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.
@9JW4BZRNew Democratic11mos11MO
Invest in higher density middle housing in cities instead of detached single family homes in the suburbs.
@B26DXZW4 days4D
Yes, but only if the prices of these homes will be through the roof expensive and not at the expense of farmland and green space.
@9ZRQ8ZP1mo1MO
Yes, but only if we also implement vacancy taxes for houses not being used, strictly regulated Airbnb, and ensure our infrastructure can actually support the amount of immigration.
@9ZQV5PZ1mo1MO
Yes, although the government should also consider using its powers to create mixed-zoning areas (e.g., blending commercial spaces into residential zones) and reducing the ability of civilians to unfairly interfere with construction designs
@9ZNW7W51mo1MO
Yes, but prioritize the homeless and not at the expense of green space so maybe decrease the number of houses from 1.4 million to 1 million.
@9ZKX2DJ1mo1MO
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.
@9Z9ZCV72mos2MO
No, not until the housing that is currently sitting vacant because of greedy people can be properly distributed to those indeed of housing
@9YNQFHTNew Democratic2mos2MO
Yes, for the unhoused and low income. Repairs and maintenance should be done to existing properties when possible to avoid losing green space.
@9WYDMSD2mos2MO
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.
@9VRBTD83mos3MO
yes, but not at the expense of green space, actually affordable housing, homeless housing, and rebuilding and repairing already existing housing
@9VQZSZ43mos3MO
No, the government should not subsidize but invest instead. Taking the profit from the sales to spend on healthcare and education for the area.
@9VQZ2Z63mos3MO
No. Government should expedite, streamline, and modernize approval processes so new homes can be built more quickly and less expensively.
@9VKQ9MZ3mos3MO
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.
@9VGGMWSConservative3mos3MO
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.
@9V97TX63mos3MO
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
@9V8PY4N3mos3MO
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.
@9V798RX3mos3MO
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.
@9V793YG3mos3MO
Deregulate the process of gaining development approval, so private developers can build homes quicker and cheaper.
@9V529PY3mos3MO
No. Eliminate red-tape, zoning laws, and other inhibiting factors that make developments challenging and expensive.
@9V4V9BF3mos3MO
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.
@9V3LSSJ3mos3MO
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.
@9V28F6V3mos3MO
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.
@9TZCC783mos3MO
just add apartment buildings in areas where not many people live instead of 1.4 million single family homes
@9TXD9P93mos3MO
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
@9TWK4RLConservative3mos3MO
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.
@9TQYT753mos3MO
The government should mandate that developers build more and fix more homes. They are being extremely lazy.
@9TMMWC23mos3MO
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
@9TC77NN4mos4MO
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.
@9T766434mos4MO
Yes, but new homes should be affordable (<30% of household income) according to median incomes in the neighbourhood
@9T46CVY4mos4MO
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 Democratic4mos4MO
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.
@9T3PHHP4mos4MO
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.
@9T2YZLQ4mos4MO
No, the government should incentivize the cooperation of businesses and governments to achieve affordable housing!
@9T2MJNX4mos4MO
not at the expense of farmland and green space, is it possible to rebuild/repair existing houses and what does that involve/create?
@9SSRG9H4mos4MO
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.
@9SHLP2B4mos4MO
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
@9SCVQRW4mos4MO
Yes but not at the expense of farm land and the taxes or interest rate should not get more expensive
@9S9R2T44mos4MO
Stop all mass immigration only immigrate to people that have been vetted and let the economy look after itself.
@9S5BLMY4mos4MO
In decades past governments made developers set aside so much housing for geared to income and now they don't
@9RYCN7J 5mos5MO
I'm all for it. Only for housing families with low income and the homeless. Where and when is their choice. But I'm not for buying existing houses. Let architects and home designers collaborate to build them custom homes. This operation should take place at a suitable time when the country shouldn't have to worry about money.
@9RWN5L65mos5MO
Yes, but only to house the homless and middle to low income people while taking all necessary measures to not build at the expense of farmland and green spaces
@9RTLWCPIndependent5mos5MO
If we can afford it, but regardless, BUILD MORE HOMES and pause immigration for a little bit. Balance the supply and demand
@9RQNPMR5mos5MO
Yes but not in the cities. Build small self contained communities with a light industry hub especially circular industry. Houses with their own green space and quality of life. Not soul destroying high-rise.
@9RGCB9P5mos5MO
I believe that our urban centres need densification. Suburbs are harming urban centres. There should also be a national vacancy tax on homes not being lived in, and regulations on homeowners who own multiple homes and income properties
@9RDL9D3Conservative5mos5MO
We need more housing but it shouldn’t be paid for by taxpayers. Tax incentives and other government initiatives to build more work better.
@9RCYQ6B5mos5MO
Only for those who cannot afford a dwelling due to the crazy stupid housing markwt and do not already own property
@9RCHRZL5mos5MO
No, limit the amount of property corporations and individuals own so that existing housing can be used to home low-income and homeless individuals
@9RCH4755mos5MO
Yes, but only for below market rentals allowing the younger generation housing opportunities while saving for their down payment.
@9RCF532Conservative5mos5MO
They should do so in the form of removing regulations and they should build affordable housing in key cities and increase the number to 2 million
@9RCBSYB5mos5MO
The government should promote and subsidize or pay for the building of low rent, simple accommodations, for immigrants, foreign students and the homeless. If fully government funded, these accommodations would have to be monitored for compliance to health and safety and the residents would have to have a plan to move out to private residences in an agreed to timeline dependent on their individual situations.
@9RC2QHKNew Democratic5mos5MO
Yes, but the homes must be affordable, energy efficiant, high density, and accessible to public services.
@9RBYBX65mos5MO
A great deal of homes are purchased and repurposed as Air B&Bs. This is causing a series of housing issues from multiple opinions.
@9RBTBFT5mos5MO
The federal (or provincial governments with federal subsidies) should be building affordable public housing - to imagine that everyone in the country will buy a home is nonsense
@9RBGJNJ5mos5MO
No, they should regulate he construction industry to make sure they build four affordable houses for each luxury house.
@9R72MJH5mos5MO
The government should not fully front the bill but rather work with building companies and realtors to partially subsidize while offering strong incentives for new homes nationwide. The economy should be allowed to freely flow with a little push from the government.
@9R5KN5L5mos5MO
yes, but they should also rebuild or repair existing houses and not at the expense of farmland and green space.
@9R2QTDQ5mos5MO
Rebuild and repair existing houses first and the move to make new houses if necessary but not at the expense of green spaces.
@9QQT3386mos6MO
We can't just keep building more houses to combat the housing crisis because eventually, we will run out of space to build. There needs to be a more long-term solution.
@9Q6NY5X6mos6MO
Yes to the homeless, however the government should take into consideration how much money that will cost, and go into that process it in small sections.
@9PXSBSY6mos6MO
Yes, but jot at the expense of farmland and green space. Also deporting any non permanent citizens to subsidize actual Canadians
@9PHSCVJ6mos6MO
Direct subsidy No; Remove zoning restrictions, and greenlight projects outside traditional areas, Yes
@9PBL3NP6mos6MO
No, we both cannot afford this right now and I believe that it'll be better to rebuild or repair existing houses instead.
@9P8NRFMNew Democratic 6mos6MO
The priority should not be building new houses, but rebuilding and repairing existing houses, making the purchase of a house easier for citizens, leaving existing or building appropriate/enriching environments for wildlife.
@9P39F5F7mos7MO
They should build more affordable housing. Not just for homeless people but majority of young people struggle to live in houses
@9NBKTL97mos7MO
I think the government should, only to help the homeless but we also cannot afford it. The government should subsidize after national debt is payed off and people aren't struggling to live on minimum wage.
@9N4LLHZ7mos7MO
Prioritize quickly building high density housing first to get people off the streets, already helping lower costs because of lower demand, then build more houses as well as more medium density housing. Change building and zoning laws if necessary.
@9MPXFPV7mos7MO
we should reduce the costs of living instead, because there's already plenty of places to live. but the cost of living has greatly increased to unsustainable levels.
@9MF9FJ98mos8MO
The government needs to come up with a universal housing program that provides extremely basic fully subsidized private bedrooms to anyone who wants one (think university dorm rooms with a common kitchen and bathrooms) if you want better you can rent/buy a house or apartment.
@9MC4BQL8mos8MO
Only build if we need to, to be able to house everyone. Focus on rebuilding and repairing what we have instead.
@9M9Z7WC8mos8MO
Only if there is that much of a demand for homes. They could rather build more homes, shelters and orphanages.
@9LMNP5M8mos8MO
Yes, because houses are just becoming more expensive for the people creating them, and also the people buying them so there wouldn't be many advantages to this opportunity, and there are also a lot of houses being displayed on the market making it just more abundance in the community being introduced than is needed right now. The only homes that should be built are those that cater to the homeless.
Yes, but to fix the current housing costs and vacancies first, however, the homeless should be able to receive lower cost housing as they begin to get back on their feet.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
