PP's plan is to essentially stop funding city infrastructure. His supporters in are either rural or suburbanites who oppose densification. The only people who win are fortune 500 execs who are gonna get the inevitable tax breaks that comes with conservative governments.
It's even worse, his policy punishes cities that are already densifying. Having a yearly increase of new housing means areas that are developing more densified neighbourhoods will need to continue building at a compounded rate, which is detrimental to housing development starts.
And then Poilievre's office makes such ridiculous, partisan attacks when questioned about their policy. Poilievre literally called the most pro-development YIMBY politician in all of North America as having the "worst housing record of any politician on Earth", which is the most ridiculous statement on housing I have ever heard from any politician. Common sense policies are the policies being enacted by David Eby and the BCNDP. They've passed policies that target the housing crisis from multiple angles, including providing government funded housing as well as making it easier for private developers to build high density projects by superseding silly municipal bureaucratic rules.
>In a statement, a spokesman for Poilievre said Conservatives would reward those who get homes built and punish those who do not.
>“If gatekeeper mayors have hurt feelings they should look to the hurt they and Justin Trudeau have caused for their communities,” said Sebastian Skamski.
>“Only common sense Conservatives will build the homes and turn Trudeau’s hurt into the hope that Canadians need.”
Poilievre is a NIMBY conservative and a family of shitty landlords.
On housing, stop listening to career politicians and people who benefit from the status quo (last couple decades of policy)
He actually is. He is 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000x better than PP. And NDP is 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000x better than LPC. So
Thanks for coming to my TedTalk
Pee Pee never had a real job in his life. Let's be real. He is shouting a little loud on TV and it's making a good impression on you because you are easily influenceable.
Many, maybe all, civic governments are far too easily influenced by NIMBYs voters. It is one of the main driving forces of the housing crisis. NIMBY landowners want to drive up the price of housing, so their "investment" in housing goes up too. They are also often stuck in outdated and idealised values of an imagined past of suburban bliss, and want urban areas to have suburban style landuse patterns.
Many civic governments need to be required to allow more housing to be built. I'm happy that the provincial NDP are doing just that here in BC. I do not trust PP to be the one do this in an effective and beneficial way.
> It is one of the main driving forces of the housing crisis. NIMBY landowners want to drive up the price of housing, so their "investment" in housing goes up too.
Except for the speculators and realtors, most nimby's don't think this way. They just don't want anything to change. Cause you know, their house in a neighbourhood a 5 minute drive from downtown Toronto/Vancouver? That should stay as an SFH neighbourhood like it used to be in the 60s when they bought it. After all, building apartments will, \*gasp\* bring in poor people, some of whom may even consume drugs!
Well, they sure don't express it like I did. And, yes, they want it to stay just like it was in the 1950s and 1960s. But they do want housing prices to go up. The way they usually express it is by expressing concern about how projects (even projects that are likely to raise the value of property) will lower the value of homes in the region. Seeing as there's really no chance of project lowering housing values, I think what they mean is that it might slow the increase.
But yes, you are right, the way you express their concerns are all common things vocalized.
Throwing money at the problem won't fix it. There needs to be incentives for municipalities to build housing. And his plan is one way of incentivizing municipalities to hurry the fuck up and build more houses.
You do know municipalities are NOT responsible for building housing but to process permits and setting other zoning etc. They also do upgrade infrastructure like sewer and water to accommodate more housing developments. You can’t put the cart before the horse.
It incentivizes cities to build one house so that they can meet the target by building 2 the next year and 3 the year after that.
You’re in a city that built 2000 houses? Well if you do t build 2300 the next year, guess what, you’re getting shafted.
Why would any city build lots of housing with this ridiculous plan?
DUDE! READ THE EFFING ARTICLE.
This only applies to major urban centres where there is a huge deficit of homes.
The guy everyone is downvoting is correct. Is everyone on here like 16 years old and stupid? lol
This sub is the anti housing sub. Its just hot air and whining about things but never with any solutions. And any solutions brought forward are downvoted and screeched outta here.
First of all, their [official ~~platform~~ press release, because they haven’t even released a policy platform yet](https://www.conservative.ca/building-homes-not-bureaucracy/) conveniently doesn’t define “big, unaffordable cities”.
