Quote:
Originally Posted by a very long weekend
Basically, this crackpot geography/environmentalism professor is saying that supply has increased a little bit more than population growth, so that means that supply isn't the problem, that demand is. So, the appropriate policy tools are those that would kneecap demand and growth.
|
Agreed, that's pretty stupid "evidence" for a demand-side solution... the fact that our tiny city of 2.5 million people is somehow the
fourth-densest in North America (beaten by Mexico City, NYC and San Fran) is more compelling.
Quote:
Originally Posted by a very long weekend
Putting aside how you intend to keep population growth and housing starts at their current levels if you hammer demand for housing, just think about how dumb it is to look at all these people wanting to pour money into your region and to tell them - "no, we can't, we must protect the 75% of the city made up of automobile-oriented detached low rise housing, that is the imperative.
|
We're also North America's third-densest metro region (Mexico City again, and Montreal). By all means, let's rezone our SFHs, but surely there's some happy middle ground between "sleepy lumberjack/fishing town" and "pre-sold foreign condos everywhere?"
Quote:
Originally Posted by a very long weekend
It's nuts. People want to make movies in Vancouver, but that's making movie equipment rentals expensive, I know, we'll tax foreign movie companies. Companies want to make software in Vancouver, but that's pushing up salaries and making it hard for local companies to compete for top talent, I know, we'll put a tax on foreign companies coming in.
|
Funny, because said software companies won't move in - or can't get employees from outside BC - because the high real estate prices scare them off. Deflate the bubble, and real estate money gets replaced with tech money almost overnight.
A better metaphor would be that overseas film crews get first dibs on renting movie equipment... so we're evening the playing field with a tax.