this post was submitted on 28 Feb 2024
5 points (85.7% liked)

Canada

7206 readers
476 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories


πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities


πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


πŸ’» Universities


πŸ’΅ Finance / Shopping


πŸ—£οΈ Politics


🍁 Social and Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

"I don't want to eat anymore. I just want to pass as soon as possible," said Bouchard. "I'm not going to do that, but that's the way I feel."

The 91 year old lady really just said "guess I'll die" when told her rent was going from $2,400 per month to $3,400

[–] Poutinetown@lemmy.ca 2 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Why was her rent 2400 in the first place?

[–] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

It's a retirement residence, and from their site it looks like housekeeping and meals are included in the price. They also have packages including nursing care which are much more expensive. The article says one lady was paying $4,700 a month and is now expected to pay $7,000.

The reason they can jack the price up is because they're claiming the fee increases are from the housekeeping, meals, staff, etc. Not the actual rent, which has increases limited by law.

[–] Poutinetown@lemmy.ca 2 points 8 months ago

This is pretty crazy. If they are making those claims they should prove in court that there was a proportional increase (60% salary increase, 60% increase in supply cost)

[–] FMT99@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Now Lemmy has to decide, who do we hate more? Boomers or landlords?

[–] jadero@lemmy.ca 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Why not both? As a boomer myself (b. 1956), I'm confidently overconfident in saying that, at 91, she's actually too old to be a boomer. Less confidently, she missed being a boomer by about 10 years.