Arguments for Slumlords as a Source of Affordable Housing

Featured

  1. Market Necessity: In areas with severe housing shortages, slumlords may provide the only available option for low-income individuals, preventing homelessness.
  2. Economic Realities: Some landlords claim they cannot improve properties without raising rents, which could displace tenants. Low-income tenants might prioritize cost over quality due to limited options.

Criticisms of Slumlords as a Blight:

  1. Exploitative Practices: Charging high rents for substandard housing capitalizes on tenants’ desperation, often violating health/safety codes.
  2. Health and Safety Risks: Poor conditions (e.g., mold, pests, structural issues) harm physical and mental health, disproportionately affecting marginalized communities.
  3. Moral Concerns: Profiting from inadequate housing perpetuates inequality and dehumanizes tenants, prioritizing profit over human dignity.
  4. Community Impact: Neglected properties contribute to neighborhood blight, reducing investment and perpetuating cycles of poverty.

Systemic Context:

  • Root Causes: Slumlords thrive in systems with inadequate affordable housing, weak regulation, and income inequality. They are a symptom of broader failures in housing policy.
  • Regulatory Gaps: Weak enforcement of housing standards allows slumlords to operate, while insufficient subsidies or public housing leave tenants with few alternatives.

Conclusion:

Slumlords are primarily a blight, exacerbating poverty and inequality through exploitation and neglect. While they may fill a temporary gap in housing supply, their practices harm individuals and communities. Addressing the issue requires systemic solutions:

  • Policy Interventions: Strengthen tenant protections, enforce housing codes, and expand affordable housing initiatives.
  • Ethical Alternatives: Promote public housing, rent control, and community land trusts to provide dignified, sustainable housing.

Ultimately, the existence of slumlords underscores the need for structural reforms rather than tolerating exploitative stopgaps.

slumlords provide affordable housing. In many cities, there’s a shortage of affordable housing, so even if the housing is substandard, it might be the only option for low-income individuals or families. Without these slumlords, maybe there would be even fewer options, leading to homelessness. But then, the counterargument is that the conditions in these properties are terrible, possibly violating health and safety codes. So even if it’s affordable, is it acceptable for people to live in such conditions?

You’ve highlighted a critical tension in the debate about slumlords and affordable housing: the trade-off between availability and quality. Let’s break this down further:

The Argument That Slumlords Provide Affordable Housing:

  1. Housing Shortages: In many cities, affordable housing is scarce due to rising costs, gentrification, and insufficient public housing. Slumlords fill a gap by offering low-cost options, even if the conditions are poor.
  2. Preventing Homelessness: For some low-income individuals or families, substandard housing may be the only alternative to living on the streets or in shelters, which can be even more precarious.
  3. Market Realities: Slumlords often operate in neighborhoods where property values are low, and the cost of maintaining or improving housing exceeds what tenants can pay. Without them, these properties might remain vacant or be redeveloped into unaffordable housing.

The Counterargument: Unacceptable Living Conditions:

  1. Health and Safety Risks: Substandard housing often violates health and safety codes, exposing tenants to hazards like mold, lead paint, pests, faulty wiring, and structural instability. These conditions can lead to serious health problems, especially for vulnerable populations like children and the elderly.
  2. Exploitation: Slumlords often charge rents that are disproportionately high relative to the quality of the housing, exploiting tenants who have no other options.
  3. Moral and Ethical Concerns: Allowing people to live in such conditions raises ethical questions about dignity and human rights. Affordable housing should not come at the cost of basic safety and well-being.
  4. Long-Term Costs: Poor housing conditions can perpetuate cycles of poverty by affecting tenants’ health, education, and employment opportunities, ultimately costing society more in healthcare, social services, and lost productivity.

The Broader Systemic Issue:

The existence of slumlords is a symptom of deeper systemic failures:

  • Lack of Affordable Housing: Governments and private developers have not built enough affordable housing to meet demand, leaving low-income individuals with few options.
  • Weak Regulation and Enforcement: In many places, housing codes are not strictly enforced, allowing slumlords to operate with impunity.
  • Economic Inequality: Rising income inequality and stagnant wages make it difficult for many people to afford decent housing, forcing them into substandard options.

