Post #3702244

2026-07-09 20:08 UTC

@thetyee@mstdn.ca explains another bailout for the wealthy: yesterday’s speculators now see their positions secured, paid for, in effect, by the public And if we wanted affordable housing, maybe we'd keep a requirement for it? Burnaby and Vancouver are removing another powerful lever for maintaining affordability by removing inclusionary zoning, which requires some percentage of below market units within projects. Imperfect as it’s been, this was one of the few mechanisms that required new market projects to deliver a share of somewhat more affordable units. It takes an implausible neoliberal contortion to say that removing the requirement to build affordable housing will lead to housing that's affordable. If the past is any guide, ... land prices rise to neutralize the supposed cost savings. New units will remain expensive and the gap between housing costs and local incomes widens. Developers will still make their margins. Land speculators will collect their unearned gains. Ordinary households see little relief. https://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2026/07/09/No-One-Discussing-This-Bigger-Condo-Bailout/?utm_source=mastodon&utm_campaign=grassroots #CDNPoli #Canada #housing #affordability

Replies (2)

@datum@zeroes.ca 2026-07-09 20:20

It's hard to avoid overquoting https://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2026/07/09/No-One-Discussing-This-Bigger-Condo-Bailout/?utm_source=mastodon&utm_campaign=grassroots from @thetyee@mstdn.ca . Highly recommend reading the whole thing if you're affected by city living costs in Canada. We have tried the supply-only, deregulation-first approach for years. It has produced record construction in some periods and record unaffordability in the same places. The dirt under the building continues to inflate faster than incomes. Halving development charges and gutting inclusionary zoning will not break that cycle. It will merely subsidize and protect the participants who have profited most from it. and the author does offer sensible suggestions: Increased density or reduced charges should be granted only in exchange for substantial, permanent affordability — through strong inclusionary requirements, public land trusts or direct capture of land lift to fund non-market housing. #Canada #CNDPoli #Politics #housing

Open ##3702243
@pinhman@humanwords.party 2026-07-09 20:46

@datum@zeroes.ca @thetyee@mstdn.ca The unanswered (deliberately ignored) question in Canada’s housing affordability crisis , Limited profit housing entities These are a vehicle to create and maintain not-for-profit housing, offer a range of economic supports and keep established not-for-profit housing out of the speculative housing market. Why is there virtually nothing about this in Canada? Good limited profit housing policy could establish collaborations between business groups, municipalities, worker labour groups that would all benefit from lower housing costs. But the for profit housing industry has a well funded voice and significant political clout (remember the B.C. Liberal/United, taken out by BC construction industry). Every landlord MP is in a conflict of interest https://www.housinginternational.coop/resources/ciriec-working-paper-the-system-of-limited-profit-housing-in-austria-cost-rents-revolving-funds-and-economic-impacts/ https://www.landlordmps.ca/

Open ##3703210