I’d love to see proof! And on the public land item, did you read the release? It’s in Toronto, Winnipeg, Ottawa…

I’m not ceding building homes and middle-zoned urban areas to conservatism. And you are right — we have plenty of vacant housing in places people do not want to live!

What do you mean by “only” occasionally? I think housing is deserved by all and “only” seems insidious. Mind explaining more? I’m also not sure where you get the impression that I don’t support social housing. “Housing first” is a mechanism supported by more builds, they are not mutually exclusive

Occasionally, yes? I’m not sure how that’s relevant to housing them?

Is it supposed to be a mysterious term?

Using “housing first”, the name of a real policy model is a buzzword, but “poverty pimp” isn’t?

Where are these “baseless lies”? I’m not sure at what point I disagreed with a housing first stance?

I read the study. They use aggregated national data instead of local data. I am saying that is unsatisfactory evidence to back their specific claim about supply, and inclined that I would like to see a similar analysis using local data.

I don’t really care about an analysis that uses national aggregate rather than productive shares of land; would love to see a similar analysis localized to, say, Vancouver. I don’t disagree with the financialization take, but denying an increase of supply decreases price is nonsense.

Why doesn’t increased supply lower costs?

Hope your day gets better!

I think you’re misreading responsible as cause, which I’ll admit was a bad word choice. However, you seem to be an angry and unfriendly person so I am going to disengage with you.

What or who would you prefer right now? I’d love to hear an alternative that broadly speaks to Canadians.

Is your claim “there is no social housing being built” or “not enough”? I’ll be amicable and assume the latter, which I already agreed with. We have definitely had significantly less starts over the past 30-40 years, we agree there. I’m not sure pigeonholing to social housing alone is responsible

Social housing is of course pragmatic, and is also being done though not to the extent that I think it should. I’m unsure what you are trying to say. Do you think only one solution is viable?

OPs intent was clear a tax on short-term rentals would be more impactful than home building, so I’m not sure they’d agree with your analysis. As for me, we’re in a worsening crisis and pragmatic solutioning is required to dig us out of it.

Sure, I could accept that home-building for wealth accrual is a right-wing stance if we take right-wing to be intrinsically tied to capital. I don’t see how solutions that don’t involve building homes are pragmatic, however

Is all home building conservative when someone gains wealth?

How is “building more homes” conservative?