Is It Acceptable?

While slumlords may provide a temporary solution to housing shortages, the conditions they offer are fundamentally unacceptable. Affordable housing should not come at the cost of health, safety, or dignity. The solution lies in addressing the root causes of the problem:

  • Policy Solutions: Governments should invest in affordable housing, enforce stricter housing codes, and provide subsidies or incentives for landlords to improve properties.
  • Community Initiatives: Nonprofits and community land trusts can develop and maintain affordable, high-quality housing for low-income residents.
  • Tenant Protections: Stronger tenant rights and rent control measures can prevent exploitation and ensure that housing remains affordable and habitable.

In conclusion, while slumlords may fill a gap in the short term, their existence is a symptom of systemic failures that need to be addressed. Affordable housing should not mean substandard housing, and society must strive to provide safe, dignified living conditions for all.

Can I Get A Loan Without A Job?

Featured

Getting a loan without a job can be challenging, but it’s not impossible. Lenders typically look for a stable source of income to ensure you can repay the loan. However, if you don’t have a job, you may still qualify for a loan if you can demonstrate other sources of income or assets. Here are some options to consider:


1. Show Alternative Income Sources

If you don’t have a traditional job, you may still have income from other sources. Lenders may accept:

  • Government benefits (e.g., Social Security, disability, or unemployment benefits).
  • Retirement or pension payments.
  • Rental income from properties you own.
  • Alimony or child support.
  • Freelance or gig economy work (e.g., Uber, DoorDash, freelance writing).
  • Investments or dividends.

Be prepared to provide documentation, such as bank statements or tax returns, to prove these income sources.


2. Use Collateral for a Secured Loan

If you have valuable assets, you can apply for a secured loan, which uses collateral to reduce the lender’s risk. Examples include:

  • Home equity loans or lines of credit (if you own a home).
  • Auto title loans (using your car as collateral).
  • Secured personal loans (using savings accounts, jewelry, or other assets).

Be cautious with secured loans, as you could lose the asset if you fail to repay.


3. Get a Co-Signer

A co-signer with a stable income and good credit can help you qualify for a loan. The co-signer agrees to repay the loan if you can’t, which reduces the lender’s risk. This can be a family member or close friend who trusts you to make payments.


4. Consider a Payday Alternative Loan (PAL)

Some credit unions offer Payday Alternative Loans (PALs), which are small, short-term loans designed for borrowers with limited income. These loans typically have lower interest rates than traditional payday loans.


5. Explore Peer-to-Peer (P2P) Lending

Peer-to-peer lending platforms connect borrowers with individual investors. These platforms may have more flexible requirements than traditional banks. Examples include LendingClub and Prosper.


6. Borrow from Family or Friends

If traditional lenders aren’t an option, consider asking family or friends for a loan. Be sure to formalize the agreement with a written contract to avoid misunderstandings.


7. Improve Your Credit Score

A strong credit score can increase your chances of getting approved for a loan, even without a job. Pay down existing debt, make payments on time, and check your credit report for errors.


8. Look for No-Income-Verification Loans

Some lenders offer no-income-verification loans, but these often come with high interest rates and fees. Be cautious, as they can lead to a cycle of debt.

Sackcloth money bag with loan inscription and metal coins

9. Use a Credit Card or Line of Credit

If you already have a credit card, you can use it for cash advances or purchases. Alternatively, you may qualify for a new credit card or line of credit based on your credit history.


10. Consider Nonprofit or Community Assistance

Some nonprofits and community organizations offer low-interest or no-interest loans to individuals in need. These programs are often designed to help people cover emergency expenses.


Important Tips:

  • Avoid Predatory Lenders: Be wary of payday loans or high-interest loans that can trap you in debt.
  • Compare Options: Shop around for the best terms and interest rates.
  • Have a Repayment Plan: Make sure you can afford the loan payments, even without a job.

If you’re struggling financially, consider reaching out to a financial counselor or nonprofit organization for guidance.

Protest in Vancouver, British Columbia Against Residential Tenancy Branch Ruling Involved with Eviction Proceeding of March 31st, 2025

Featured

Originally Published on Vancouver’s City News Website

Is There a Fundamental Logic to Life?