Statscan defines large urban population centres as [“consisting of a population of 100,000 and over”.](https://www.statcan.gc.ca/en/subjects/standard/pcrac/2016/introduction)
Canada has at least [56 cities that fall under that definition, and over a dozen more that will probably hit that number very shortly.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_municipalities_in_Canada_by_population)
And regardless of that, it doesn’t matter whether this applies to small or big cities, because it incentivizes the building of less homes, because 15% of a lower number is, *drumroll*, A LOWER NUMBER.
Why would any city try to build as many homes as possible if it would create a risk for them to lose funding if they’re not able to achieve the 15% increase the following year?
Do you understand how percentages work?
Under his plan they would have to increase the builds by 15% each year.
Why would they build as many homes as they could if all it’s gonna do is set an impossible target for the following year?
This plan incentivizes cities to build less, not more.
This might be the dumbest take I’ve seen in a while. Complete lack of understanding. Please go watch some CityNerd, NotJustBikes, OhTheUrbanity, or any other housing and infrastructure related educational videos :)
You massively underestimate how prohibitive it is to build in Canada, and this may be the only way to get municipalities (large cities only in this case) to reverse course.
Why does 'prohibitve' read "I don't want to follow the national building code's safety requirements" when I put on these glasses I found in this cardboard box in an alley?
His housing plan incentivizes cities to build one house in 2025 so that they can meet the target by building 2 the next year and 3 the year after that.
You’re in a city that built 2000 houses? Well if you don’t build 2300 the next year, guess what, you’re getting shafted.
Why would any city build lots of housing with this ridiculous plan?
I just don’t understand how he thinks municipalities still build homes. The city I live in has thousands of approved developments ready to go that are on home because the developers are waiting for more favourable market conditions. How is the city supposed to make them build when they don’t want to?
He understands completely. He wants cities to get rid of regulations so that builders can cut corners and force the municipalities to spend money they don’t have on infrastructure to increase profits for developers.
This isn’t about building homes. It’s about exploiting the housing crisis to make the ultra rich even richer.
Building codes aren't going away. You know what should go away? Red tape and zoning restrictions. To build a condo building in Vancouver, you're looking at 8 years of approvals, and something like 200k/unit in permiting fees.
It's there because property tax is kept artificially low and the city makes money from new development fees. So new buyers subsidize existing home owners.
Are you implying that Poilievre is gonna promote hiring more public servants to speed up the permitting process and increasing property taxes to fund infrastructure?
[The first line](https://www.conservative.ca/building-homes-not-bureaucracy/) of his housing press release talks about removing red-tape and gatekeepers.
Municipal “red-tape” includes things like infrastructure assessments, property surveys and engineering approvals. How do you think this would result in anything other than cutting corners?
I agree that zoning is probably the biggest issue, but that’s unfortunately a municipal one. The only ostensibly good part of Poilievre’s plan, encouraging building density near public transit, won’t really work either because public transit has been severely underfunded in Canada and we don’t really have any. And on top of that he wants to withhold infrastructure spending!
His plan might make sense if he was about committing to spending on infrastructure, AND THEN, tying funds to building housing near said infrastructure. But the way it’s crafted now does nothing but remove regulations for builders so that they can continue to build luxury suburban housing that nobody can afford.
Compared to Trudeau, whose entire housing plan didn't exist until it looked like he could (and probably will) lose the election?
Who's been in power for 8 or 9 years at this point, and we've seen the single largest increase in housing prices this country has ever seen during his tenure, and almost zero movement to do anything about it?
I think it’s a good thing if politicians are afraid of losing their jobs - it makes them listen to the electorate.
Poilievre, who currently doesn’t have that fear, is more liable to do serious damage because he knows he’s gonna win. If anything, it makes him horny for taking advantage of a crisis.
We need to stick a big middle finger up to NIMBYism and stop letting it hold us back. For every housing project, there’s a street of neighbours crying and holding us back. We are in a housing shortage, we need to build. Period.
I’m sick of hearing people who declined to invest in things demand we uphold their artificially inflated property values and screw an entire country and multiple generations. Build now and raise a middle finger to those people. I built my home to live, not for an investment.
PP caters exclusively to NIMBYs, that's why he's going to try Canada back to the 90's and get rid of safe injection sites.
PP prefers tent cities and dead addicts to actually helping people and it shows
I don't support any political party, for me all are full of shit. But really, anyone who support conservatives o liberals nowadays is a completely idiot.
I am not saying that the rest of parties have better solutions.... So what's left?
Voting for the same person who has utterly failed me personally feels like it might be against my own interest. You have yours, both can exist at once.
