Replying to APC - the 'right' to affordable housing?

APC, the anti-poverty coalition, being those whom I have a beef with.

Now given that the federal and provincial governments have for long insisted that the availability of long-term housing is a key concern, it does NOT say that it is the role of government to provide subsidized rental properties for homeless derelicts, NOR does government contend that affordable housing should be in downtown core sectors of highly desirable real estate value.

The PRIVILEGE of affordable housing is an objective that the federal government has pursued through changes to the national housing act and through mortgage-regulation engineering. However, this privilege is extended to citizens who are contributing members of society (and with incomes that can support such mortgages) but whom are pressed beyond the ownership of homes because of burgeoning demand and volatile financial factors.

But what right do sub-poverty level individuals have to claiming the most desirable property locations in metropolitan Vancouver? It is my contention that they have NO such right nor privilege. It is called market forces in action and regulatory intervention has generally created more problems than it has fixed.

Rather than subsidizing sub-standard properties for street beggars, I find it better that we develop the cesspools of crime in the downtown eastside in the objective of promoting economic growth and the well documented standard of living enhancements that accompany such growth. Tragically, individuals who cannot afford elevated levels of rent WILL be squeezed out of the market (and into Surrey, jk). However, I believe this is better for them as they will be forced into a market with a more suitable cost of living to their capabilities and it will be better for society in general as economic and social objectives will be attained.

We should not impede the improvement of society for the sake of protecting a special interest group that shows few signs of redemption. For their sake, and society's sake, I argue we must allow economic forces to work. We could develop social housing for these individuals in other locations at a lower cost to government and to those individuals. Furthermore, the real estate will be able to put to a better alternative use.

I am all for gentrification and find it enhances total social utility as well as improving standards of living, economic growth, and socially desirable outcomes (a potential pareto improvement to say).

Dear APC, bite me.