„Es hat mich krank gemacht“, sagt ein Senior aus Ontario über Mieterhöhungen in einem Altersheim
https://www.ctvnews.ca/toronto/consumer-alert/article/i-was-flummoxed-ontario-seniors-rent-increases-by-4-per-cent-at-retirement-residence/
„Es hat mich krank gemacht“, sagt ein Senior aus Ontario über Mieterhöhungen in einem Altersheim
https://www.ctvnews.ca/toronto/consumer-alert/article/i-was-flummoxed-ontario-seniors-rent-increases-by-4-per-cent-at-retirement-residence/
10 Kommentare
Largest voting block is seniors, who overwhelmingly vote Conservative, guess which Premier changed the rental increase laws? I guess y’all should consider who you vote for
LOL @ Conservatism.
Literally harming everyone to grift, cheat, and steal for tgeir buddies.
Modern conservatism, as practiced by our conservative politicians, is a mental illness.
Supply and demand. Millions of boomers with 2-5 million dollar retirement portfolios will drive up prices for everything in their retirement. This is also why the inheritance meme is exaggerated. Most boomers will blow through most of their retirement savings on expenses before they die. A lot of full service retirement homes are up to 10k/month for a tiny apartment. This isn’t extortion, it’s massive amount of money flooding the system driving up prices.
„Arlow told CTV News that her monthly rent increased from $3,784 to $3,935 a month“
That’s a nothing burger increase. If you were affording 3784, you can afford 3935. Your stock portfolio is up 50% in 2 years.
Wage Increase
Property Tax Increase
Food Increase drastically
All equipment and goods went up in price
Utilities Increased
All attributes to the rent increase.
If they don’t want that, vote for a federal government that focus on fiscal responsibility and less handout so we can have a organic budget surplus (without selling projects for one-time cash gain).
Lowering inflation and stop money printing tends to help.. but that means corruption ends and handout ends.. which means politicians and significant of the population who relies on handouts will be angry…
Thank Harris for starting that,Fords and his minions will finish it
So … this is going to be a continued problem. If you look at our population graph, were massively top heavy as boomers start to require old age care. We literaly dont have the space or personel to actually care for our population without massive immigration which, clearly, a lot of the country is already pissed about.
Theres no easy way out of the fact that despite boomers having had the economic conditions to amass greater wealth than current generations, theres not enough care aides & services in the canadian economy to properly accomodate our aging population.
It isn’t a cash grab. Retirement residences need to be exempt because they are vastly more complex to operate, maintain and build. The reality is that there are increasingly more older Canadians and fewer younger Canadians to take care of them. The caregiving sector will increasingly compete for capable employees and we can see wages go up and as such the operating costs increase. Even with better refinement of immigration (intaking people with documented professional experience in caregiving) the associated costs will be passed onto to residents.
My great fear is that Canada will continue to prioritize the elderly ahead of productive working adults and children (our future productive workers). A herd that prioritizes the sick and elderly is on the path to collapse.
Has anyone even read the story, it seems reading the headline is sufficient to go on a tangent. The title is extremely misleading.
The person in the article is facing a 3.99% rent increase versus the 2.1% guideline increase. Which is legal because services are not taken into account with the guideline.
Management justifies it as 2.1% for the building per guideline and 1.89% for services because it’s a retirement home with services (meals, on site medical staff, entertainment, activities etc).
The person’s grief is its excessive because they cook their own food and expected 2.1%.
From my perspective, it appears to be a reasonable increase. 2.1% according to guideline for the building portion and 1.89% for services.
That person lives in a retirement home with services, they could live in an ordinary apartment if they don’t think they should have to bear their fair share for services whether they use them or not, it’s not an a la carte proposition. We don’t get to cherry pick which public services we fund, and the same applies there too.
That is the whole point of a retirement home with services, you choose to live there for the convenience of on site medical staff and other amenities. How does it work if they decide I’ll fund the on site medical, but not the entertainment or common areas. That makes no sense.
Welcome to a young persons life. I complained once about a rent increase when I was younger, not in a way that was bitching but more “yeah, the place is nice but the rent just went up again”.
My boomer uncle latched onto it and wouldn’t stop harping on “you need to work 2-3 jobs and get a side hustle like I did to afford your first house.
I’ll tell him the same if he’s in a seniors facility and the costs go up.
When i read the title i thought she is getting 10% increase.
Clickbait title; misleading article