I’m going to be honest, Bonnie Crombie throwing her hat into the ring convinced me to sign up to vote against her. Ontario does not need a Blue Liberal NIMBY today.
I’m going to be honest, Bonnie Crombie throwing her hat into the ring convinced me to sign up to vote against her. Ontario does not need a Blue Liberal NIMBY today.
Yes, but its such a huge issue inherent to the entire “representative model” in combination with partisan politics to the point that it really forestalls any notion of accountabillity to the localities at issue.
Politics is a sport now and people are not sufficiently educated (nor receptive to curing that) to the point where they will vote against their own local and personal interests if it gives a finger to the other side and their side consequently “wins”. Its on both sides, not just the right or left or whatever. But I don’t see a way out. Its at the point where I think people should be able to vote with their phones on each substantive issue to ensure adequate representation. Our model is so broken and they have 4 years to cash out in the event they are chosen despite their unworthiness.
I think the Swiss have a model where they can literally vote on such issues unmediated but I’m not super well-versed on competing models in line with such. We do need to move past this model of “winner takes all” and “I got 4 years to secure my future by selling you out, bitch”
The rise of movement that is quantifiably different would change things in a hurry.
What we have is far from perfect, but we’re lucky that everyone is on basically the same page. The differences we have are ultimately nitpicky.
We have huge differences where everyone who owns real estate (and likely has a pension + healthcare) is essentially a single-issue voter to the detriment of all and everybody else and are egging on further mass immigration without regard to any of the downsides for anyone else.
Using your housing example: We all agree that everyone should be allowed to buy a house. We only differ on some nitpicky details of how to manage the scarcity of them.
In contrast, a rising movement towards allowing only Doug Ford to own houses, and all existing houses to be transferred into his possession would bring out the pitchforks. Other places in the world have to contend with that kind of thing. We’re fortunate that we don’t have to. We are all on basically the same page, which means that not being truly represented isn’t that impactful, and, as such, it also means there isn’t much pressure to enact change.
I don’t know that we all agree with everyone being able to buy a house. I think there need to be significant limits or an outright prohibition on foreigners owning our real estate and I would go so far as to say even with non-citizens. Particularly if Canadians cannot reciprocally own property in said countries of origin.
More work needs to be done on bring non-renting vacancy property holders to their knees and banning AirBnB houses and get the message across that there’s no more gold rush. Put up or shutup and get the hell out of the market if you just want to let an investment simmer. That’s what index funds and REITs are for.
I don’t know that we all agree with everyone being able to buy a house. I think there need to be significant limits or an outright prohibition on foreigners owning our real estate and I would go so far as to say even with non-citizens. Particularly if Canadians cannot reciprocally own property in said countries of origin.
More work needs to be done on bring non-renting vacancy property holders to their knees and banning AirBnB houses and get the message across that there’s no more gold rush. Put up or shutup and get the hell out of the market if you just want to let an investment simmer. That’s what index funds are for.