Has Carousel for the poor arrived?

Baggsy

Baggsy

Well-known member
Site Supporter
Baggsy said:
View attachment 54970

"A 51-year-old Ontario woman with severe sensitivities to chemicals chose medically-assisted death after her desperate search for affordable housing free of cigarette smoke and chemical cleaners failed, advocates say."

Woman with chemical sensitivities chose medically-assisted death after failed bid to get better housing
Click to expand...

Incredibly sad but it’s telling that two of her healthcare team are a psychiatrist and a psychotherapist. You can’t escape “chemicals”. Plastics, carpets, paints off gas for a long time. Everything is “chemicals” and many things break down over time and liberate gasses. I’ve met some people before that have complained about perfumes/cars idling etc and it’s always what they can smell, never warnings from them about issues with the chemicals they can’t smell (of which there are a lot!). Not saying it isn’t real but as In the story, there are professionals with their doubts.
 
Chuck McGill? Life imitates media so often.
Better Call Saul for those not aware. Great character.

Space_Blanket.jpg
 
I would ask one question….what did she eat? Food is chemicals and many food items have a particular odour. So many questions.
 
jc100 said:
Incredibly sad but it’s telling that two of her healthcare team are a psychiatrist and a psychotherapist. You can’t escape “chemicals”. Plastics, carpets, paints off gas for a long time. Everything is “chemicals” and many things break down over time and liberate gasses. I’ve met some people before that have complained about perfumes/cars idling etc and it’s always what they can smell, never warnings from them about issues with the chemicals they can’t smell (of which there are a lot!). Not saying it isn’t real but as In the story, there are professionals with their doubts.
Click to expand...
Agree. There aren't a lot of log cabins with moss chinking and a thatched roof available in the affordable housing pool. Even that would have chemicals, just natural ones.
 
GreyGhost said:
Agree. There aren't a lot of log cabins with moss chinking and a thatched roof available in the affordable housing pool. Even that would have chemicals, just natural ones.
Click to expand...

Oak moss is a fragrance used in perfumery. So…that’s out.
 
You can argue about whether or not her illness was psychosomatic, but not being taken seriously is likely a component of what killed this woman
 
TwistedKestrel said:
You can argue about whether or not her illness was psychosomatic, but not being taken seriously is likely a component of what killed this woman
Click to expand...
Even if she was taken seriously, I don't know what a reasonable solution is for her. Affordable housing is needed by far more people than have access to it. If the provider spent a lot of money accommodating her, that is less available to help others. As she did not appear to have conditions that would be imminently life threatening, these added costs could continue for decades. Is it better to completely accommodate one or partially accommodate two? Not an easy answer.
 
I just do not see how she could be accommodated short of a MCS only building where no chemicals, scents, smoking etc. is the deal, including from the other tenants. Otherwise it is limiting the rights of the other tenants. Even in a detached house in the city there are smells of exhaust, chemicals, people smoking etc. from outside, just an open window away. And of course off gassing from building materials in anything new or renovated.

Tragic, but sometimes there is no practical solution to a problem at this extreme, maybe a bubble boy type deal? It is likely a situation where her family needed to somehow step up...which is not always possible or they have given up.
 
Last edited:
TwistedKestrel said:
You can argue about whether or not her illness was psychosomatic, but not being taken seriously is likely a component of what killed this woman
Click to expand...

The tragedy is that she likely wasn’t being taken seriously by any side in this. The mental health side (which is severely underfunded) and the physical health side (which tends to shunt these cases off to the mental health component). It’s just about the worst catch 22 there is.
 
Government owns a bunch of semi detached houses near where I grew up. The one I'm most familiar with, hasn't really had a "poor" family in it, since I was around 20. That family had 7+ children, a stay at home mom, and a father that had had an accident at work. Most occupants since then, have had some "in" with the government. Teachers, Municipal workers etc. One family had four cars. The maintenance work done on them doesn't seem that great, and requires frequent repair. e.g. siding peeled off within two years. Still they've all been worth millions of dollars for the last few years. A subsidized apartment we tried to get into had all nice luxury cars parked out back. They wanted 275/month for a 2 bedroom at a time when we were paying over 800 for a 1 bedroom. Rumor has it that med. school students would move in and then stay after they graduated. Super didn't have any issues with the tenants, and the tenants were happy with the rent.

