Canadian homeless encampments have become increasingly visible in recent years, and those residing within them have faced a fair bit of variation in how local governments react to their presence. Today, let’s look at a remarkable legal case that may change the game regarding how homeless encampments are considered under Canadian law and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
I don’t like homeless encampments, tent cities, favelas etc. They are unsafe, unclean and foster destructive behavior.
Let’s destroy them by building safe, permanent homes for people.
It’s so strange to me that “free market capitalism” lovers can’t see that encampments are a market response. There is a large supply of unenclosed space (parks, sidewalks, underpasses) and an unmet demand for shelter. They shouldn’t be surprised when market participants convert the former into the latter.
How effective do they think it will be to police every unenclosed space in the region vs building adequate shelter. Building shelter has all sorts of associated benefits too.
Market lovers don’t love markets. They love power. And if you can’t exercise power over someone as worthless as the homeless, who can you?