It is a well-known fact that in this day and age, accommodations should be offered for people who are too poor to pay for their own by authorities because of the increase in people’s demand for a destination to live. While I accept that governments ought to supply shelters for miserable individuals, I would argue that there are some flaws when executing this campaign.
On the one hand, it can be argued that there are two clear benefits of government housing supply for the poor. Firstly, this plan will reduce crime and contribute to increasing social stability. A stable society is related to long-term jobs, strong income, and safety, while homeless people are prone to become thieves, robbers, beggars, and sexual criminals which threaten the secure living environment. Thus, by providing accommodations for the poor, they will have a better life and can find a job more easily. Another advantage is that people who receive housing from authorities will be protected from abusers or harsh weather. The reason is that homeless people are targeted for abusers and serial killers or will be vulnerable to harsh weather conditions. For instance, a large number of Canadian citizens who lived without shelters, died due to overheating. Therefore, offering houses for poor people means ensuring their lives.
On the other hand, I am of the opinion that there will be some potential problems if the government executes a campaign of housing supply. The first flaw is that this source of support can lead to a heavy reliance on charitable funds. Some people who receive assistance have become accustomed to the begging life, so they do not desire to apply for employment to improve their living conditions; they just stay at supported homes or even become more miserable to ask for more subsidies from the authorities. Furthermore, supplying accommodation from national councils can take a toll on taxpayers. Because of an increasing number of homeless people and housing prices, other citizens will have to be pressured to pay higher taxes. This expense will delay other social developments such as providing better healthcare, building new infrastructure, investing mote education, preparing for military.
In conclusion, although I acknowledge that governments should provide houses for people who are miserable and cannot afford their own to build a stable society and prevent them from the threats to their lives, I would contend that the housing supply from governments leads to some disadvantages related to reducing the process of developing community. The balance should be stuck between two to achieve the best outcome.