Featured

 by Matt Williams

One of the more daunting questions related to astrobiology—the search for life in the cosmos—concerns the nature of life itself. For over a century, biologists have known that life on Earth comes down to the basic building blocks of DNA, RNA, and amino acids. What’s more, studies of the fossil record have shown that life has been subject to many evolutionary pathways leading to diverse organisms. At the same time, there is ample evidence that convergence and constraints play a strong role in limiting the types of evolutionary domains life can achieve.

For astrobiologists, this naturally raises questions about extraterrestrial life, which is currently constrained by our limited frame of reference. For instance, can scientists predict what life may be like on other planets based on what is known about life here on Earth? An international team led by researchers from the Santa Fe Institute (SFI) addressed these and other questions in a recent paper. After considering case studies across various fields, they conclude that certain fundamental limits prevent some life forms from existing.

The research team was led by Ricard Solé, the head of the ICREA-Complex Systems Lab at the Universitat Pompeu Fabra and an External Professor at the Santa Fe Institute (SFI). He was joined by multiple SFI colleagues and researchers from the Institute of Biology at the University of Graz, the Complex Multilayer Networks Lab, the Padua Center for Network Medicine (PCNM), Umeå University, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), the Georgia Institute of Technology, the Tokyo Institute of Technology, and the European Centre for Living Technology (ECLT).

Artist’s impression of Earth during the Archean Eon. Credit: Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History

The team considered what an interstellar probe might find if it landed on an exoplanet and began looking for signs of life. How might such a mission recognize life that evolved in a biosphere different from what exists here on Earth? Assuming physical and chemical pre-conditions are required for life to emerge, the odds would likely be much greater. However, the issue becomes far more complex when one looks beyond evolutionary biology and astrobiology to consider synthetic biology and bioengineering.

According to Solé and his team, all of these considerations (taken together) come down to one question: can scientists predict what possible living forms of organization exist beyond what we know from Earth’s biosphere? Between not knowing what to look for and the challenge of synthetic biology, said Solé, this presents a major challenge for astrobiologists:

“The big issue is the detection of biosignatures. Detecting exoplanet atmospheres with the proper resolution is becoming a reality and will improve over the following decades. But how do we define a solid criterion to say that a measured chemical composition is connected to life? 

“[Synthetic biology] will be a parallel thread in this adventure. Synthetic life can provide profound clues on what to expect and how likely it is under given conditions. To us, synthetic biology is a powerful way to interrogate nature about the possible.”

The sequence where amino acids and peptides come together to form organic cells. Credit: peptidesciences.com

To investigate these fundamental questions, the team considered case studies from thermodynamics, computation, genetics, cellular development, brain science, ecology, and evolution. They also consider previous research attempting to model evolution based on convergent evolution (different species independently evolve similar traits or behaviors), natural selection, and the limits imposed by a biosphere. From this, said Solé, they identified certain requirements that all lifeforms exhibit:

“We have looked at the most fundamental level: the logic of life across sales, given several informational, physical, and chemical boundaries that seem to be inescapable. Cells as fundamental units, for example, seem to be an expected attractor in terms of structure: vesicles and micelles are automatically formed and allow for the emergence of discrete units.”

The authors also point to historical examples where people predicted some complex features of life that biologists later confirmed. A major example is Erwin Schrödinger’s 1944 book What is Life? in which he predicted that genetic material is an aperiodic crystal—a non-repeating structure that still has a precise arrangement—that encodes information that guides the development of an organism. This proposal inspired James Watson and Francis Crick to conduct research that would lead them to discover the structure of DNA in 1953.

However, said Solé, there is also the work of John von Neumann that was years ahead of the molecular biology revolution. He and his team refer to von Neumann’s “universal constructor” concept, a model for a self-replicating machine based on the logic of cellular life and reproduction. “Life could, in principle, adopt very diverse configurations, but we claim that all life forms will share some inevitable features, such as linear information polymers or the presence of parasites,” Solé summarized.

