• Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    25
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Not everyone wants to own and not everyone that doesn’t want to own wants to rent an apartment and it’s not the government’s place to own single family houses for rent (all provincial governments should have a non profit crown corporation owning all rental properties over a certain number of doors though).

    Edit: Downvote all you want, I know tons of people that don’t want to have to deal with the maintenance responsibilities that come with a house, they still have a family and don’t want to live in an apartment, would you rather force them to own the place they live in?

    • Kichae@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      8 months ago

      it’s not the government’s place to own single family houses for rent

      all provincial governments should have a non profit crown corporation owning all rental properties over a certain number of doors though

      Why the arbitrary distinction? What’s so special about the number 1 here?

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 months ago

        The level of maintenance per unit and the density issues caused by single family housing means they’re a luxury item and not a necessity, the government should be there to make sure everyone has acceptable living conditions (a private bedroom for everyone, a kitchen, bathroom and livingroom per household…) not to provide them enough space to have a home theater room or a bedroom used as a walk-in.

    • twopi@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      There are two solutions.

      1. Housing Cooperatives: https://chfcanada.coop/about-co-op-housing/
      2. Community Land Trusts: https://www.communityland.ca/

      Both provide people the ability to have homes without direct ownership nor dealing with the hassle of ownership nor the uncertainty of renting.

      It has the benefits of owning. Control over rent prices, ability of modifying living space (including putting up pictures) and benefits of renting (allowing easy relocation, delegate maintenance responsibility).

      Housing cooperatives and CLTs have the benefits of both without the drawbacks of either. It also treats housing as a human right as opposed to an “investment”.

      There are housing cooperatives for students, the most temporary population and the least wanting to maintain a property.

      https://www.nasco.coop/

      You can be a part of this movement too by donating or investing in such projects. I urge you to do so.

      They work, and work well. There just needs be mass injection of funds into them.

    • fuckyou@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      It is most certainly the government’s business providing housing for its citizens. Like we did, the state- and thereby the people (who own the fucking state), collectively owned like half of all homes in the country. Rent was dirt cheap, anything belonging to the apartment or house was the responsibility of the landlord (a communal entity) to maintain on their own buck, everyone could easily get a home, and it was considered one of the social wonders of the world.

      Then the capitalists bought their way into government, sold it all, and now we have a “housing crisis”.

      Conservatives- they sure know how to create a good life for everyone.

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        8 months ago

        Yeah, as I said, they should have a crown corporation for rental properties above a certain number of doors, but single family housing (which actually make cities worse) aren’t their responsibility.

        Also, when exactly did the State own half the homes in the country?