this post was submitted on 29 Nov 2024
105 points (97.3% liked)

Canada

7275 readers
375 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

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


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 13 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Fwiw, rent control is fully insufficient - what you need is a completely massive supply of affordable housing built, owned and operated by the public. Nothing short of this will make a dent

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Also prohibit the use of houses for ~~scalping~~ speculation and investment

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

This is only really a thing in a paradigm of housing scarcity. Can't speculate on houses if houses are not abnormally rising in prices year over year.

The housing scarcity is the root cause, and is most effectively addressed by the aforementioned method

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 weeks ago

De Beers enters the chat

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

Non purpose built for rental homes should be limited to one per person. Any more than that should be hit with cumulative tax rates for each home past the first until such time as it is no longer profitable to hoard them.

Not saying people can't own multiple homes. It just shouldn't be so disgustingly profitable. If it's not profitable, prices adjust accordingly.

[–] fourish 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

So problem will never be solved then. Far too much vested interest in the status quo from existing landowners.

Nobody is going to build “affordable housing” unless you like living 10 hours commute from major cities. And as soon as someone builds a bullet train to shorten the commute to an hour the prices will skyrocket.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I'd advise you to avoid defeatism. This is a policy that has historically been implemented in various countries, and it can be done again if pushed for enough from the voting population.

Step one is identifying the correct solution, which we've now established. Step two is to spread the word about it.

[–] fourish 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

So I’m going to put it a different way that you absolutely won’t appreciate but is the truth.

I’m a homeowner (single detached) that has a significant mortgage. Anything that happens to lower prices is going to negatively impact me so I don’t want change to bring property prices down now, but to have them go up as high as possible so I can sell down the road and make money.

That’s what you’re dealing with. It’s not defeatism, it’s people actively voting against and impeding stuff that will go in the direction you seem to think people want. Many do not want change in that direction at all.

Preparing for downvotes from those who don’t like cold hard truth.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

Right, so I think it's important that you understand that I'm in the very same boat - I have a mortgage and declining property values affect me quite negatively as well.

We can't let that be a reason to perpetuate this system that leaves so many homeless and so many more in what essentially amounts to indentured servitude in the face of ever-increasing housing costs.

We'll probably have to do some form of soft landing for the average person with a mortgage in order to not make the transition a disaster for them, but it still has to happen.