-5
submitted 4 days ago by cm0002@lemmy.world to c/canada@lemmy.ca
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Arkouda@lemmy.ca -1 points 3 days ago

Keeping prices high is consistent with the policy the LPC proposed during the election.

Which policy exactly is consistent with keeping prices high?

The consolation prize of “more affordable housing” is unclear. Affordable means different things to different people, and I haven’t seen an explanation of who will get access to it.

Well if what we have currently is "unaffordable" I think it is safe to assume that "Affordable housing" means less than market.

Who do you believe will get access to it?

As someone who is trying to figure out how to afford a home, this isn’t the answer I wanted to hear.

As someone who has never had a hope of owning a home in their lifetime, you can get in line behind the people without a place to live and wait with the rest of the middle class.

[-] sbv@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 days ago

Which policy exactly is consistent with keeping prices high?

The statements around increasing supply without discussing lowering prices.

In the election platform, increasing supply was discussed separately from affordable housing.

Well if what we have currently is "unaffordable" I think it is safe to assume that "Affordable housing" means less than market

From what I've seen, "affordable housing" typically refers to government owned and managed housing that is rented out below market cost. That's consistent with the language used in the LPC election platform. Usually there is a waiting list to get it, and some sort of means test or qualification (like being homeless, etc) to get onto the list.

I'd distinguish that from making open market housing more affordable, either through rent caps, subsidies, changes to tax law, flooding the market, etc. That would lower the cost of housing on the open market.

I think that distinction is real because neither Carney nor the housing minister have said "we will make housing cheaper and more affordable". Instead, they're using Affordable Housing like a proper noun and talking around a very straightforward question.

Who do you believe will get access to it?

I don't know. I haven't seen an explanation of what the Liberals plan.

If spaces are very limited, I hope for a means test, prioritizing people on disability, or the homeless.

If spaces are kind of limited, I hope they limit it by income. Poorer people would get access first.

If it's abundant (which hasn't been promised), I hope that it would be open to all. But that seems really optimistic.

It'll be defined at some point. We'll see then.

As someone who has never had a hope of owning a home in their lifetime, you can get in line behind the people without a place to live and wait with the rest of the middle class.

I'm waiting right along with you.

this post was submitted on 14 May 2025
-5 points (41.9% liked)

Canada

9681 readers
1035 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

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

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS