In 2017, The Canadian government announced that it would allocate C$40 billion (US$31.6 billion) to a national housing plan to alleviate the severe lack of affordable housing. This includes building 100,000 affordable housing units, repairing another 300,000 social units that already exist and reducing homelessness by 50%.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Electoral District (2011):
@ISIDEWITH3yrs3Y
Yes
@9FCQ7CK1yr1Y
I dont have data at the ready but there is proof that giving, for example, a homeless person a place to live increases their quality of life considerably and raises the odds they will seek help for addictions, mental health, gain independence and search for work. Affordable housing has a ripple effect on many aspects of society. Everyone has the right to housing under the UN Human Rights
@9FD8H9V1yr1Y
Stable housing reduces the need for emergency shelter services, healthcare interventions, and other costly interventions.
@9F7F777 1yr1Y
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjl08CB_aSBAxXAF1kFHTq6DA0QFnoECBEQAw&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.alvarezdiazvillalon.com%2Fblog%2F5-reasons-affordable-housing-creates-better-world%23%3A~%3Atext%3DCities%2520that%2520lack%2520affordable%2520housing%2Cdistress%2520in%2520poor%252C%2520segregated%2520neighborhoods.&usg=AOvVaw2qp8crNAips4bmnRqqEaCX&opi=89978449
@9F976G71yr1Y
Investing in low price housing has tested economic benefits, such as job introduction and diminished homelessness costs. It moreover positively influences education, healthcare, and local well-being, making it a wise and compassionate funding in our society's future.
@ISIDEWITH3yrs3Y
No
@9FDKFHH1yr1Y
yes there is probaly the odd guy who lost their job and got kicked out of there house but most homeless are homeless due to drugs and they have the responabilty to quit
@9FQPJYX1yr1Y
The only kind of Unaffordable housing shloud be castles in the most populated cities. People need spaces to live, same as with food, water, electricity, and healthcare. It shouldn't be impossible to afford some and not the others on a minimum wage.
@9F9YTWD1yr1Y
21% of the nations wealth comes from residential housing so our overall nations wealth could decrease from this lowering of house prices and overall our economy.
@ISIDEWITH3yrs3Y
No, rebuild or repair existing houses instead
@ISIDEWITH3yrs3Y
Yes, but only to house the homeless
@9F9YTWD1yr1Y
Housing the homeless the country will lose a lot of its income and the economy could crash making the prices of the houses only even lower, wages lower and it could be a greater downfall of the economy.
@ISIDEWITH3yrs3Y
No, we cannot afford this right now
@9F7F777 1yr1Y
If we implement affordable housing more people can spend more money on consumer goods, thus bringing an era of prosperity to Canada.
@9FFFNS61yr1Y
what the opponents are argung is that it's a lot like ubi - give everyone a universal basic income (or something like that, in this case affordable housing) and there's literally no difference from giving them SNAP or other food stamps, in the case of the united states. the argument i'm trying to make, however, is that government needs to be able to control for market inefficiencies (this is particularly true in the case of medicaid, which, as a single-payer system is more effective than multi-payer systems in general.) government involvement needs to be minimalized except to… Read more
@9FF69BV1yr1Y
I agree, but it is important to note the systemic problem that the housing market is only so big and so expensive because of both inflation, and how within cities and provinces there, a specific rules that prevent multilevel housing plans to preserve “aesthetics”
@9FCQ7CK1yr1Y
We can always afford it - the issue seems to be in prioritizing peoples lives over police and military funding, and solving the country's debt. If not now, when? How bad does it have to get?
@9FHGTB91yr1Y
Yes we can, by reducing funding for less important issues and putting all that money towards affordable housing.
We dont have enough money to afford these houses so we should put more money into other ways that'll help our economy. We should also save our money for the next few years and control our immigration rates so we don't have to worry much about the limited housing.
Invest in higher density middle housing in cities instead of detached single family homes in the suburbs.