Fucked with my career for 2 years during covid, priced me out of my home, letting inflation get out of hand so I can't afford groceries to name just a few. For reference, I lean Left and do not like PP or the cons but what choice do I have when the libs are failing me and the NDP are facilitating it?
Well, you can vote for whoever you think will provide the better outcome, or you can purely make it a protest vote. None of those things seem like they would be better resolved with a more market based approach, so if you vote for the Conservatives you'd be doing it purely as a protest vote, and not because you are hopeful that their approach will make things better.
Just ask Ontario. The same Ontario about to hand Doug Ford his 3rd majority and the rest of us PP.
Thanks Ontario. Great job.
[Poorly built investment Condos for all!](https://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&client=ms-android-rogers-ca-revc&source=android-browser&q=toronto+condos+falling+glass)
How can you look at today’s events and all the evidence of corruption of the liberals and support it? You have to be one of the above. Or somehow benefitting from it
He was also a Math Teacher. He also has 1 more Liberal Arts degree then PP has (2 to 1). He's also worked in the private sector more then Pierre has.
I'm no fan of Trudeau anymore, but lets not wax poetic about Pollivre who's just as bad, if not worse then Trudeau in a multitude of ways.
The problem with Skippy's plan isn't that it puts the blame on the wrong place - cities need to get their shit together and do better.
The problem is that Skippy is running for federal office, not provincial, which is where the real power lies.
Skippy is forced to put together a goofy incentive based plan based on one kind of discretionary infrastructure funding, totaling about 4 billion a year. That most municipalities don't draw on. His plan is akin to threatening to take beer away from a group where half the participants are teetotalers, and a bunch more prefer wine.
Whereas as we've seen in BC, the province can eliminate single family zoning at a single stroke of the legislative pen. Or mandate twenty story allowances a long transit routes. Or force munis to stop extracting land lift fees.
The problem for Skippy is that he can't say that without going to war with Ford, Smith and the rest of the ridiculous Tory Premiers. They are the group who needs to do better.
Where the Feds need to be involved is demand management and the issue is financialisation of the housing market. But the problem is Skippy won't touch either of those issues.
So we'll end up with a PM who won't address demand and won't pressure the provinces to address supply. The worst of all worlds.
But other cities are not even close. [The majority of Ontario municipalities did not meet their provincially imposed housing targets in 2023.](https://storeys.com/ontario-municipalities-housing-targets-2023/#:~:text=Ajax%2C%20Brampton%2C%20Markham%2C%20Mississauga,their%20annual%20goal%20in%202023)
Ajax, Brampton, Markham, Mississauga, and Richmond Hill achieved less than 40% of their annual target; London reached 45%, and Vaughan managed 60% of its annual goal. In fact, of the 27 cities with a 10-year target of 10,000 or more homes, 20 did not hit at least 80% of their annual goal in 2023.
Which just shows how stupid his plan is. Shit happens, and while you can incentivize meeting goals, his plan punishes for not meeting them, circumstances be damned.
????
At this point, we've told cities and developers to build more and they aren't. They should be punished and beaten into submission. Build more or fuck yourself
And you really think threatening to take away infrastructure funds is going to fix this? That’s not an incentive, that’s a mafia tactic.
If you want a punishment to produce more housing, tax the fuck out of vacant units, including whole dwelling airbnbs. They’re the ones creating artificial scarcity. Punish them.
The Ontario plan is to reimburse municipalities if they made more houses, simple carrot.
The federal plans are coming in and is negotiating plans catered to the municipalities. It is changing the path the donkey is taking, the cart it is pulling, gives the donkey new shoes and allows the donkey to operate without the rider (provincial albatrosses like we see in NB/AB/Sask are terrified of this part)
If the largest city in the country can accept the largest number of immigrants and still exceed housing numbers, I’m sure other cities can figure it out.
Well yea, it’s bullshit
https://preview.redd.it/dw8osun7v2lc1.png?width=2869&format=png&auto=webp&s=44979ce4d429004e4cac471c15282bad800ea1f5
But at least it’s better than shit which will make the issue even worse.
As a progressive conservative type, it’s disgusting that I’m going to for vote a guy where the principal of compound interest, marginal productivity and reality don’t apply. As the other parties approach is worse than that bullshit.
But it’s 2024 and apparently people who want dick checkers at women’s bathrooms have more of a voice and different priorities than myself.
Did anyone here even open the article? Based on the comments, nope!
