this post was submitted on 30 Jun 2026
10 points (91.7% liked)

CanadaPolitics

3298 readers
17 users here now

Placeholder for any r/CanadaPolitics refugees

Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.
  2. Has to be relevant to Canadian politics.

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

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I've heard that Mark Carney wants to 'bail out developers'. It looks to me more like David Eby wants to help out people who can't afford to buy a first home---but then spin, vibes, and ideology got involved. :-(

https://open.substack.com/pub/billhulet/p/trying-to-talk-about-housing?r=4ot1q2&showWelcomeOnShare=true

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] CloudwalkingOwl@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Of course people could believe that intensification will lower their property values, but from what I've read it usually increases the value of properties. When I hear these guys talk, however, I think it isn't about the money--it's just they are afraid of change. I can understand that, as there's no 'do over' once the developers start building. I agree, however, that it ultimately comes down to the provinces---even though toads like Poilievre will go to great lengths to blame it all on the federal Liberals.

As for equity financing, I suppose boomers know it as a 'reverse mortgage'--from the television adverts. It strikes me this only happens because of the weird situation we currently find ourselves in because zoning won't allow cities (if they wanted) to build enough housing. Without the lack of supply, houses would cost less, so there's less incentive to loam money to owners. It's true the provinces have the last word, but I've had some weird conversations with 'progressive NDP' council members in the city where I used to live who refused to even consider allowing having enough housing for everyone as one of the city's official plan criteria. I also have read that councils often move heaven-and-earth to get around reforms that were supposed to increase density--effectively sabotaging the province when it tries to do something right.

Frankly, the housing issue has made me somewhat bitter about the so-called 'progressives' I meet.

[โ€“] GreenBeard@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago

Well, allow me to be the first "progressive" you met that thinks the housing situation is absurd. I too am sick of people who acknowledge it's become a vicious cycle of property speculation leading to people afraid to upset the apple cart, then pass laws that make it worse. And I'm a 40 year old homeowner, so not exactly the demographic with the most to gain from fixing it, personally. I won't bore you with my policy ideas about how to deflate the market without sending us into a financial crisis, I find most people stop trying to listen when they see the "public housing" part of it, even if I point out it's revenue net neutral and ultimately doesn't cost the taxpayer a dime (unlike the moderate liberal plan). Unfortunately I'm about as charismatic as a boot upside the head, so I know better than to run for office.

The one time a progressive actually did try to fix the zoning problem here in Calgary the recall petitions started flying around the next day and they ran her out of office so fast you'd think she had personally kicked every single dog in the city.