There are severe social consequences to housing shortages in cities and only the government can solve these problems. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

It is said that the scarcity of housing will produce negative results in society. In my opinion, I believe that

governments

have the ability to handle

this

situation and to give more effective ways to make it. One of the reasons why I think that

governments

make reasonable and achievable policies to extend employment outside the

cities

.

For example

, in China, there is a tremendous density of workers has been transferred to the countryside. By imposing high taxes and encouraging cooperations to reside in their workplace around

cities

,

governments

will provide them with compensation and bonuses.

As a result

, there are many youngsters who would be attracted to relocating their housing with their workplace changed.

Thus

, the number of housing will match the needs of people in

cities

. Another reason is that

governments

are able to propel the process of public facilities being constructed effectively. Citizens would rather stay in the

cities

than in the rural areas because they have chances to enjoy advanced healthcare systems, education and conveniences.

Therefore

, the government can increase the budget to guarantee people have equal priorities regardless of their areas, which encourages them to immigrate to rural areas. The

further

step is that the population in the

cities

will get relieved, and housing storage will accommodate people who need to live in the

cities

and no longer become a social hot spot. In a nutshell, the government is responsible for housing shortages, and several steps can be taken by them to tackle

this

issue,

otherwise

, it will influence people’s normal life at large.