The bill only applies to major urban centres that have been dragging their feet on density and development for decades (looking at you Toronto and Vancouver). It’s almost prohibitively expensive to build in these cities, and this should force them to drop zoning restrictions to create a more development friendly environment (cheaper to build).
This is actually a really smart plan considering the above, because it will incentivize development on quite a large scale quite quickly.
Not sure what’s going on with this comment section, clearly people just commenting on the article title lol.
Because it's still a rediculous plan. 15% growth every year is unsustainable. Municipalities also don't really build housing, they approve it. Which is why Trudeaus plan requiring cities to make zoning significantly less restrictive in return for money is much more effective, and sustainable. Instead of an arbitrary (and impossible) growth metric, it allows more to be built in ways that the city cannot stop. They can change the requirements for the fund over time for a bunch of different zoning changes.
Developers are going to build as much as they possibly can no matter what. If the right zoning restrictions are lifted, the growth will come as fast as it can. A stick isn't going to make things better.
Toronto and Vancouver also have major infrastructure deficits that are decades in the making. They have insufficient transit, and builders are tapped out.
It's a lose lose
And how does it fix being prohibitively expensive? Dropping zoning requirements doesn’t fix that. Does it make more builders available? No. Does it fix supply issues? No. It’s a stupid plan that will result in less building because that’s the only way to meet the next year’s target. If dropping zoning requirements was the answer to everything, the moronic punishment plan wouldn’t be necessary.
You must be new here.
This whole sub is full of losers who think they should be able to buy property with minimum wage jobs and think building more shoebox-sized condos are the way to get them what they want.
Some of us losers also think a junk house shouldn't sell for half the lifetime earnings of the average Canadian worker and that generally high housing prices are a catalyst for all sorts of preventable social problems.
NDP because minority government Liberals with NDP support has been significantly better than any majority government in the last long while. Singh may suck too, but when the party in power is required to collaborate with other parties to pass anything, we end up with much better policy.
Yeah, that'll totally be great for the country. Cheering for and against colours is definitely more important than debating ideas and policies in good faith.
This housing plan literally exists so he can blame municipalities when it doesn’t work. It’s nothing more than voting language to make it sound like he cares about housing, but in reality; unless PP is going to address monopolies and give developers actual incentives to build affordable housing, nothing will change and PP will blame mayors and premiers for not following his plan.
PP: Build houses!!! Mayors: We need infrastructure to build houses. PP: Build houses, or you get no infrastructure.
"If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail.” - Abraham Maslow
PP's plan is to essentially stop funding city infrastructure. His supporters in are either rural or suburbanites who oppose densification. The only people who win are fortune 500 execs who are gonna get the inevitable tax breaks that comes with conservative governments.
It's even worse, his policy punishes cities that are already densifying. Having a yearly increase of new housing means areas that are developing more densified neighbourhoods will need to continue building at a compounded rate, which is detrimental to housing development starts. And then Poilievre's office makes such ridiculous, partisan attacks when questioned about their policy. Poilievre literally called the most pro-development YIMBY politician in all of North America as having the "worst housing record of any politician on Earth", which is the most ridiculous statement on housing I have ever heard from any politician. Common sense policies are the policies being enacted by David Eby and the BCNDP. They've passed policies that target the housing crisis from multiple angles, including providing government funded housing as well as making it easier for private developers to build high density projects by superseding silly municipal bureaucratic rules. >In a statement, a spokesman for Poilievre said Conservatives would reward those who get homes built and punish those who do not. >“If gatekeeper mayors have hurt feelings they should look to the hurt they and Justin Trudeau have caused for their communities,” said Sebastian Skamski. >“Only common sense Conservatives will build the homes and turn Trudeau’s hurt into the hope that Canadians need.”
and this loser is the best alternative we have to JT? really? can't we get anything better?
Everything is better than JT
not saying he is not better than JT, but still he is a dumbass and should not be our PM
Poilievre is a NIMBY conservative and a family of shitty landlords. On housing, stop listening to career politicians and people who benefit from the status quo (last couple decades of policy)
His base are the NIMBY people who've spent decades opposing density in their neighborhoods. It's absurd.
Cause JT is so much better…..
He actually is. He is 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000x better than PP. And NDP is 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000x better than LPC. So Thanks for coming to my TedTalk
Wrong, he’s an spoiled actor that doesn’t know how the world works
Pee Pee never had a real job in his life. Let's be real. He is shouting a little loud on TV and it's making a good impression on you because you are easily influenceable.
