Haadhi
haadhifaizal.bsky.social
Haadhi
@haadhifaizal.bsky.social
University of Waterloo Civil Engineering
Founder @moretransitso.bsky.social
They actually need to change it to this. A 13km/h streetcar should not be the same as subways on the map
November 29, 2025 at 6:01 PM
Almere is a North American suburb that just happens to have 10 BRT lines
November 28, 2025 at 11:40 PM
My favourite stat is that the new Line 2 MSF is projected to cost around the same it cost to build the entirety of the existing subway line adjusted for inflation
November 28, 2025 at 8:17 PM
The Union station expansion for streetcars is probably driving most of the costs. They should've finished the work back in 2014 when they closed it to build another subway platform. There's probably 400% contingencies on all the numbers too
November 25, 2025 at 9:09 PM
Serves a different purpose but the same mode should've been used for Eglinton, it's possible you could have even saved money doing so
November 24, 2025 at 2:50 AM
Why don't any official plans or even fantasy maps not include some sort of yellow line extension. Seems like something that should happen, especially one to the east
November 18, 2025 at 10:51 PM
Is it though? Most of the worlds premiere systems are publicly operated.
November 15, 2025 at 6:49 AM
My main takeaway is that whenever congestion or commutes are talked about in cities its almost always about cars. The 3 worst commutes shown at the end are all trips from suburbs to downtown you could take on the GO train
November 15, 2025 at 6:47 AM
In conclusion, it seems the hosts used their bias against rent control to make incredibly weak arguments about trade offs which actually don't really involve rent control. As the face of housing economics in canada, @mikepmoffatt.bsky.social and @missingmiddleca.bsky.social need to do better. 16/16
November 12, 2025 at 11:43 PM
Both hosts seem to recognize that while they might not like rent control, it might not be the best idea to remove it since it'll hurt a bunch of people and we should focus on increasing supply. Their conclusion is the right one, but goes against the title and all arguments made during the video.
November 12, 2025 at 11:43 PM
To close out the video @carastern.bsky.social and @mikepmoffatt.bsky.social both say that they're ideal solution isn't rent control but ample supply and high vacancy. That's an okay opinion to have but the reality is that it's going to take a while for that to happen in large parts of Canada. 14/16
November 12, 2025 at 11:43 PM
but he also recognized that a large part of this increased mobility was essentially from evictions that were caused by the large increase of rents in these units, which were previously 20-40% lower than market rates. This study doesn't support the arguments made earlier in the video. 13/16
November 12, 2025 at 11:43 PM
@mikepmoffatt.bsky.social cites a study about Cambridge, MA and the elimination of rental control in the 90s. However this study did not analyze market/stabilized rents but the change in value for properties in the area. Mike cites that the elimination of rent control improved mobility.... 12/16
November 12, 2025 at 11:43 PM
Later in the video more and more points are made about the so called trade off of higher supply/vacancy and rent control, but again this assumes that if we got rid of rent control tomorrow we would have significantly more affordable market rate rentals. 11/16
November 12, 2025 at 11:43 PM
Claiming that the high price of those units is to offset the so called "subsidy" of rent controlled units is straight up disingenuous. You could argue that rent controlled units have worse maintenance but that's more to do with incentives than actual money from landlords, at least in Ontario. 10/16
November 12, 2025 at 11:43 PM
Rents in these units are much closer to what people in rent controlled units would pay, rather than market rate units. The reality is that landlords who own old buildings will make a ton of money for units charged at market rates (obviously). 9/16
November 12, 2025 at 11:43 PM
This is easily disproven by the existence of old co-op/non profit housing. Since these buildings don't need to turn a profit and will charge the break even price, the rent is what's required to pay the loan for the building and maintenance. 8/16
November 12, 2025 at 11:43 PM
The next point made in the video is that old renters are subsidizing new renters in the same building, and implies that there's a 1 to 1 tradeoff between the price of the market rent and the price of the rent stabilized unit. 7/16
November 12, 2025 at 11:43 PM
@mikepmoffatt.bsky.social makes a good point about a senior living in a rent controlled 3 bedroom unit alone would downsize if there wasn't rent control. But again, specifically bringing up Ontario I don't think there's enough of these cases to open up large amounts of units to lower rents. 6/16
November 12, 2025 at 11:43 PM
This argument also assumes that if we got rid of rent control tomorrow, it would open up 100s of thousands of units that will drive down prices for everyone. But I highly doubt that would happen because these people still exist and need somewhere to live. 5/16
November 12, 2025 at 11:43 PM
I can't speak for other places, but in Ontario and the GTA there are a billion problems that are limiting the supply of rentals/housing that are having a large effect you can point to before even discussing if rent control is affecting new housing construction. 4/16
November 12, 2025 at 11:43 PM
This is obviously not ideal but the problem with the argument is that the blame is placed on rent control for some reason and not the lack of supply of overall rentals causing high market rents. The argument implies that rent control is the reason that person can't move when this is not the case.
November 12, 2025 at 11:43 PM
The first point is an example of someone living in a low rise, 2 bedroom rent stabilized unit. The person wishes that they could move but market rents are too high so the person decides to stay in place. 2/16
November 12, 2025 at 11:43 PM