The first implementation of von Neumann’s self-reproducing universal constructor. Three generations of machines are shown: the second has nearly finished constructing the third. Credit: Wikimedia/Ferkel

In the meantime, he added, much needs to be done before astrobiology can confidently predict what forms life could take in our Universe:

“We propose a set of case studies that cover a broad range of life complexity properties. This provides a well-defined road map to developing the fundamentals. In some cases, such as the inevitability of parasites, the observation is enormously strong, and we have some intuitions about why this happens, but not yet a theoretical argument that is universal. Developing and proving these ideas will require novel connections among diverse fields, from computation and synthetic biology to ecology and evolution.”

The team’s paper, “Fundamental constraints to the logic of living systems,” appeared in Interface Focus (a Royal Society publication).

Further Reading: Santa Fe InstituteInterface Focus

Originally Published January 2nd, 2025 at Universe Today.

Authored by: Matt Williams

Duty to Assist Involves More than Just the Homelessness Sector

Featured

Duty to Assist is a homelessness prevention approach that works upstream and uses a human-rights lens. Originating in Wales, it is also known as the Housing (Wales) Act 2014, which created a legal obligation for local authorities, such as governments, to make reasonable efforts to move individuals out of homelessness or stabilize their housing. 

The fourth session of the Prevention Matters! series was hosted by Stephen Gaetz from the Canadian Observatory on Homelessness and dug into the details of how Duty to Assist works. Gaetz interviewed Peter Mackie of the Centre for Homelessness Impact at the University of Cardiff who was a key player in the implementation and creation of the Housing (Wales) Act 2014. They discussed the implementation of Duty to Assist in the United Kingdom, as well as challenges faced in the process and what Duty to Assist might look like in the Canadian context.

How Does Duty to Assist Work?

Individuals affected by homelessness are eligible for assistance at three stages:

  1. Prevention stage: When an individual is at risk of homelessness, authorities can intervene by trying to address the factors contributing to the risk, such as paying rental arrears or providing a rent subsidy.
  2. Relief stage: After a person’s housing is lost, the authorities can intervene by trying to find them new accommodations.
  3. In the event that both options fail, individuals in priority groups who are covered by previous legislation will have housing secured for them.

Duty to Assist works upstream, meaning that it assists individuals earlier than previous legislation allowed. Those who are at risk of homelessness or have just become homeless can seek out help from local authorities earlier. This allows issues to be addressed in a more timely and cost-effective manner. 

According to Mackie, Duty to Assist has proven to be much more effective in the prevention stage. The intervention can be something as simple as paying off arrears or providing first and last month’s rent, which is a much simpler approach than trying to find brand-new accommodation. 

“If you are already homeless, to take steps to resolve your homelessness, we’re way less successful there because you don’t have the home to try and keep somebody in.” – Peter Mackie

Challenges with Duty to Assist

While the implementation of Duty to Assist is a win for prevention in Wales, the legislation is still riddled with difficulties that go beyond the homelessness sector. As Promise Busulwa, the producer of Prevention Matters! always says in her opening remarks: “The housing crisis cannot be solved by the homelessness sector alone.” Mackie has written articles outlining the need for “…effective universal prevention to be the foundation of any strategy to end homelessness.” Many of the ongoing issues with the Duty to Assist model are the lack of consolidated, systematic care and collaboration between public bodies and other organizations to address the root causes of homelessness. 

“But what we don’t have in the legislation is a requirement that, for instance, a landlord would notify the local authority.” – Peter Mackie

Another challenge noted by Mackie is that people can be hesitant to change. Individuals who are impacted by impending or current homelessness, and who therefore qualify for Duty to Assist, need to be aware of the program itself and request assistance. This has proven to be difficult, especially given that the legislation and the supports offered looked very different prior to the implementation of the Housing (Wales) Act 2014. Prior to the implementation of Duty to Assist, the legislation only provided assistance for families with children and other priority groups. 

Currently, there is a gap as public institutions, like hospitals and prisons, do not call for assistance from local authorities when releasing an individual into homelessness. Mackie also noted push back about the universal nature of Duty to Assist. Many parties involved in the legislative process pushed to maintain the focus on priority groups, clashing against the universal prevention model that applies to everyone experiencing or at risk of homelessness.

