Shortage of housing has several social consequences and only government can solve the problems. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Nowadays one of the significant issues of the society is a deficiency of accommodation and related social implications. Some people consider that only authorities can tackle the issue. I somehow agree with

this

opinion, meanwhile I believe that ordinary citizens may improve the situation in the case of combining their efforts.

First

, lack of housing stock has obviously negative impact on a society and standards of living. Homeless population due to lack of decent shelter tend to have more health associated problems.

In addition

, stray people are caught up in a vicious circle, when it is difficult for them to find well-paid jobs because of their circumstances and there is not a chance to purchase or rent a place suitable for residence.

Thus

, the best way to resolve the issue is determined actions of the government,

such

as allocating sufficient funds for construction of accommodation for those who is below the line of poverty and does not have own property to live in.

In addition

, authorities may provide alleviation of taxes for those businesses who build social dwellings for citizens.

However

, the public can address the problem as well by collecting money for already existed shelters or even helping to build houses for stray people.

For instance

, I discovered a project of one American couple who raise funds online and build tidy wooden houses for homeless people. Interestingly, that the cost of

this

house is around one thousand dollars, quite affordable for the public. In conclusion, I partly agree that the government should be responsible for handling scarcity of residential buildings because it has powerful financial instruments for tackling it. Meanwhile, the society can contribute in alleviating the burden of housing shortage.