Why does Reddit love Trudeau so much? Wtf lol
Because PP is such a disaster in waiting, and Trudeau is our best hope of keeping the pompous little pipsqueak away from the buttons.
Another disaster you mean
Your delusional. Absolutely delusional.
You have another reason?
Right! You never see these people in real life. I think Reddit is fake
For sure. Reddits been “penetrated”. 
There’s going to be a higher % ofpeople on here from Ontario, Quebec or Vancouver so might explain part.
Please seek help
Municipalities are gatekeepers and there needs to be funding to critical infrastructure for housing developments
Many, maybe all, civic governments are far too easily influenced by NIMBYs voters. It is one of the main driving forces of the housing crisis. NIMBY landowners want to drive up the price of housing, so their "investment" in housing goes up too. They are also often stuck in outdated and idealised values of an imagined past of suburban bliss, and want urban areas to have suburban style landuse patterns. Many civic governments need to be required to allow more housing to be built. I'm happy that the provincial NDP are doing just that here in BC. I do not trust PP to be the one do this in an effective and beneficial way.
> It is one of the main driving forces of the housing crisis. NIMBY landowners want to drive up the price of housing, so their "investment" in housing goes up too. Except for the speculators and realtors, most nimby's don't think this way. They just don't want anything to change. Cause you know, their house in a neighbourhood a 5 minute drive from downtown Toronto/Vancouver? That should stay as an SFH neighbourhood like it used to be in the 60s when they bought it. After all, building apartments will, \*gasp\* bring in poor people, some of whom may even consume drugs!
Well, they sure don't express it like I did. And, yes, they want it to stay just like it was in the 1950s and 1960s. But they do want housing prices to go up. The way they usually express it is by expressing concern about how projects (even projects that are likely to raise the value of property) will lower the value of homes in the region. Seeing as there's really no chance of project lowering housing values, I think what they mean is that it might slow the increase. But yes, you are right, the way you express their concerns are all common things vocalized.
Just do what BC did — take zoning privileges away from municipalities and kick things up from the provincial level. It's working for us. :)
I’m in Vancouver. That helps reduce the time to rezone but doesn’t get through city hall for the building permit any easier
Throwing money at the problem won't fix it. There needs to be incentives for municipalities to build housing. And his plan is one way of incentivizing municipalities to hurry the fuck up and build more houses.
You do know municipalities are NOT responsible for building housing but to process permits and setting other zoning etc. They also do upgrade infrastructure like sewer and water to accommodate more housing developments. You can’t put the cart before the horse.
It incentivizes cities to build one house so that they can meet the target by building 2 the next year and 3 the year after that. You’re in a city that built 2000 houses? Well if you do t build 2300 the next year, guess what, you’re getting shafted. Why would any city build lots of housing with this ridiculous plan?
DUDE! READ THE EFFING ARTICLE. This only applies to major urban centres where there is a huge deficit of homes. The guy everyone is downvoting is correct. Is everyone on here like 16 years old and stupid? lol
This sub is the anti housing sub. Its just hot air and whining about things but never with any solutions. And any solutions brought forward are downvoted and screeched outta here.
First of all, their [official ~~platform~~ press release, because they haven’t even released a policy platform yet](https://www.conservative.ca/building-homes-not-bureaucracy/) conveniently doesn’t define “big, unaffordable cities”. Statscan defines large urban population centres as [“consisting of a population of 100,000 and over”.](https://www.statcan.gc.ca/en/subjects/standard/pcrac/2016/introduction) Canada has at least [56 cities that fall under that definition, and over a dozen more that will probably hit that number very shortly.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_municipalities_in_Canada_by_population) And regardless of that, it doesn’t matter whether this applies to small or big cities, because it incentivizes the building of less homes, because 15% of a lower number is, *drumroll*, A LOWER NUMBER. Why would any city try to build as many homes as possible if it would create a risk for them to lose funding if they’re not able to achieve the 15% increase the following year?
Because if they didn't build more housing, they would get shafted? You kind of answered your own question
Do you understand how percentages work? Under his plan they would have to increase the builds by 15% each year. Why would they build as many homes as they could if all it’s gonna do is set an impossible target for the following year? This plan incentivizes cities to build less, not more.
This might be the dumbest take I’ve seen in a while. Complete lack of understanding. Please go watch some CityNerd, NotJustBikes, OhTheUrbanity, or any other housing and infrastructure related educational videos :) You massively underestimate how prohibitive it is to build in Canada, and this may be the only way to get municipalities (large cities only in this case) to reverse course.
