Housing is one of the basic necessity for human survival. However, there are many unfortunate lives that cannot afford it. One of the highly debatable issues today is whether the government should provide free housing. I partially agree with this viewpoint, but I also believe that it is not the only solution for several reasons outlined in my essay.
On one side of the argument, it could be said that providing free housing would ensure that many people who cannot afford one will get a shelter rather than sleeping on the roads. In addition, it would ensure better standards of living and bring prosperity to the economy. A good illustration for this is the United States, wherein public authorities ensure that the citizens have a basic accommodation which enhances their living standards. Thus, it is pertinent that government takes such step for extremely poor people who needs a house.
On the other hand, it is can also be argued that such free housing is not a sustainable idea as the population increases. This is true especially in the developing countries such as India and China. Moreover, the states in these economies have to also spend on other essentials such as food and education. To overcome this barrier, the government can either subsidize housing or redevelop slum areas to build more houses and make it affordable for the mass. A classic example of such an initiative is a country like Indonesia, where the country offers up to 60% home loan subsidy to the needy people, this resulted in a 40% growth in home dwellers.
Having considered a range of arguments, I have come to a conclusion that free housing to extremely poor families and subsidization for the mass population of lower socioeconomic class, needs to be adopted to tackle this issue.
Housing is one of the basic necessity for human survival.
However
, there are
many
unfortunate
lives
that cannot afford it. One of the
highly
debatable issues
today
is whether the
government
should provide
free
housing. I
partially
agree
with this viewpoint,
but
I
also
believe that it is not the
only
solution for several reasons outlined in my essay.
On one side of the argument, it could
be said
that providing
free
housing would ensure that
many
people
who cannot afford one will
get
a shelter
rather
than sleeping on the roads.
In addition
, it would ensure better standards of living and bring prosperity to the economy. A
good
illustration for this is the United States, wherein public authorities ensure that the citizens have a basic accommodation which enhances their living standards.
Thus
, it is pertinent that
government
takes such step for
extremely
poor
people
who
needs
a
house
.
On the other hand
, it is
can
also
be argued
that such
free
housing is not a sustainable
idea
as the population increases. This is true
especially
in the
developing countries
such as India and China.
Moreover
, the states in these economies
have to
also
spend on other essentials such as food and education. To overcome this barrier, the
government
can either subsidize housing or redevelop slum areas to build more
houses
and
make
it affordable for the mass. A classic example of such an initiative is a country like Indonesia, where the country offers up to 60% home loan subsidy to the needy
people
, this resulted in a 40% growth in home dwellers.
Having considered a range of arguments, I have
come
to a conclusion that
free
housing to
extremely
poor families and subsidization for the mass population of lower socioeconomic
class
, needs to
be adopted
to tackle this issue.