this post was submitted on 02 Aug 2023
63 points (94.4% liked)

Canada

7134 readers
233 users here now

What's going on Canada?

Communities

🍁 Meta

🗺️ Provinces / Territories

🏙️ Cities / Regions

🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer

💻 Universities

💵 Finance / Shopping

🗣️ Politics

🍁 Social & 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
[email protected]
63
Trudeau says feds aren't primarily responsible for housing, but how responsible are they? (www.cbc.ca)
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
40 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Experts say Ottawa's role in housing sector has grown (Richard Raycraft · CBC News)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

end single family exclusionary zoning, incentivize and fast-track new developments to start gently densifying into missing middle townhouses and multiplexes

Why do we even need to do this? The population didn't magically triple in the last 5 years. We should not have run out of housing this fast, so where did it all go?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because its a limitation of personal property rights and freedom. Why can't I as a property owner turn my single family home into a ground level cafe/bakery with 4 units above if I have the capital? It's a government overstep that limits our supply, artificially increasing demand and cost, and gets in the way of entrepreneurship. Having relative freedom over property usage was only something recently taken away in the last 80 or so years due to racist white flight to the suburbs.

While populations hasn't tripled in the last 5 or so years, we are experiencing growth pains that investors and speculators are taking advantage of limited supply, and relying on the fact we will have limited supply for some time to come as long as the zoning stays as the status quo.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Cramming people into tiny apartments is not a solution to this problem. Clawing back all the property that's been gobbled up by “investors” over the last few years, and then selling it at a reasonable price to people who will actually live in it, is a solution to this problem.

And spare me your complaints about “entrepreneurship” and “government overstep”. There's nothing innovative about house hoarding and rent seeking.

Every working family should have the ability to own a house with a yard for the kids to play in, as my family did when I was young. That's the minimum acceptable standard of living for a developed nation. Not being packed like sardines into tiny apartments. This is not the Soviet Union.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We can't keep bulldozing farm land and natural ecosystems to build tax payer subsidized, non eco friendly single family suburban homes anymore. Families can live and do live very comfortably in missing middle sub 6 story low rise duplexes, triplexes, townhomes, and multiplexes. All of which can be built up on existing property at the will and freedom of property owners. https://www.canadianarchitect.com/editorial-finding-the-missing-middle/

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Then why did real estate prices skyrocket only in the last few years? Why do they affect multi-family housing equally? I'm paying nearly USD2000 per month for one apartment in a building with dozens. 15 years ago, I paid only USD725 per month for a larger apartment in the same area.

Land scarcity is not the problem. It's a distraction from the problem, no doubt perpetuated by the people causing the problem. Stop letting them deceive you.

And no, there's nothing comfortable about living under the tyrannical whims of a building manager and not being able to let your pets roam outside. That is a dramatic decrease in quality of life, it is not necessary, and it is not acceptable.