this post was submitted on 10 Jan 2024
18 points (95.0% liked)

CanadaPolitics

1892 readers
35 users here now

Placeholder for any r/CanadaPolitics refugees

Rules:

All of Lemmy.ca's rules apply

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Pxtl@lemmy.ca 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

For example, Singh wants to subsidize mortgages of people facing rising payments. This encourages rising prices since it's feeding demand instead of supply. That's trying to douse a fire with gasoline. And likewise, there are many affordable-housing builders who will tell you that the chief problem isn't funding but rather the extreme requirements city halls have made to prevent construction. You can't build public or co-op housing if City Hall says you need every building to be narrow 3-storey mayan step pyramid set back 60% from all sides of the lot.

And when we talk about that period of "like they used to"? Most of that rental housing was market-rate. A big "subsidy" was tax benefits on private landlording. The idea that Canada can build housing top-down instead of empowering the market to do it bottom-up is ridiculous since our governments' capacity to get anything done top-down has absolutely cratered.

[–] SkepticalButOpenMinded@lemmy.ca 2 points 10 months ago

I agree that subsidizing mortgages is a bad solution. The other two parties are even worse in this regard. Conservatives have proposed massively extending mortgage terms, and removing or lowering stress test requirements. Conservatives implemented many of the existing subsidies for homeowners. The Liberals introduced a brand new tax free account for housing (FHSA), which only helps those who have already maxed out their TFSA (less than 20% of the population). A tax break for the already wealthy to increase demand for housing. Idiocy. These are all way worse. So are Liberals/Conservatives even bigger idiots?

The idea that Canada can build housing top-down instead of empowering the market to do it bottom-up is ridiculous since our governments’ capacity to get anything done top-down has absolutely cratered.

The NDP obviously endorses a private housing market, so I don't know who that criticism is supposed to apply to? Do you mean there should be no public housing at all? It's not "market vs. government". It's simply delusional to think you don't need both. Every other functioning rich country, from Japan to France, Singapore to Switzerland, has public and co-op housing, including Canada. And yes, we used to build a lot more of it.

Here's the thing: like healthcare, minimal shelter isn't a choice. It's a necessity. (i.e. Demand is relatively inelastic.) So when you make it so that people cannot live without entering the housing market, it makes prices soar. Imagine if buying a house was a choice, because there's always high quality public housing if necessary. That's how it is in most Scandinavian countries. Literally no country has affordable housing provided purely by the private sector. No housing expert or major economist endorses a pure market based solution this extreme.

Alas, the sensible moderate solution of the NDP, the thing done everywhere else in the world, endorsed by experts and evidence, is seen as "unrealistic" in Canada. We are thoroughly brainwashed.