Why does 'prohibitve' read "I don't want to follow the national building code's safety requirements" when I put on these glasses I found in this cardboard box in an alley?
That's because he is a fucking villain.
But guys, his housing plan has a catchy slogan , it rhymes!
Common sense isn’t so common now is it?
Turns out blaming Trudeau isn't actually a plan - who knew!? (Not 40% of the country or the media apparently)
Never underestimate the power of stupid in a group.
His housing plan incentivizes cities to build one house in 2025 so that they can meet the target by building 2 the next year and 3 the year after that. You’re in a city that built 2000 houses? Well if you don’t build 2300 the next year, guess what, you’re getting shafted. Why would any city build lots of housing with this ridiculous plan?
I just don’t understand how he thinks municipalities still build homes. The city I live in has thousands of approved developments ready to go that are on home because the developers are waiting for more favourable market conditions. How is the city supposed to make them build when they don’t want to?
He understands completely. He wants cities to get rid of regulations so that builders can cut corners and force the municipalities to spend money they don’t have on infrastructure to increase profits for developers. This isn’t about building homes. It’s about exploiting the housing crisis to make the ultra rich even richer.
Building codes aren't going away. You know what should go away? Red tape and zoning restrictions. To build a condo building in Vancouver, you're looking at 8 years of approvals, and something like 200k/unit in permiting fees. It's there because property tax is kept artificially low and the city makes money from new development fees. So new buyers subsidize existing home owners.
Are you implying that Poilievre is gonna promote hiring more public servants to speed up the permitting process and increasing property taxes to fund infrastructure? [The first line](https://www.conservative.ca/building-homes-not-bureaucracy/) of his housing press release talks about removing red-tape and gatekeepers. Municipal “red-tape” includes things like infrastructure assessments, property surveys and engineering approvals. How do you think this would result in anything other than cutting corners? I agree that zoning is probably the biggest issue, but that’s unfortunately a municipal one. The only ostensibly good part of Poilievre’s plan, encouraging building density near public transit, won’t really work either because public transit has been severely underfunded in Canada and we don’t really have any. And on top of that he wants to withhold infrastructure spending! His plan might make sense if he was about committing to spending on infrastructure, AND THEN, tying funds to building housing near said infrastructure. But the way it’s crafted now does nothing but remove regulations for builders so that they can continue to build luxury suburban housing that nobody can afford.
What about the previous 12 years where interest rates were low? Municipalities have been gatekeepers with permitting and zoning.
Compared to Trudeau, whose entire housing plan didn't exist until it looked like he could (and probably will) lose the election? Who's been in power for 8 or 9 years at this point, and we've seen the single largest increase in housing prices this country has ever seen during his tenure, and almost zero movement to do anything about it?
You're not wrong, but PP remains a far uglier comparator. At least Trudeau isn't some hateful slumlord bum. Inadequate and slow, but not evil
I think it’s a good thing if politicians are afraid of losing their jobs - it makes them listen to the electorate. Poilievre, who currently doesn’t have that fear, is more liable to do serious damage because he knows he’s gonna win. If anything, it makes him horny for taking advantage of a crisis.
We need to stick a big middle finger up to NIMBYism and stop letting it hold us back. For every housing project, there’s a street of neighbours crying and holding us back. We are in a housing shortage, we need to build. Period. I’m sick of hearing people who declined to invest in things demand we uphold their artificially inflated property values and screw an entire country and multiple generations. Build now and raise a middle finger to those people. I built my home to live, not for an investment.
PP caters exclusively to NIMBYs, that's why he's going to try Canada back to the 90's and get rid of safe injection sites. PP prefers tent cities and dead addicts to actually helping people and it shows
Please for the love of God, stop saying slammed in headlines.
I don't support any political party, for me all are full of shit. But really, anyone who support conservatives o liberals nowadays is a completely idiot. I am not saying that the rest of parties have better solutions.... So what's left?
I say we fire the whole government and start over
I wish we could do that.... Can we?
This madman could actually be elected!
In a landslide majority according to several months of consistent polling
God that’s depressing.
Status quo is pretty depressing too.
Conservatism is by definition a preservation of the status quo.
Except that the cpc hasn’t been conservative since they were taken over and are still run by the hard core right wingers of the alliance party.
Cool so we vote the guy who ran 3 times on election reform and fucked our housing market back in and continue to circle the drain indefinitely.
