Yes it is the solution. We need family sized homes near transit corridors. We did this in the post war period. Most of our boomers benefit from post war federal government involvement in building housing. We stopped in the 90s and now look at us.
The condos were shoebox investments, not real housing. Good they are losing money. We need livable homes.
There is lots of academic evidence making affordable housing more readily available improves social and economic outcomes for individuals, like Scandinavia does. Dont know why you are vilifying public housing. You half-talk as if the free market can solve it if we somehow stimulate the market to build more, but make sure the rich dont do that? Doesn’t sound practical.
I’m not sure what you mean by “make sure the rich don’t do that”. I’m saying a lot of residential real estate was bought up for the purposes of renting. That effectively reduces the supply of available housing for purchase, which drives up prices.
Public housing can have a place in a well functioning economy but it’s not sufficient by itself and I haven’t heard Avi suggest anything beyond that.
But we do want more housing. Weird criticism.
Building more housing is not the solution when we have hundreds of thousands of condos and homes sitting empty on speculation.
Lewis needs to get his head out of his ass.
Yes it is the solution. We need family sized homes near transit corridors. We did this in the post war period. Most of our boomers benefit from post war federal government involvement in building housing. We stopped in the 90s and now look at us.
The condos were shoebox investments, not real housing. Good they are losing money. We need livable homes.
No, we need to prevent rich people and corporations from hogging all the real estate, and we need to stimulate economic growth.
Granted, Carney isn’t doing enough on the first point but Avi’s solution is like constantly pouring water into a cup that has a hole in it.
There is lots of academic evidence making affordable housing more readily available improves social and economic outcomes for individuals, like Scandinavia does. Dont know why you are vilifying public housing. You half-talk as if the free market can solve it if we somehow stimulate the market to build more, but make sure the rich dont do that? Doesn’t sound practical.
I’m not sure what you mean by “make sure the rich don’t do that”. I’m saying a lot of residential real estate was bought up for the purposes of renting. That effectively reduces the supply of available housing for purchase, which drives up prices.
Public housing can have a place in a well functioning economy but it’s not sufficient by itself and I haven’t heard Avi suggest anything beyond that.