@9BZVR9Y2yrs2Y
Yes, but not at the expense of farmland and green space and only available to low income or first time homebuyers.
@8VMFV6K3yrs3Y
Yes, if they are affordable.
@B3KP87Z6 days6D
A crown corporation should own the homes to provide break even return on investment for the government and to force down property values while providing affordable rental housing.
@B3KFQF66 days6D
Yes, but only for low-income people and homeless people and not at the expense of farmland and green space.
@B3JVWRC6 days6D
Build homes that actually look nice and not just condominiums. Don't build on the expense of farmland or green spce.
@B3GDFZM1wk1W
Government should not be subsidizing the building of new homes. They should be removing or modifying regulations that inhibit the building of commercial and residential structures on the outside edges of urban areas to allow faster and more expansion.
@B3G8LCR1wk1W
Affordable housing should not include rentals and condos. Affordable homes should be such as townhomes/semis/detached without maintenance and/or potl fees.
@B3G84PP1wk1W
Instead of spending billions for new homes, deport all the newcomers that are here either illegally or who abused the international student program. This create less demand and more supply of homes in general and cost a fraction of what it would cost to build new homes.
@B3G3R7S1wk1W
Stop mass immigration and the housing crisis will reduce. Also reduce interest rates and mortgage rates to make it affordable for people to buy and rent.
@B3G2PTY1wk1W
Apartments and building are being put up not to help homelessness but to increase immigration. They are not providing amenities to compensate the population increases in neighborhoods such as grocery stores and doctors
@B3FQZNN1wk1W
Hell yeah, younger people need places to have babies or we will be facing demographic crisis as well. Maybe subsidize young families specifically.
@B3FC9K91wk1W
Homes? Or condos that take up majority of our free space? And what are the “affordable prices” ? That everyone keeps mentioning… I’ve never seen them.
@B3DM7MY2wks2W
If we can afford it and does not do a large amount of damage to the environment, then yes. Otherwise, no.
@B395RFR2wks2W
No. They should be looking at building far more than that, and do whatever they can to pop the bubble.
@B393GKS2wks2W
this is just a political spewing by the Liberal party to appease the voters. It will never happen and the political parties are so good at throwing around Our money
@B38NWBT2wks2W
Yes, but only if it somehow can prioritize people who already live in their region. As in, someone from Toronto shouldn't be snatching up an affordable home from someone who needs it more. Also, rebuilds and repairs to existing houses are also important.
@B36YNTD2wks2W
So long as those homes are not bought up by landlords who can jack up the rent at their own leisure.
@B36FSFF2wks2W
if we make more homes then we take more Forrest's the less the Forrest,s the less air less air death death sadness sadness+death=depression=suicide=death=repeat
@B35Q7K53wks3W
I am happy to have gov't fund not-for- profit housing in Canada. I am NOT ok with gov't giving subsidies to for-profit entities to own these houses. Housing should re-use already developed land whenever possible and benefit the poorest in our society first.
@B34QTLR3wks3W
Yes, but not at the expense of green space and farmland and only to house the needy homeless; not for the people who already have many homes.
Yes but focus on building RGI housing as opposed to affordable and market rent housing. There are more people in Canada who reside in apartments and cannot afford to buy a home than there are people who can.
@B2ZSZNS3wks3W
No, allow first time home buyers to "write-off" the interest on their mortage for a period of time (i.e. 10 years).
@B2ZKMPD4wks4W
Yes Funding the building of new homes, but they can only be purchased or used by people born in Canada or a Canadian Citizen of ten years or more.
@B2Y9WCS4wks4W
Yes, but not at the expense of farmland and green space, but also to primarily focus on housing the homeless/those in need
@B2WG66CNew Democratic4wks4W
Yes but only to house homeless and require them to work on house building to help pay for renting the home
@B2W94QV4wks4W
For first time home buyers or single income, there is not benefits for this class of people right now. The homeless do not need more benefits.