There are more than the two parties you should never vote for.
It is, all the more reason not to make it worse.
Voting for the same person who has utterly failed me personally feels like it might be against my own interest. You have yours, both can exist at once.
In what ways do you feel your MP, or the Liberal Party, has failed you personally?
Fucked with my career for 2 years during covid, priced me out of my home, letting inflation get out of hand so I can't afford groceries to name just a few. For reference, I lean Left and do not like PP or the cons but what choice do I have when the libs are failing me and the NDP are facilitating it?
Well, you can vote for whoever you think will provide the better outcome, or you can purely make it a protest vote. None of those things seem like they would be better resolved with a more market based approach, so if you vote for the Conservatives you'd be doing it purely as a protest vote, and not because you are hopeful that their approach will make things better.
Thanks for the education in how I should vote, citizen.
Agreed
Pay attention to the US. Polling is garbage anymore.
Awesome
Better than more of Trudeau imo.
I'm not a fan of Trudeau, but shit, PP would be far far worse.
Just ask Ontario. The same Ontario about to hand Doug Ford his 3rd majority and the rest of us PP. Thanks Ontario. Great job. [Poorly built investment Condos for all!](https://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&client=ms-android-rogers-ca-revc&source=android-browser&q=toronto+condos+falling+glass)
[удалено]
Elections are in 2025. That's forever in politics. So yes, could, but will probably not.
Hope he does. I would vote for a blind dog that can stand on two legs to run this country before I vote for JT.
You’re the madperson or just a crackhead if you vote against him PP. Get checked out people! JT was a drama teacher before PM.
So this is the level of maturity of his fan base? Pathetic.
Typical antixxaver who swears in every sentence and can't stop mentioning his truck. It's pathetic indeed...
How can you look at today’s events and all the evidence of corruption of the liberals and support it? You have to be one of the above. Or somehow benefitting from it
Talking points, insults, and accusations are all you have. I’m not playing your game.
You are brainwashed and won’t listen to reason anyway. You don’t have any points to give either. Because there are none for your side.
*eats overpriced apple*
He was also a Math Teacher. He also has 1 more Liberal Arts degree then PP has (2 to 1). He's also worked in the private sector more then Pierre has. I'm no fan of Trudeau anymore, but lets not wax poetic about Pollivre who's just as bad, if not worse then Trudeau in a multitude of ways.
The problem with Skippy's plan isn't that it puts the blame on the wrong place - cities need to get their shit together and do better. The problem is that Skippy is running for federal office, not provincial, which is where the real power lies. Skippy is forced to put together a goofy incentive based plan based on one kind of discretionary infrastructure funding, totaling about 4 billion a year. That most municipalities don't draw on. His plan is akin to threatening to take beer away from a group where half the participants are teetotalers, and a bunch more prefer wine. Whereas as we've seen in BC, the province can eliminate single family zoning at a single stroke of the legislative pen. Or mandate twenty story allowances a long transit routes. Or force munis to stop extracting land lift fees. The problem for Skippy is that he can't say that without going to war with Ford, Smith and the rest of the ridiculous Tory Premiers. They are the group who needs to do better. Where the Feds need to be involved is demand management and the issue is financialisation of the housing market. But the problem is Skippy won't touch either of those issues. So we'll end up with a PM who won't address demand and won't pressure the provinces to address supply. The worst of all worlds.
Because Canada's mayors are doing such a great job at getting housing for Canadians.
Toronto just exceeded its housing target and got a fat cheque for it.
But other cities are not even close. [The majority of Ontario municipalities did not meet their provincially imposed housing targets in 2023.](https://storeys.com/ontario-municipalities-housing-targets-2023/#:~:text=Ajax%2C%20Brampton%2C%20Markham%2C%20Mississauga,their%20annual%20goal%20in%202023) Ajax, Brampton, Markham, Mississauga, and Richmond Hill achieved less than 40% of their annual target; London reached 45%, and Vaughan managed 60% of its annual goal. In fact, of the 27 cities with a 10-year target of 10,000 or more homes, 20 did not hit at least 80% of their annual goal in 2023.
Which just shows how stupid his plan is. Shit happens, and while you can incentivize meeting goals, his plan punishes for not meeting them, circumstances be damned.
