44
submitted 11 months ago by sik0fewl@kbin.social to c/canada@lemmy.ca

The federal government says it will build more than 2,800 homes on its properties, putting it on track to build nearly 30,000 homes on public lands over the next six years.

top 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Ghostwurm@lemmy.ca 21 points 11 months ago

Read: Take publically paid for property, and sell it for less than value to cronies and make them rich landlords.

[-] Dearche@lemmy.ca 16 points 11 months ago

What we need isn't thousands of detached single family homes, but hundreds of low and mid-rise buildings that each house dozens. There is no system in the world that'll make single detached homes viable for the entire population. Not to mention that suburbs cost the government more in taxes than they take in, whereas high density neighbourhoods with mixed use buildings are second in economic revenue to downtown cores while providing massive amounts of housing.

I work at a place that spends over a million a year in rent because it uses space from the mixed use first floor of a 30 floor condo. There's dozens of stores like mine that do the same in the area. Imagine how much property tax the city gets from this? How much money must pass through each and every store to be able to afford such rent? And how pretty much every store in the area is doing pretty well despite stores just a few blocks away are crumbling and dying off because there's almost no housing in the area unlike this neighbourhood.

People wanting detached homes is fine. But what about us that don't care about such things? Why don't we get an option for a small but low cost home?

[-] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago

That is barely enough to keep up with 1 year worth of population growth.

[-] rab@lemmy.ca 7 points 11 months ago

We had over 1m newcomers in the past 12 months haha

[-] twelvefloatinghands@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

What percentage were construction workers?

[-] rab@lemmy.ca 1 points 11 months ago

Not nearly enough

[-] jcrm@kbin.social 12 points 11 months ago

"Homes on public lands" is very different from "public housing". Public housing would work towards fixing the problem, what they seem to be suggesting only makes it worse.

[-] xc2215x@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago
[-] VieuxQueb@lemmy.ca 11 points 11 months ago

Only already rich landlords will be able to buy them, not me or anyone who needs it.

[-] Dearche@lemmy.ca 3 points 11 months ago

That's right. Most likely this is only going to be a sale of public land wholesale on the premise that the buyer will build homes on it. No way anybody short of one of the huge corporations can afford to buy a thousand pieces of land at a time. The land'll be resold at an exorbitant price once they're done in the end.

[-] Tylerdurdon@lemmy.world -2 points 11 months ago

Bears vote the measure down with a unanimous BRRRRRAAAAWWWW

this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2023
44 points (97.8% liked)

Canada

7164 readers
304 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


๐Ÿ Meta


๐Ÿ—บ๏ธ Provinces / Territories


๐Ÿ™๏ธ Cities / Regions


๐Ÿ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


๐Ÿ’ป Universities


๐Ÿ’ต Finance / Shopping


๐Ÿ—ฃ๏ธ Politics


๐Ÿ Social & Culture


Rules

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

https://lemmy.ca


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS