Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 30/12/2012 (1664 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.
Caught up in semantics
Reading some of the responses to the affordable housing issue has been frustrating in that the comments are just arguing semantics. Housing is housing, be it an actual house or rental unit. The point is Brandon needs more places in the affordable range instead of the McMansions that the local developer (yes singular) seems to focus on. So let’s not get hung up on whether it is a house or rental unit — the word to focus on is affordable! And let’s give “all” developers a chance to build.
Can we please use the proper terminology?
What the city needs is affordable shelter, not affordable housing. Who gets off thinking everyone’s entitled to a house? Or that everyone wants a house? To my mind that would be developers who build houses or politicians who are out of touch with reality. All most people want — when they are young, or new to town, or of low income — is affordable rental units. Or in Brandon’s case, any rental units. Can we please start using the term affordable shelter instead of the misleading affordable housing?
Something wrong here
I am not sure if I understand the thinking behind affordable housing. Is it the belief that everyone deserves to have a house regardless of their income? Before I bought my first house, I saved for years for the downpayment. I also sacrificed quite a bit to go to school full-time so that I could get a good job and afford a house. I do understand that prices have skyrocketed along with everything else. What am I missing?
Comment from a visitor
I’m from another province, visiting over the holidays. Heading north on 18th Street to cross the Daly Overpass over the tracks, I was honked at and saw several middle fingers and angry faces of other drivers while I was trying to merge into the left lane from the right lane at the foot of the bridge in order to cross. Wow! Thanks, not-so-friendly Brandon for displaying your driving ignorance! A little hint from an out-of-town visitor: learn to merge!
Have to be responsible for your opinions
This is written in response to the person who submitted “Just Stating His Opinion” to the Dec. 27, Sound Off. Firstly, stating ones opinion does not shield one from criticism or repercussions. Secondly, opinion or not, Braydon Mazurkiewich’s statements were racist and racist people should have no place and no representation in politics, leadership or positions of power. The fact that Braydon had to apologize and resign from his position within mere hours underscores the seriousness of the issue. The Progressive Conservatives made a bad choice in not apologizing for the comments of one of the party’s chosen representatives, however perhaps they should be apologizing for choosing a person of such poor character to represent them in the first place. In Mr. Pallister’s own words, what was said “was unacceptable to any thinking Manitoban,” so I suggest now is the time for some silent, soulful reflection for anyone aligned with such subhuman beliefs.
Time to put a stop to gimme, gimme!
I am a property taxpayer in the city of Brandon. I take issue with the way our council and our city bureaucrats are hiding important issues from the taxpayer. You people are getting paid to look after the taxpayer and not expanding taxes. We do not need all these programs that you people are wanting. You can not look after what you already got now. Enough of this. We do not need more buildings, expenses and taxes. What we need is more industry because we can not keep our young people working in Brandon as there is nothing here to keep them. Bad time to expand the city when the economy is not good. You just can’t run to the taxpayer’s pockets — the pockets are empty! And don’t forget we also have school taxes.