this post was submitted on 22 Aug 2023
551 points (97.7% liked)

Canada

7193 readers
477 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
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 35 points 1 year ago (3 children)

As someone who believes:

A) Housing investors collectively have made incredibly large amounts of money at cost of other Canadians.

B) Essentially every single level of government has done little to aid in housing/infrastructure developments. If not outright block them.

C) Given the other 2 issues aren't dealt with immigration is the only thing that can completely pivot overnight but we've only increased it.

I think the biggest issues is that in the last election 80% of voters seemed to think more of the same was okay. To be clear I'm talking about the people who voted for a party who's housing minister said that investor is helping the situation or the party's leader said the same or people who couldn't even be bothered to vote.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Canada's fertility rate hasn't been above the replacement rate in over 50 years and that is with immigration. It's currently at 1.4 (child per woman/family)

Nearly four-fifths of the 1.8 million population increase from 2016 to 2021 was attributable to new arrivals to Canada either as permanent or temporary immigrants

If you want to lower immigration rates, you're gonna need to increase birth rates unless you want to become the next Japan where the population is expected to halve within our lifetimes.

The issue is the supply of affordable housing, plain and simple, and there is no solution that does not involve the government intervening in the housing market in some form.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If you want to lower immigration rates, you’re gonna need to increase birth rates

The opposite is also true: if you want to see higher birth rates then housing needs to be affordable. Most Canadians require some financial stability before they start a family, and that is difficult today with the sky high housing costs.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (6 children)

The number one reason young people tell me they do not want kids these days is because they cannot afford it. Perhaps if housing was more affordable and wages weren't stagnated it wouldn't be a privledge to raise a family these days.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

While I agree the answer to the issue is the solution. As I noted it doesn't seems like people agree on the issue.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So what is wrong with a declining population, anyway?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

An increasingly aging population. Less money from taxation to fund services, decreasing standards of living, more people dependent on a decreasing number of income earners, being in a nursing home without anyone available to care for you etc

A death spiral unless we can somehow manage to grow economically to compensate but even then the social outcomes arent great either.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Note also that the Liberals have basically stated that their immigration policy is intended to suppress wages. It's not about helping refugees, or about diversity, it's about class warfare.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Yeah, the government is helping house Canadians the same way the government is helping Canadians enjoy a livable climate in the future.

[–] [email protected] 34 points 1 year ago (2 children)

50% of Airbnb in Toronto are hosted by entities of 10+ full homes. The average occupancy rate is 37 nights/year. How are we letting this happen?

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago

Numbered corporations create annoymity for these Airbnb landlords to evade taxes and encourage mortgage fraud. force real name incorporation for real estate and cities can enact punishing tax rates for these illegal hotel operators.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Source? 50% seems really low

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

http://insideairbnb.com/toronto

It's interactive. I clicked on the "full homes" and only multi listings and the number was 8600/16000.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 year ago (7 children)

You know what would go a long way? Make housing a shitty income source. Bring about heavy taxes on any additional livable property beyond the one you live in yourself. Ban all politicians from landlording - it’s a conflict of interest holding us all back. Ban corporations and foreign organizations from owning housing. You’d see a fire sale. Prices would plummet, and people who need housing would have a greater chance at it. Finally, get a fucking UBI going, and grow universal healthcare to include eye and dental care.

Enough is goddamn enough. We know who the problem is and it isn’t immigrants, it’s well-off folks taking and hoarding more than they need using their much larger disposable income and connections to take advantage of the rest of us.

There are solutions to making Canadian’s lives better, and they’ll take work and time to make happen, but this continuous pissing in the wind isn’t getting us anywhere. We can do this civilly with hard work, or we can get to a breaking point and do things like 1789 France. One way another, the bullshit has got to go.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

There's just not enough houses, though. Measurably. Banning landlords would be bad news for anyone who can't afford a mortgage downpayment.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Great news then. Banning landlords of non purpose built units, would drop prices!

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Like former office space or whatever? That's not what OP said, but encouraging repurposing is an idea worth talking about.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

No, as in single family homes. If the building was expressly built with density in mind (think triplex and above) then it's fine IMO. This reduces the land scarcity side of the equation, as well as incentivizes density.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, we could do a Castro and just nationalise all rentals, in theory. Growing a government department that plays the role of every landlord at once would be a big project, though, and of course it's not politically viable at the moment. And we'd still have a housing shortage.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Not public housing, social housing. We could seed self-owning housing coops.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Same problem as with getting a mortgage, then. A lot of people don't have the money to start or buy into such a thing.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Corporations should never be able to buy homes, they're not a commodity. I'm in the US and we have the same problem, it's fucking us over with no end in sight.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago

Immigrants have always been the punching bag of long term residents...

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago (2 children)

People from r/Canada are so pathetic and predictable that they got pissed at the article and the thread about this has already been locked.

"Why would corporations hoard housing if it wasn't for immigration?" is the main argument they use, like corporations wouldn't be attempting to profit over a basic human need in any circumstances.

This pisses me off so much.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Are white upper class Americans in their definition of immigrants? Or are they just racist and simping for big corporations lol.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago

I was researching the other day when we might expect the housing market to recover to the point where people can actually afford a house again.

Instead, what I found was lots of articles proclaiming that the housing market will "recover" by 2024. By "recover" they meant that the downward trend in $$$ is going up again. Meaning house prices going up.

It really blew my mind that there is so little concern for affordability and it's all about the investments.. So sad. Seriously considering leaving Canada at some point in the future in order to buy a house, which is nuts.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Blaming corporations is a cop-out. Small "mom and pop" landlords are just as capable of gouging their fellow Canadians for profit. At least there are real-estate corporations that build stuff instead of being purely parasitic.

And at least the corps have to pay tax on their profits. Private owners who bought when things were cheap and are now multimillionaires got all that money effort-free and tax-free thanks to the principal residence exception.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

This stinks. I'm not a landlord, I do own my own house.

And at least the corps have to pay tax on their profits

I wish i payed 15%. I'm not even counting on the rebates they get for setting up shop places, or developing "doing research". Corporations quite often do not pay their fair share. Corporations do buy up swaths of real estate.

Private owners who bought when things were cheap and are now multimillionaires got all that money effort-free and tax-free thanks to the principal residence exception.

Almost nobody got their shit effort-free, you still have to go in with the bank and pay them a shit tonne of money. Principal residence only applies to first residence, and you still have to pay taxes on your residence (I know, because I pay them).

And here's some news for you: housing was always relatively expensive, people who bought gigantic mortgages took on a whole pile of risk, made the banks rich, and sometimes came out richer for it; that doesn't make them bad.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (7 children)

How exactly do they get it tax free due to principle residence exemption?

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

The beaverton speaks truth once again!

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

As a Lemmy passer-by and one-time resident of Toronto... I almost ate the onion on this one.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Ahh, didn't know Canadians had their own version of The Onion.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

And they can't wait until we push our govt to build more homes ... So they can buy them up.

Everyone saying we need more supply is a loon. We need a reallocation of existing homes. Building more will just line these assholes' pockets.

load more comments
view more: next β€Ί