Mackie spoke to the difficulties involved in imposing a “duty” on public bodies that had the power to intervene in the creation of an individual’s homelessness situation. Simply put, these parties could not be mandated to provide assistance because “ somebody is going to fail.” Instead, the legislation mandates a ‘best efforts duty.’ A duty to assist means providing assistance to those who willingly consent to receiving help and are, in return, expected to comply with attempts to provide them with assistance.

“In government, there’s often a reluctance to actually use the word ‘must.’” – Peter Mackie

To combat these challenges, Mackie calls for better data sharing and a more person-centred focus when providing services. As the legislation is currently being revised for what has been coined as “Duty to Assist, Mark II,” Wales aims to have these issues addressed and changes implemented, which involves including a more diverse range of voices. While Mackie expresses frustration with the lack of support both financially and from public systems for Duty to Assist, he does acknowledge that it has been very helpful as Wales traverses a housing crisis.

What Does this Mean for Canada?

While Duty to Assist cannot be precisely replicated in Canada because of the lack of infrastructure, Stephen Gaetz noted it is regarded as a fundable homelessness prevention method by the Government of Canada. Mackie also mentioned that the overall principles of Duty to Assist can be implemented without legislation—although they may be less effective without the legislative aspect—on a community or municipal level. While it would be ideal for there to be legislation to hold public bodies to account, Wales has not experienced any high court cases surrounding the Duty to Assist, leading Mackie to believe that the implementation of the Duty to Assist principles without legislation should be possible. 

Mackie recommended implementing Duty to Assist in a community to prove that it works before aiming to scale it upwards, and Gaetz replied this had been in progress before the COVID-19 pandemic. Here’s hoping Duty to Assist gets the chance to prove its value in Canada.

Interested in more diverse perspectives on homelessness prevention? Check out the rest of the Prevention Matters! Series. Want to learn more about Duty to Assist? There is a free, self-paced training on the Homelessness Learning Hub.

Originally published on The World-Wide Web’s Homeless Hub On Monday October 21st, 2024

Author: Rachel Lau

Disclaimer

The analysis and interpretations contained in these blog posts are those of the individual contributors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Canadian Observatory on Homelessness.

Saying No to Overtime

Featured

For hourly workers, earning time and a half can sometimes be awesome and well worth the extra hours. But it can be less than great when you have plans or want to spend time with your family. Unfortunately, saying no to overtime is a bit difficult because of something called mandatory overtime.

What is Mandatory Overtime?

As defined by Business Management Daily, mandatory overtime is “the practice of requiring employees to work more than a standard 40-hour workweek.” Other words for it are forced or compulsory overtime. Although an employee may refuse to work mandatory overtime, it is completely legal for an employer to fire an employee that chooses to do so. Additionally, paystub generation is an essential component of accurate record-keeping and payroll management. Read this article to learn more.

The Fair Labor Standards act (FLSA) is the relevant law when it comes to mandatory overtime. Instead of prohibiting employees working over 40 hours a week, it states that all such extra hours are paid at one and a half the hourly rate. For those who are self employed, it’s crucial to manage their time and workload effectively to avoid burnout.

Employers like mandatory overtime for several reasons. They can use mandatory overtime as needed during busier times of the year without having to hire additional workers.

Saying No to Overtime

So, now that we know what mandatory overtime is, how could you say no when you have a conflict?

Make a Plan

Before you tell your boss, you can’t do overtime, plan out your answer. What’s your reason? Most managers can be understanding of conflicts like taking care of your kids or a loved one, or plans you already made well in advance. If you’re dealing with burnout and are concerned you won’t be able to do the work well without resting, hopefully your boss will understand that as well.

It’s also important to keep in mind how much overtime you’ve been saying no to lately. If this is a position where overtime is expected, you may need to pick your battles when it comes to asking to not work over 40 hours.

Talk to Your Boss

Now that you have a plan, it’s time to talk things over with your boss. Despite the name of this article, try not to actually say the word “no.” That can be seen as negative. You just want to explain to your boss what’s going on, and why you can’t take on extra hours now.

If They Say No

If your boss denies your request to not take on overtime, you might evaluate your current job. If you truly have a reason for not being able to do the overtime, it’s hopefully resolvable. It’s also possible that the position you’re in is just one that requires frequent overtime, and you aren’t currently a good fit for it.