this post was submitted on 23 Nov 2023
18 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

7204 readers
336 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
[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 year ago (35 children)

Just like

this meeting could have been an email

well,

this policy point could have been a search result.

In all seriousness, all levels of government are moving too slowly on housing affordability. They should be trying to reduce prices to prepandemic levels, or, even better 2010 levels.

[–] karlhungus@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago (34 children)

I think there might be a balance here that's hard to strike, every one who's in a house is going to hate loosing that value, and any politician who lowers the current value of property will have to deal with upsetting that category of voters. It seems like building more affordable houses would be better, it'll have a similar effect, but probably not as drastic.

If they put effort into making them environmentally friendly and employeed/educated people to do that we could make our country a nicer place to live. Just have to breakup the grocery conglomerates and things would be looking up

[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)

any politician who lowers the current value of property will have to deal with upsetting that category of voters

We should hold politicians to a higher standard.

Bad policies have encouraged Canadians to tie their savings to unproductive investments like real estate. Coincidentally, we have declining productivity. If our quality of life was improving, I wouldn't care, but that's declining too.

Politicians should do what's good for the country, in the long term. If they have to make unpopular decisions, they need to dress them up appropriately.

And if we are excusing our politicians for being self serving assholes, then they should consider that there's a large contingent of people upset that they can't afford to buy a house, either to get onto the real estate treadmill, or to move when their circumstances change.

[–] karlhungus@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A higher standard means ignoring voting citizens?

That seems unfair

[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It's a question of long-term prosperity. Home prices are unsustainable and an unproductive investment. Our quality of life is suffering because of this bubble.

At the same time, there's a large contingent of the electorate that's incredibly angry about being locked out of home ownership. By focusing on home owners, we're ignoring them.

[–] karlhungus@lemmy.ca 0 points 11 months ago

See my original comment:

I think there might be a balance here that's hard to strike

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (31 replies)
load more comments (31 replies)