@B2W3G4Y1mo1MO
Yes but don't take farm land and not if it's for immigrants. Also it is good to do if it's for our own homeless.
@B2VCMN71mo1MO
Yes! For the sole purpose that the government are to blame for an increase in Canadas population with limited housing. One of the issues leading to Canadas housing crisis!
@B2TVZW31mo1MO
Yes, and prioritize working families that are low income. Education is expensive, childcare is too and not everyone can afford education which impact ones ability to earn a guaranteed income etc.
@B2SX7XJ1mo1MO
We need to redesign zoning codes and build more high density affordable housing and livable spaces, walkable neighborhoods and public transportation. Private homes take too much space and resources.
@B2QQFP81mo1MO
Large commie blocks and the forced relocation of new immigrant populations to interior Canada as to prevent large demographic concentrations.
@B2PMF3Y1mo1MO
Yes, but we should also be helping regulate the purchase of these homes to prevent them being purchased as rental properties.
@B2J26RY2mos2MO
It all depends on what types of homes at to be build - I would not be in favour of this if they were to be single family dwellings, but duplexes and smaller (non-luxury) apartments, yes 100%.
@B2HTNHR2mos2MO
Yes, but only for young students(or people under the age of 25) that are struggling with finding a place to live
@B2HMZCY2mos2MO
The amount of homes being built versus the jobs available at despicable rates is disgraceful. This question ties in to several others, and the focal point for the general population is that nothing about any current policies benefits them.
@B2CCM3P2mos2MO
No, we should encourage private corporations by making it easier and less expensive to build homes rather then having to constantly spend tax-payer money.
Not if they are for profit builds. Geared to income, Habitat for humanity, non-profit affordable units
@9ZKX2DJ4mos4MO
If the bulding is intended to host homeless people, then both the private and public sectors should reach an agreement
I think once immigration practise are under control, the housing market will be more available for Canadian Citizens and we won’t have to build more houses. Also, we need to protect farmland.
@9Z9ZCV74mos4MO
No, not until the housing that is currently sitting vacant because of greedy people can be properly distributed to those indeed of housing
@9YNQFHTNew Democratic4mos4MO
Yes, for the unhoused and low income. Repairs and maintenance should be done to existing properties when possible to avoid losing green space.
@9WYDMSD4mos4MO
Yes, we should aim to exceed that number and build half as many multi unit complexes such as high, mid and low rise apartments, duplex, multiplex, townhomes and condos.
we must also repair and rebuild existing homes and housing units as well.
in total we should aim to build 10 million new housing units by 2050, 1-2 million ideally by 2030.
Yes, not affecting farmland and green space and be reasonable affordable housing. The post war housing is a good example of affordable housing for the average family.
We don’t need new houses as much as we need incentives for existing structures, mortgage affordability, etc.
@9VRBTD85mos5MO
yes, but not at the expense of green space, actually affordable housing, homeless housing, and rebuilding and repairing already existing housing
@9VQZSZ45mos5MO
No, the government should not subsidize but invest instead. Taking the profit from the sales to spend on healthcare and education for the area.
@9VQZ2Z65mos5MO
No. Government should expedite, streamline, and modernize approval processes so new homes can be built more quickly and less expensively.
@9VKQ9MZ5mos5MO
The government should only subsidize the building of new homes if they can control / keep down the selling price. No public money whatsoever should be going to increase profits for developers.
@9VGGMWSConservative5mos5MO
No with an emphasis on encouraging communities to allow small backyard housing with not extra charge for infrastructure (ie: garbage, water, sewer, etc) And yes in the form of tax credits for building or adding a suite or backyard structure to an existing home.
@9V97TX65mos5MO
No but they should provide crown land for development of hoseing by others as long as they can meet certain cost criteria. These development should be created as seperate municipalities away from dense populated areas
@9V8PY4N5mos5MO
If the homes are decent sized that could de decently priced then sure. We shouldn't be building mansions by any means with the housing crisis going on.
