this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2023
113 points (93.1% liked)

Canada

7203 readers
158 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
[–] alvvayson@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (4 children)

So Canada has 38 million people and 16 million houses, about 2.4 people per house. Average household size in Canada is 2.5, so there is some slack to allow for second homes and vacancy.

Perhaps more houses are needed in the areas where people want to live, but it doesn't seem like that big of a shortage.

[–] saigot@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

that seems a bit self fulfilling, most people aren't homeless, so of course the average household size is greater than the number of people per house. That doesn't mean that they are in a happy or affordable position.

[–] alvvayson@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

That's exactly my point.

It's not about a lack of houses in general, but a lack of housing in specific places and a lack of affordability in housing.

And yeah, facts have a way of being kind of obvious when you look at the figures.

[–] RandAlThor@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I wonder how many of these are vacation homes or air b&b rentals that sit idle for most of the year?

[–] Powerpoint@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Up to 30% of Canadians are domestic speculators. Doesn't matter how much we build when people just buy it up to increase their portfolio. We need a ban on this activity or a very very heavy tax to force them to sell.

https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/speculators-30-homeowners-provinces-statscan-143600364.html?_guc_consent_skip=1694666705

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

You're working under assumption most homes have people.living in them...

[–] RehRomano@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 year ago

That is a 100% indisputably correct assumption. Vacancy taxes worked where they've been implemented to incentivize the occupancy of empty homes and the overwhelming majority of homes have people living in them.

[–] Rocket@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Just one house too few is enough to create an endless bidding war.

[–] alvvayson@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

No... one house too few can also mean two people somewhere have to become roommates, or a couple that wants to separate holds on a little longer, or someone lives with their parents, or etc etc.