Submitting for this truly astonishing quote:

" Landlords in Quebec, however, feel they need to catch up to other provinces as Quebec is still one of the most affordable places to live in the country, said Jean-Olivier Reed, a spokesperson for the Quebec Landlord Association (APQ)."

  • acargitz@lemmy.caOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    There are places that cap real estate speculation? And also are shifting equity away from real estate and towards the productive parts of the economy? While also promoting social housing and coops and building new walkable neighborhoods? Like all of those things at once? Where is that social-democratic utopia?

      • acargitz@lemmy.caOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Explain why the real estate sector in a small island city-state is comparable in any way to that in the country with the second largest landmass in the world.

        • BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          Because 99% of the Canada landmass is rural, and a city is a city.

          Also, last time I checked, Montreal (the first city mentioned in the article) is an island.

          • acargitz@lemmy.caOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            Singapore is 735.2 sq km and has a density of 7,804/sq km.

            The Montreal metropolitan area is 4,258.31 sq km and has a density of 1,007.85/sq km.

            I don’t know if 1% of Canada is urban. But assuming it is, and assuming that it is impossible to grow that 1% of the 9,093,507 sq km that make up the country (a ludicrous assumption that one), that is still 90,935.1 sq km.

            Your comparison is just plain irrelevant and wrong.

            • BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 months ago

              Your comparison has no relevance. What does total available landmass have to do with anything related to the policies in question?

              • acargitz@lemmy.caOP
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                Sorry but any analysis of real estate economics that does not take into account the scarcity or abundance of …land is just pointless.

                Singapore does not have a Brossard to connect with a REM to build a new urban core. Even more, it does not have multiple options for different places to develop and densify, like Montreal has, just based on the current plans for the REM, and without taking into account future transit projects or the idea of, oh I don’t know, creating an Ottawa-Montreal megacity with HSR.

                • BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Again, what does having abundance of land have to do with policies like Walkability, Speculation, or Social housing?