Chapter 3: Media Article
"Landlords not keen on government bill", CBC news Dec 21, 2001
This article is about the introduction of Bill-26 that was passed by the provincial government of Quebec. Landlords are upset about the new bill and are hoping that the bill could be withdrawed. The new bill limits the questions that a prospective landlord may ask a prospective tenant before leasing a place out. This new bill therefore limits the amount of information that a landlord can gather before leasing out their homes, and therefore affecting his or her judgment. The Association of Apartment Owners of Montreal says the government is responsible for the current housing crisis. They say the reason the crisis exists is because of rent control.
Relationships to Chapter 3 - Market Imperfections (Information)
Usually when the government gets involved the source of information is made more available to both the supplier and the consumer. But in this case it has a more of negative affect on the suppliers, which are the landlords, than the consumers. With the introduction of the new bill, the landlords are now limited on questions they can ask and therefore affecting their decision. This makes it harder for the landlords to prevent drug operations from happening on their own property. At the same time new laws were passed or being passed that states it is the landlords responsibility for the place you are leasing out isn't being used for drug operations. Penalties such as fines will be sent to those who are unable to meet these requirements. With this bill it makes it even harder for the landlords meet these laws. If a landlord does rent out a place to people and later finds out its used for drug operations, the land lord must go through the rental board and prove that it is a used for drug operations before breaking the lease. This process is a very long and slow process that would decrease effeminacy. By introducing this new bill landlords are more hesitant about leasing their place out to strangers. Instead the landlord would be looking for potential tenant through reference rather than through advertisement. This at the same time affects consumers too since there will be less information provided by the suppliers or the landlords. The consumers may be unaware of the price differences or if the place for is actually out there. This may just affect the entire market by creating what seems to be a shortage from the lack of information sent out. In my opinion I don’t agree with Bill-26. The restriction of information will only cause more problems and making it harder for people to protect their own property that they are leasing. If they continue to do this it is hard for these people to lease their homes out to people. They would just rent it to people that have connections to them in some way. If the bill were to be withdrawn, then people would be more willing to spread the information to a larger population and increasing the amount of shared information.
"Landlords not keen on government bill", CBC news Dec 21, 2001
This article is about the introduction of Bill-26 that was passed by the provincial government of Quebec. Landlords are upset about the new bill and are hoping that the bill could be withdrawed. The new bill limits the questions that a prospective landlord may ask a prospective tenant before leasing a place out. This new bill therefore limits the amount of information that a landlord can gather before leasing out their homes, and therefore affecting his or her judgment. The Association of Apartment Owners of Montreal says the government is responsible for the current housing crisis. They say the reason the crisis exists is because of rent control.
Relationships to Chapter 3 - Market Imperfections (Information)
Usually when the government gets involved the source of information is made more available to both the supplier and the consumer. But in this case it has a more of negative affect on the suppliers, which are the landlords, than the consumers. With the introduction of the new bill, the landlords are now limited on questions they can ask and therefore affecting their decision. This makes it harder for the landlords to prevent drug operations from happening on their own property. At the same time new laws were passed or being passed that states it is the landlords responsibility for the place you are leasing out isn't being used for drug operations. Penalties such as fines will be sent to those who are unable to meet these requirements. With this bill it makes it even harder for the landlords meet these laws. If a landlord does rent out a place to people and later finds out its used for drug operations, the land lord must go through the rental board and prove that it is a used for drug operations before breaking the lease. This process is a very long and slow process that would decrease effeminacy. By introducing this new bill landlords are more hesitant about leasing their place out to strangers. Instead the landlord would be looking for potential tenant through reference rather than through advertisement. This at the same time affects consumers too since there will be less information provided by the suppliers or the landlords. The consumers may be unaware of the price differences or if the place for is actually out there. This may just affect the entire market by creating what seems to be a shortage from the lack of information sent out. In my opinion I don’t agree with Bill-26. The restriction of information will only cause more problems and making it harder for people to protect their own property that they are leasing. If they continue to do this it is hard for these people to lease their homes out to people. They would just rent it to people that have connections to them in some way. If the bill were to be withdrawn, then people would be more willing to spread the information to a larger population and increasing the amount of shared information.
posted by J.Woo at 2:26 AM
2 comments
