Counterpoint: The CPC could start acting like a government in waiting rather than the Republican party.

Fun fact: Ontario used to have vacancy control. Harris killed it. Neither McGuinty nor Wynne brought it back. And Ford, well, enough said.

Hey, he can have all the CPC voters he wants. Sooner that party resets the better for Canada. That by no means says he’ll lead the NDP to government, though.

And if your bar is Singh, it’s on the floor. That supply and confidence agreement with Trudeau was dumb. And while that explains the result in 2025, what’s your excuse for 2021? Singh hadn’t screwed up the party yet.

He ran in two general elections, came in third for both. In two different ridings, I’ll add. 2021 and 2025.

She’s got a better shot provincially than federally, which sucks because we need her federally. People keep mocking Pierre for losing his riding but Avi can’t even win one.

I don’t care what side the demand is on. We’ve been talking about fixing the housing crisis since at least 2006. Enough already. Cut immigration, build more housing, and for crying out freaking loud pressure the provinces to implement proper vacancy control.

No, federal NDP voters, national vacancy control at the federal level is not an option. Not even if Avi says it should be.

Interest rates should have been a lot higher than they are even before Covid. We’re scared of breaking the economy, then along came Covid and broke the economy. The folks trying to catch a falling knife are not my concern and shouldn’t be the BoC’s.

Now if they could just fix housing we’d be in business.

Companies are laying people off without the interest rate increases, so I say bring it. If I’m gonna lose my job tomorrow, my savings may as well get a bump.

No, and that’s why the NDP shouldn’t have elected Avi Lewis. Between the two of them, I vote Carney. Now, replace him with Stiles and we talk.

I have investigated the system I’m talking about. I have also investigated the system you’re talking about. I don’t do any better under that system than this one. And, to be completely honest with you, I could not possibly care less if you read or reply. You’re interested in explaining to me why I’m wrong rather than having a discussion and I’m not here for that.

I feel it important to point out that rental laws in particular are provincial, not federal. Which is why Ontario and BC were the only provinces to have any kind of vacancy control, and which is why Ontario removed it 13 years after BC did. So unless that link includes provincial members of parliament as well, what you’re showing me is a list of people who are benefiting from a system they don’t have the authority to change.

Also: Please try not to explain ableism to someone who’s experienced it. You’re not going to route out discrimination by making it illegal. That’s been done already. Changing the ownership structure of a property doesn’t make that property more likely to accept a disabled tenant. Neither does making shelter a right (the TL; DR of that argument: “you have the right to a house, but not this house”). Now, if you want to talk about improving the rental or homeownership situation for everyone, then we can absolutely have that conversation. If you want to talk about abolishing homeownership entirely, we’re going to have a different conversation.

I did read your comment. You did not clarify what you meant. And I did not follow your link because it lacked context.

Nothing you’ve actually described is explicitly anti-property. In fact, some of what you’ve described - for example, rental regulations - is already in place and not actually helping. For instance it’s been illegal to discriminate against the disabled for decades. So they don’t. Instead, they discriminate against your credit score (not protected), whether or not you make a minimum income (not protected), whether or not you can obtain positive references (not protected), etc, all of which are more likely to affect the disabled.

One thing that would absolutely help would be rent control that includes vacancy control. Ontario used to have that. Without it, the current rent control legislation only protects me as long as I stay here. It doesn’t protect you if I move out and you move in.

Everything’s more expensive these days. I’ve been in this place a decade and my Premier hasn’t fucked that up yet, so it’s not as expensive for me as it should be. But, the fact that my Premier could still fuck that up tomorrow is precisely why I don’t trust a government solution to that problem.

Not in Canada it’s not. We can’t even solve proper rent control, which includes vacancy control.

I mean, find a party that actually wants proper government-run housing and you’ll change my mind. Alternatively, you can explain what you mean by being anti-property if not that. Because, as a person with a disability who’s experienced both the housing and support, I can throw pretty much every government in this country farther than I trust them.

Mom and pop landlords, perhaps? That’s why I avoid those.

Because renting from the government isn’t a good option either. I’ve done that and you couldn’t pay me to do it again. If I’m gonna be stuck renting, give me a landlord who’s motivated to fix shit when I say it’s broken. That is emphatically not the government.

I mean, they’re doing that too. I got one on the fifth.

It should not be given airtime at all. If you give it airtime, then you are taking it seriously.