this post was submitted on 18 Jun 2023
17 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

7204 readers
263 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
[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If the government does not want to get into public housing for some stupid reason, they could at least be funding and facilitating housing co-ops.

[–] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

for some stupid reason

The economy. Real estate has unfortunately became a huge part of most advanced economies, so affordable housing would be detrimental to a country's GDP growth. I'm not saying we should keep people homeless for the sake of the economy, I'm just saying that is absolutely what's happening.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I agree that real estate is expensive because the people with the most economic power want it to be expensive. Nearly every Boomer out there is counting on real estate investments (in the form of their massively overvalued houses) to see them through retirement, but that has required housing to constantly appreciate over the last 50 years. If housing were suddenly made affordable again, the state would have to support millions of wiped out Boomers whose only asset is suddenly worth no more than a shelter to sleep under.

There are any number of things a state could do to make holding real estate an unattractive investment and absolutely tank the real estate market -- which would be good for every poor person struggling to find a shelter to sleep under, and murder on entrenched capital. There's an obvious conflict of interests here. The ruling class has a "moral" incentive to make housing affordable for everyone, but they have an even stronger financial incentive not to. They are openly squeezing us exactly hard enough to get the most money out of us, no matter how many people needlessly die, no matter how many children are raised in inter-generational poverty. It's not part of the calculation, it's incidental.

[–] justhach@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"If housing were suddenly made affordable again, the state would have to support millions of wiped out Boomers who's only asset is suddenly worth no more than a shelter to sleep under."

Oh, god, the horror. Imagine if a house was just... a home shudders in investment banker