy Crap!

I live in a 2-year old townhouse and I guess it is equally "run down", because it is also not equipped with proper sprinklers. Heck, my parents live in a $700,000 house in Markham and astonishingly it is also not equipped with proper sprinklers.

Does anybody have the number for Mike Holmes? I gotta call him and see if he'll install sprinklers in my townhouse so that it's not so "run-down". Maybe he'll make it a family special and do my parent's house at the same time.

Gimme a friggin break. Community Housing Projects don't need sprinklers any more than regular housing complexes need sprinklers. This whole story is sensationalized by the media to appeal to our sense of outrage and make us get upset at the way the poor and downtrodden of our society are mistreated by the government.

The only thing I'm upset about is people standing there with their hands out and then spending the free money unwisely.

[Bazooka Joe]

I hardly think it's unfair to the animal to live in a poor household - consider the alternative: a poor family, who might not be able to afford veternarian bills, or the needle that they'd receive because our SPCA is already too crowded. And if they get these animals from the SPCA, they've already been fixed.

Formal obedience classes aren't a requirement of dog ownership - I've had three dogs in my life, and not one of them have ever needed it. If you read a book on it, you can train your dog yourself quite effectively.

I can't believe we're arguing over whether a poor person should have a pet, when pets are far cheaper than, say, children. And I hope that people aren't advocating castrating poor people just because they're poor...

If the animals aren't fixed and allowed to roam at large, it only makes the problem worse - that many more animals that need needles eventually. Poorer medical care ensures that they will live shorter lives. As for children, I don't know why you'd bring that up, it's not the same thing at all. And castration? Where'd that come from? I guess Godwin's law will rear it's head shortly.

I guess I feel that pet ownership is a major responsibility and that being able to financially provide for an animal is an important part of that responsibility.

[brute33]

In montreal whenever an apartment burns (that houses poor people) and leaves the tenents homeless, 99% of the time the media will focus on the fact that none of the tennents had insurance. But when you look at pictures of the burnt out buildings you will often see Tv satellites dishes all along the balconies.

They claim they can't afford insurance (even a small 10,000$ policy) but they can afford expressvu. give me a break!

[weedb0y]

In montreal whenever an apartment burns (that houses poor people) and leaves the tenents homeless, 99% of the time the media will focus on the fact that none of the tennents had insurance. But when you look at pictures of the burnt out buildings you will often see Tv satellites dishes all along the balconies.

They claim they can't afford insurance (even a small 10,000$ policy) but they can afford expressvu. give me a break!

Please. They cant afford expressVu. However, they can afford FTA receiver package. ;)

[ClubberLang]

As a pet owner, I think it's unfair for pets to be in lower income familes (especially government assisted). Who's it unfair to? The animal. I doubt there's statistics for this, but subjectively those I've known to live in Community Housing are considerably less likely to have their animals fixed, to feed them higher quality food, or to provide even basic medical care for them (flea prevention, heartworm prevention, teeth cleaning). Additionally, I would imagine the animals are less likely to attend formal obedience.

Pets cost a lot of money. If someone is unable to meet their basic needs then I don't think they should be attempting to provide for the basic needs of another creature.

LOL this is just laughable on so many levels.

[Bazooka Joe]

LOL this is just laughable on so many levels.

$1500 for a broken leg

http://www.redflagdeals.com/forums/showthread.php?t=538123

$4000 for bloat

http://www.redflagdeals.com/forums/showthread.php?t=528796

$1500 unspecified vet bill

http://www.redflagdeals.com/forums/showthread.php?t=529268

$500 for unspecified bird illness

http://www.redflagdeals.com/forums/showthread.php?t=515941

$1600 for spay and dental

http://www.redflagdeals.com/forums/showthread.php?t=451893&highlight=vet

$1600 spent, $2300 upcoming for an ear infection

http://www.redflagdeals.com/forums/showthread.php?t=304374

I could go on, but you get the point. An average emergency/unforeseen illness for an animal costs roughly a 40” LCD TV. I suppose you can just let the animal painfully die and then go get another one for free from the unfixed dog down the street.

Here’s a fun thread about a low income pet owner:

http://www.redflagdeals.com/forums/showthread.php?t=332431

[Narci]

Seems like Ontario is the only province with no mandatory sprinkler system because it adds cost the the contruction of the unit.

http://www.thestar.com/News/article/292240

In Vancouver:

In 1990, Vancouver made sprinkler systems mandatory in all newly constructed single-family homes, and there hasn't been a fire death in those residences since then.

[tempperm]

My concern is with poor people who earn such small paycheques that the government has to literally give them a free place to live, and then they turn around and spend some of their small paycheques on an unnecessary expense like a pet...while people like me earn too large of a paycheque to even dream of qualifying for free government housing, but then we have to spend such a large chunk of our paycheques on rent/mortgage payments that we literally can't afford an unnecessary expense like a pet.

Do you not see the unfairness in this scenario?

Would u rather trade places?........I consider myself fortunate that I live in a society where we can ALL have a pretty good quality of life(a pet maybe?).....today I pay my share of taxes...tommorrow I could develop a mental illness and never be able to work again......if u feel strongly, rock the vote...