Gear Land Use for Affordability, not profiting - Housing is for Living, not investing tool

It is sad seeing young Canadians cannot afford housing without some sort of help from their aging parent‘s retiring money. A lot seen be done to address this, but only to discover this problem come back repeatedly in future. In the world of demand and supply, by nature, it drives for “profit first” which in return lifting house price rather than helping at “Affordability”. For example, a developer A would but a piece of land ($X) to build 100 apartment units would sell them at $X/100 with profit margin. Another developer B would buy the same land and build 1000 units and sell at $X/100, the market price, not the $X/1000. The reason is simple, enterprises, intuitions dives for “profit”, not ‘affordability” by selling them at $X/1000. They would do it at the cost of scarifying space and create unhealthy crowded high-rise environment just to make more money. It hard to comprehend, there are so much land in this world including Canada, yet we are still not able to build houses with dignity and affordability. The world of Capitalism’s demand and supply with competitive market only drives for more profit first by nature, not “Affordability.” In priority. This is probably why Singapore’s housing approach geared toward affordability for living not allowing enterprises dictating profit and drive up price. It seems then, there must be some fundamental rules or bills have to change to drive developers gearing towards more social responsibility on “affordability” rather than “profiting, profiting yet more profiting” to their shareholders.

Reactions

How would you tag this suggestion?
Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.
Donate Get Involved