In this case, could they have sealed her air off from the rest of the building, and then put a small air conditioner into the wall?

p.s. The story says a new person has applied for the same type of reason.
 
With the move to larger scale work from home does it open up more employment options (call centre work for example) to help some people get off of ODSP? It obviously cannot be for everyone depending on the disability but there has to be a good number of people that can do it, freeing up resources for those in greater need?
 
backmarkerducati said:
With the move to larger scale work from home does it open up more employment options (call centre work for example) to help some people get off of ODSP? It obviously cannot be for everyone depending on the disability but there has to be a good number of people that can do it, freeing up resources for those in greater need?
Click to expand...
I doubt it. Many large companies offered home-based work as part of their inclusion policies long before the pandemic started, particularly call centers and electronic processing. ODSP is typically delivered to those with severe disabilities, either mental or physical, that interfere with their ability to work even with considerable workplace accommodations.
 
backmarkerducati said:
With the move to larger scale work from home does it open up more employment options (call centre work for example) to help some people get off of ODSP? It obviously cannot be for everyone depending on the disability but there has to be a good number of people that can do it, freeing up resources for those in greater need?
Click to expand...
I doubt it. Folks on ODSP probably won't make reliable employees even with wfh
 
Baggsy said:
View attachment 54970

"A 51-year-old Ontario woman with severe sensitivities to chemicals chose medically-assisted death after her desperate search for affordable housing free of cigarette smoke and chemical cleaners failed, advocates say."

Woman with chemical sensitivities chose medically-assisted death after failed bid to get better housing
Click to expand...
My guess is the rationale for this was not inadequate housing -- more likely some comorbidity -- probably anxiety, depression or some form of mental illness.
 
Interesting development. Old policy was for every dollar of monthly income over $200, 50 cents would be clawed back. New policy is for every dollar over $1000 of monthly income, 25 cents gets clawed back. Seems like a decent policy to allow those that can work to work and improve their lives. They are predicting less than 10% of ODSP recipients will take advantage of program.

The shocking part to me was almost 500,000 people in Ontario on ODSP. wtf. Needs to be a serious audit and clean up that list. That's 3% of the population. Seems high. Of those, it looks like only 25,000 were reporting monthly employment income over $200. Seems awfully low.

I didn't look at the published program costs but with 500K people at $1,227 a month, that is ~$7.3B a year for ODSP. Libs/NDP/Green all promised to double it if elected. I agree that $1,227 a month sucks, but I doubt any of them considered where to come up with another $7.3B a year. It's easy to make promises when you don't need to pay the bills.

www.cp24.com

Toronto, Canada and Global Breaking News – CP24

Most recent News News business news stories and video from CP24
www.cp24.com www.cp24.com
 
GreyGhost said:
Interesting development. Old policy was for every dollar of monthly income over $200, 50 cents would be clawed back. New policy is for every dollar over $1000 of monthly income, 25 cents gets clawed back. Seems like a decent policy to allow those that can work to work and improve their lives. They are predicting less than 10% of ODSP recipients will take advantage of program.

The shocking part to me was almost 500,000 people in Ontario on ODSP. wtf. Needs to be a serious audit and clean up that list. That's 3% of the population. Seems high. Of those, it looks like only 25,000 were reporting monthly employment income over $200. Seems awfully low.

I didn't look at the published program costs but with 500K people at $1,227 a month, that is ~$7.3B a year for ODSP. Libs/NDP/Green all promised to double it if elected. I agree that $1,227 a month sucks, but I doubt any of them considered where to come up with another $7.3B a year. It's easy to make promises when you don't need to pay the bills.

www.cp24.com

Toronto, Canada and Global Breaking News – CP24

Most recent News News business news stories and video from CP24
www.cp24.com www.cp24.com
Click to expand...
A bit of a side shift but on a trip to Amish country in Ohio I talked to an Amish farmer. He clarified that they pay taxes but resent it because they take care of their own.
Forum Sponsor
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom