94
submitted 1 year ago by NightOwl@lemm.ee to c/canada@lemmy.ca
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Rocket@lemmy.ca -2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Where's the logic in that?

Houses are like cars. When you build an expensive house (or car) for someone who is rich, they leave a lower-cost used home (or car) behind, available to be filled by someone who is not so well off. The more 'unaffordable' homes you build, the more affordable homes come onto the market when the people leave their old home to move into the new home.

But the fine means that developers have to limit themselves to only the most profitable houses, which means the still pretty profitable houses, but not attractive enough once the fine is paid, go by the wayside. And, therefore, fewer affordable homes come onto the market.

Was council trying to make housing even less accessible?

[-] LeafOnTheWind@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Ah yes, trickle down house-enomics.

[-] nik282000@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

Not enough people say this, fuck Regan!

[-] Rocket@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Regan? What? Are you struggling to spell (Will) Rogers? It is he who coined 'trickle down economics' – as a joke – and it was in reference to Hoover. Regan enters the picture nowhere. He has no connection to trickle down, housing in Montreal, or anything to do with Canada at all.

[-] nik282000@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

Ronald Reagan's economic policies, dubbed "Reaganomics" by opponents, included large tax cuts and were characterized as trickle-down economics.

[-] Rocket@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Characterized by who? Trickle down economics isn't an actual thing, just a joke that made fun of Hoover's engineering background making him familiar with water tricking down, but not realizing that money 'trickles up'.

[-] LeafOnTheWind@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Trickle down economics was not a joke to Reagan (publicly anyway). His plan called for massive tax cuts to the rich so their growth would "trickle down" to everyone else through more jobs from business expansion.

A remarkably stupid idea that has only worked out for the rich...

[-] Kichae@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago

Yes, of course! If we just build luxury housing for the rich, the rich will just vacate their current luxury housing (for the rich), which will open it up for someone else! Who will be able to afford luxury housing (for the rich).

This is the thinking of someone who's never struggled to pay a bill in their life.

[-] HLB217@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

Houses are like cars. When you build an expensive house (or car) for someone who is rich, they leave a lower-cost used home (or car) behind, available to be filled by someone who is not so well off.

Except they hang on to the lower cost used home and rent it out at extortionate prices to help pay for the expensive house.

this post was submitted on 10 Oct 2023
94 points (98.0% liked)

Canada

7224 readers
383 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories


πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities


πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


πŸ’» Universities


πŸ’΅ Finance / Shopping


πŸ—£οΈ Politics


🍁 Social and Culture


Rules

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

https://lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS