What's going on Canada?
🍁 Meta
🗺️ Provinces / Territories
🏙️ Cities / Local Communities
Sorted alphabetically by city name.
🏒 Sports
Hockey
Football (NFL): incomplete
Football (CFL): incomplete
Baseball
Basketball
Soccer
💻 Schools / Universities
Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.
💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales
🗣️ Politics
🍁 Social / Culture
Rules
Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca
I don't mean to single this post out because I'm bringing it up since it happens a lot.
But why do we keep having these housing talks that have no basis of reality. Specifically isn't it almost universally believed that if the government thought something they passed would noticeably lower housing prices it be repealed by the end of the week.
It's like going into a personal finance space and 90% is what would you do if you won the lottery.
Because the answer to "how do I make my headaches go away" is "stop punching yourself in the face," and while that advice may never be acted on, it doesn't mean it's not correct or shouldn't be stated repeatedly until either the message sinks in or the patient dies.
I watched a video about how many progressive movements was at one point lofty dreams before they became reality which somewhat swayed my belief in how things can be campaigned politically.
In itself I do there's space for this, but it seems like it's shoving things that'll more conducive on getting movement on the issue like voting reform to the side. Or in your analogy a lot of the people in Canada want the patient dead and the current system caters to them, so having these theoretical discussions about how we could keep them alive doesn't change that. We either need to change those people beliefs or change the way politics work.
why do we keep having these housing talks that have no basis of reality
Which part has no basis in reality?
isn't it almost universally believed that if the government thought something they passed would noticeably lower housing prices it be repealed by the end of the week
I'm not sure that's the case. Boomers are a shrinking demographic. The proportion of the population who thinks they'll never own a home is growing. In that environment, I can see a growing appetite for legislation that would lower housing cost.
Incidentally, a great way to do that is with tax reform, which could instantly remove some of the heat from the market. It doesn't always have to be big spending.
ban MPs from owning or investing in realestate beyond a singular primary residence, and a non rental secondary residence. same goes for premiers and PMs. once you become an MP you have to live in your riding full time. if necessary you will have to sell property in order to become a public servant
outright ban corporate ownership of single family homes and condominiums.
give renters ownership rights over the properties they rent, they get a return based on how much of the mortgage was paid for by their rent, adjusted with inflation. if you buy a house for 200k, and sell it for 600k, and the tenant paid for 100k while they stayed there, they should get 300k as a return. fair is fair. you do not get to be rich because you signed a few papers and let someone work a whole ass career on your behalf to pay your mortgage for you.
homes are meant to be lived in, they are not investments. we need to completely gut and remove any and all incentive to treat them as such.
immediate rental freezes. when you sign a rental agreement, you cannot increase the amount of rent paid until the tenant willfully leaves on their own volition, or within a 5 year period. whchever comes first. if it is the same tenant, and they decide to stay, you have to perform any requested upgrades or repairs by the tenant, if you decide not to, you do not get to increase the rental price for the next five years, if they decide to stay. any recorded hostility by a landlord towards a tenant in hopes of removing the tenant and increasing the rent price for the next tenant results in a permanent ban from renting out properties. period. even if you wish to raise the rent, you can only raise it by 0.4% per year since the last contract was signed.
"but Alloi, that doesnt keep up with inflation!"
i know. when you offer someone the favour of letting them live on one of your properties, it is becaus eyou are doing it out of the kindness of your heart. not for profit.
"but Alloi! people will go hungry! retirees wont be able to support themselves"
not my fuckin problem, tenants starve to pay the rent, retirees become homeless because they cant afford rent on a pension.
if you are a landlord driven by the idea of a "passive income" that comes off the backs of people who actually contribute to society. then you are a subhuman, parasite. and deserve zero pity. you tied yourself to a sinking ship, so sink with it.