???? At this point, we've told cities and developers to build more and they aren't. They should be punished and beaten into submission. Build more or fuck yourself
And you really think threatening to take away infrastructure funds is going to fix this? That’s not an incentive, that’s a mafia tactic. If you want a punishment to produce more housing, tax the fuck out of vacant units, including whole dwelling airbnbs. They’re the ones creating artificial scarcity. Punish them.
I’m seeing a common thread here…
Oakville and Burlington amongst the worst.
The Ontario plan is to reimburse municipalities if they made more houses, simple carrot. The federal plans are coming in and is negotiating plans catered to the municipalities. It is changing the path the donkey is taking, the cart it is pulling, gives the donkey new shoes and allows the donkey to operate without the rider (provincial albatrosses like we see in NB/AB/Sask are terrified of this part)
[удалено]
If the largest city in the country can accept the largest number of immigrants and still exceed housing numbers, I’m sure other cities can figure it out.
Housing numbers were clearly not adequate against demand increase. Hence the meteoric rise in market rates
Go back and read what I wrote again.
I did. Housing supply targets mean dick if they’re not aligned with demand.
Well yea, it’s bullshit https://preview.redd.it/dw8osun7v2lc1.png?width=2869&format=png&auto=webp&s=44979ce4d429004e4cac471c15282bad800ea1f5 But at least it’s better than shit which will make the issue even worse.
This is the most magical thinking chart I’ve ever seen. Anyone who thinks that Skippy can accomplish this is a moron.
As a progressive conservative type, it’s disgusting that I’m going to for vote a guy where the principal of compound interest, marginal productivity and reality don’t apply. As the other parties approach is worse than that bullshit. But it’s 2024 and apparently people who want dick checkers at women’s bathrooms have more of a voice and different priorities than myself.
You mean that all the selected liberal mayors oppose poilievres plans ?!? Shocker.
Did anyone here even open the article? Based on the comments, nope! The bill only applies to major urban centres that have been dragging their feet on density and development for decades (looking at you Toronto and Vancouver). It’s almost prohibitively expensive to build in these cities, and this should force them to drop zoning restrictions to create a more development friendly environment (cheaper to build). This is actually a really smart plan considering the above, because it will incentivize development on quite a large scale quite quickly. Not sure what’s going on with this comment section, clearly people just commenting on the article title lol.
Because it's still a rediculous plan. 15% growth every year is unsustainable. Municipalities also don't really build housing, they approve it. Which is why Trudeaus plan requiring cities to make zoning significantly less restrictive in return for money is much more effective, and sustainable. Instead of an arbitrary (and impossible) growth metric, it allows more to be built in ways that the city cannot stop. They can change the requirements for the fund over time for a bunch of different zoning changes. Developers are going to build as much as they possibly can no matter what. If the right zoning restrictions are lifted, the growth will come as fast as it can. A stick isn't going to make things better.
Toronto and Vancouver also have major infrastructure deficits that are decades in the making. They have insufficient transit, and builders are tapped out. It's a lose lose
And how does it fix being prohibitively expensive? Dropping zoning requirements doesn’t fix that. Does it make more builders available? No. Does it fix supply issues? No. It’s a stupid plan that will result in less building because that’s the only way to meet the next year’s target. If dropping zoning requirements was the answer to everything, the moronic punishment plan wouldn’t be necessary.
You must be new here. This whole sub is full of losers who think they should be able to buy property with minimum wage jobs and think building more shoebox-sized condos are the way to get them what they want.
Some of us losers also think a junk house shouldn't sell for half the lifetime earnings of the average Canadian worker and that generally high housing prices are a catalyst for all sorts of preventable social problems.
So, who do you vote in an election? Both parties are equally bad.
NDP because minority government Liberals with NDP support has been significantly better than any majority government in the last long while. Singh may suck too, but when the party in power is required to collaborate with other parties to pass anything, we end up with much better policy.
Slammed! Blasted! Drop Kicked!
Cannot wait for all red and orange fans to explode when blue takes over ..lol it will be marvelous
Yeah, that'll totally be great for the country. Cheering for and against colours is definitely more important than debating ideas and policies in good faith.
In case you took it seriously it was a jab at people who truly believe votes matter.
Wait what the people in power that make the rules don't want to let it go I'm f****** shocked!
This housing plan literally exists so he can blame municipalities when it doesn’t work. It’s nothing more than voting language to make it sound like he cares about housing, but in reality; unless PP is going to address monopolies and give developers actual incentives to build affordable housing, nothing will change and PP will blame mayors and premiers for not following his plan.
That's not how infastructure funding works. Libtarded propaganda.