The issue of governments giving housing to people having below average financial situations remains under heated debate. From a personal point of view, it can be argued that giving the impoverished low rent or free homes may create terrible long-term consequences.
To begin with, altruistic housing support is not economically viable in modern real estate. While there have been attempts made by non-governmental organizations to offer the homeless and impoverished a place to live, most of these projects were documented to last less than a year. This is attributed to free or low-rent housing bringing a net negative to the landlords, homeowners, and real estate firms, whose altruism may diminish after lack of payment or weak financial support from tenants. Furthermore, constant renovations and upkeep of properties are generally paid for by the owners. Therefore, the government issuing laws to give shelter while the homeowners are unable to ask for adequate financial support may damage the real estate industry, and economic stability of a region.
Another reason is that the people being supported might take advantage of housing support. Numerous documentations on quick degradations of buildings can be observed, in which certain groups of people either pretend to have little to no income, or genuinely lack financial stability yet continue to leech on social policies that support their sloth. This behavior leads to the establishment of illegal drug dens & slums, affecting the well-being of surrounding neighborhoods. Another example is America’s controversial squatter’s rights, which allow the homeless to live in the landlords’ home, and potentially achieve co-ownership of the property if no action is taken. During the process, elements of criminality are commonly observed when it comes to disputes between the homeless and landlords. Generally, allowing people of lower financial standing has been proven to create numerous social and legal issues.
In conclusion, providing real estate support for people who have little to no financial strength potentially damages the industry, the overall economy, and may backfire in terms of legal and social issues. While all people should be provided with a roof to live under, it has to be done through a form of meritocracy, in which property ownership is given to those who are financially capable.