@9V798RX5mos5MO
No, first limit the number of foreigners allowed in, and 10 years from now rebuild or repair existing houses for the homeless then at a later date build 800,000 homes.
@9V793YG5mos5MO
Deregulate the process of gaining development approval, so private developers can build homes quicker and cheaper.
@9V529PY5mos5MO
No. Eliminate red-tape, zoning laws, and other inhibiting factors that make developments challenging and expensive.
@9V4V9BF5mos5MO
Yes, but the houses need to be spaced out more and need to be bigger, we have a lot of open space so it is possible.
@9V3LSSJ6mos6MO
I would say yes, but the need for more affordable housing is a bigger need and if houses are being built for millions of dollars, I would think that the price of the houses would be pretty crazy.
@9V28F6V6mos6MO
The only kind of Unaffordable housing shloud be castles in the most populated cities. People need spaces to live, same as with food, water, electricity, and healthcare. It shouldn't be impossible to afford some and not the others on a minimum wage.
@9TZCC786mos6MO
just add apartment buildings in areas where not many people live instead of 1.4 million single family homes
@9TXD9P96mos6MO
Yes, but it should go towards housing the homeless, much lower than market value home prices for low to middle income earners and support building co-op housing
@9TWK4RLConservative6mos6MO
No, I feel us as a country cannot financially support this currently. But I do feel that if the government was to subsidize the building of any homes it should be for Canadian veterans.
The house ownership should be under the government to provide people who have difficulty with housing, and after they finish their usage the house should return to the government to pass to other people that have this kind of issue. Public rental housing, like Singapore.
@9TQYT756mos6MO
The government should mandate that developers build more and fix more homes. They are being extremely lazy.
@9TMMWC26mos6MO
Government should make the land ready for building the houses with it is infrastructure ,should help in getting loan at low rate and give some incentives for the middle class of 30.000CAD to be paid in after clearing the Bank Loan
@9TC77NN6mos6MO
No, new homes should be built by the private builders. The government doesn't have a good track record of building low cost projects. The Government could assist with resourcing, including allowing skilled foreign workers to come into Canada to work on the projects.
@9T766436mos6MO
Yes, but new homes should be affordable (<30% of household income) according to median incomes in the neighbourhood
@9T46CVY6mos6MO
subsidize those that needs it, those who are stable can continue to live their own while those that needs help can get financial help if they are offering that kind of support. help the homeless and they can increase the quality of life in the country.
@9T3VJQSNew Democratic6mos6MO
We need heavier regulation on developers and real estate. It doesn't matter how many houses you build if housing is not affordable. Building new housing is necessary but it's not the answer to the bigger issue.
@9T3PHHP6mos6MO
The government should place a cap on how many properties an individual can own to prevent the rich from buying up and renting out all of the affordable houses.
@9T2YZLQ6mos6MO
No, the government should incentivize the cooperation of businesses and governments to achieve affordable housing!
@9T2MJNX6mos6MO
not at the expense of farmland and green space, is it possible to rebuild/repair existing houses and what does that involve/create?
@9SSRG9H6mos6MO
Yes, but not to promote urban sprawl. In cities government subsidies should support the building of housing that best utilizes existing infrastructure. Cities are already spread too thin and public resources are not sustainable as it is.
@9SHLP2B7mos7MO
Rebuilding and repairing existing houses would be preferable, but we need to be cautious to preserve farmland and green spaces within our communities. We also need more affordable housing for lower income families, students and develop better support for the homeless
Yes. Ensure that housing is provided to homeless and those in lower socioeconomic settings. Preventing access to this housing for corporate entities and high net worth individuals
@9SCVQRW7mos7MO
Yes but not at the expense of farm land and the taxes or interest rate should not get more expensive
@9S9R2T47mos7MO
Stop all mass immigration only immigrate to people that have been vetted and let the economy look after itself.
@9S5BLMY7mos7MO
In decades past governments made developers set aside so much housing for geared to income and now they don't
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
