Obviously its a combination of poor zoning, mass immigration, extending amortizations, the federal government buying half of all mortgage bonds, slow permitting, skyrocketing development fees.
The federal government controls 3 of those. The others aren’t as big an issue like zoning density or aren’t really sustainable like development fees given the laffer curve without the mass immigration.
This just goes to show that the market isn’t effective for providing people with housing and non-market solutions are needed.
Builders aren’t going to drive the cost of homes down, they are selling them at high prices and making a bigger profit doing so.
Why is it easier for you to question immigration levels than to question the private construction of housing?
If our food supplies weren’t keeping up with population so Loblaws made more money would you be bootlicking Loblaws or calling for the government to invest in food production?
Canada has more empty homes than unhoused people. Yes they’re not in the same places, but isn’t that another data point that the market sucks at providing housing where it’s needed?
If our food supplies weren’t keeping up with population so Loblaws made more money would you be bootlicking Loblaws or calling for the government to invest in food production?
I don’t find municipals blameless, its just their individual incentives, and some have rezoned like BC. But from a macro level it is clearly mass immigration leading to the rapid rise in prices, and thats the federal government who signs that.
Canada needs a bigger population to compete on the world stage and to defend our vast nation.
If builders or other industries can’t keep up, they need to step up or be supplemented or subverted. Canada’s population density is effectively zero. With greater military and economic threats, trying to diminish our population isn’t the way to go.
I mean, you just said it yourself. “An existing housing shortage.”
So it’s a multifaceted issues that can’t be blamed on just the Liberals or immigrants.
Sure, its supply and demand.
Obviously its a combination of poor zoning, mass immigration, extending amortizations, the federal government buying half of all mortgage bonds, slow permitting, skyrocketing development fees.
The federal government controls 3 of those. The others aren’t as big an issue like zoning density or aren’t really sustainable like development fees given the laffer curve without the mass immigration.
This just goes to show that the market isn’t effective for providing people with housing and non-market solutions are needed.
Builders aren’t going to drive the cost of homes down, they are selling them at high prices and making a bigger profit doing so.
Why is it easier for you to question immigration levels than to question the private construction of housing?
If our food supplies weren’t keeping up with population so Loblaws made more money would you be bootlicking Loblaws or calling for the government to invest in food production?
Canada has more empty homes than unhoused people. Yes they’re not in the same places, but isn’t that another data point that the market sucks at providing housing where it’s needed?
I don’t find municipals blameless, its just their individual incentives, and some have rezoned like BC. But from a macro level it is clearly mass immigration leading to the rapid rise in prices, and thats the federal government who signs that.
Canada needs a bigger population to compete on the world stage and to defend our vast nation.
If builders or other industries can’t keep up, they need to step up or be supplemented or subverted. Canada’s population density is effectively zero. With greater military and economic threats, trying to diminish our population isn’t the way to go.
Wage suppression propaganda. Meanwhile people can’t afford kids.
Once again your objections are misdirected. The leftist arguing against market solutions is probably not in favor of wage suppression, right?
Sorry can you rephrase?