Carney Is Failing

[Legato]

8 hours ago, Barquentine said:

Just watch. The facts will prove you wrong on that. Modular homes cheaper, faster to build. People will gobble up as many affordable homes as we can build.

You really want another Gorbals?

[eyeball]

9 minutes ago, Legato said:

You really want another Gorbals?

How do you get from modular homes to block after block of hi-rise apartment buildings filled with poverty stricken families?

 

[BeaverFever]

1 hour ago, Army Guy said:

Have they  come out and said the details yet, rumors have it these homes will be built on government land, and rented....what have you heard ?

Federally owned land will be made available to developers and municipalities for local housing, including both local subsidized housing programs and normal private housing developments.  But BCH isn’t just about making land available its also about supporting financing for home construction through a number of mechanisms and streamlining approvals. 

Edited September 17, 2025 by BeaverFever

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Urban sprawl means more expensive infrastructure and more public funding to pay for it -

 

Nope, and i've provided the proof of that to you before. 

It's vastly more expensive to improve the limited infrastructure in the city. Often impossible. 

Density up to a point can provide cost savings but it's vastly more expensive beyond that point, and most urban areas in canada are beyond that point. 

 

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Increasing density around existing infrastructure is clearly the way to go.

No, that would be stupid in most urban areas.  It's causing massive problems.

You're like a kid just learning to cook who thinks if a little spice is good a lot must be better, and turns out a dish so salty its inedible  

Highrises cost vastly more per square foot to build than lowrises or townhouses. In most cities it's not possible to build more streets, you've got what you've got, and ripping up sewer infrastructure to put in more capacity is either insanely expensive or impossible. 

"density" is what people who learned this stuff in high school in the 80's say, or snake oil peddlers. 

Density  can be useful outside of the urban centers in canada, where we have smaller suburbs  that could grow into urban centers of their own but not in our current urban centers.  That's thinking from 4 decades ago. 

37 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

Federally owned land will be made available to developers and municipalities for local housing, including both local subsidized housing programs and normal private housing developments.  But BCH isn’t just about making land available its also about supporting financing for home construction through a number of mechanisms and streamlining approvals. 

In concept the idea is not horrible, after all it was the conservatives that first proposed this. But their execution is horrible and it's not going to do what it needs to do and it's going to chew up all our remaining money to try it

[eyeball]

51 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Highrises cost vastly more per square foot to build than lowrises or townhouses.

So build the lowrises and the townhouses and in cases where it's appropriate a few modular homes and laneway houses...things that easily blend in with the hood. Not overwhelm it.

If governments could persuade and help land use planners everywhere to find or allow for even a 10% increase in density within existing neighborhoods it would have a huge impact on meeting housing needs and give people the best chance to own their own home.

Existing infrastructure should fairly easily be able to absorb a ten percent increase in usage with minimal upgrades if any in most cases. It sure as hell couldn't absorb high-rises without costing billions.

Edited September 17, 2025 by eyeball

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

So build the lowrises and the townhouses and in cases where it's appropriate a few modular homes and laneway houses...things that easily blend in with the hood. Not overwhelm it.

In the metros?!?!  you must be kidding! There is zero room for that.  We're already way past that.

This is why i say the only viable solution is to look a little further out.  But rather than just having 'suburb sprawl'  we need to look at doing more Community development to make little smaller 'urban centers' and liveable communities in the outskirt areas and further into rurral areas. 

THe gov't also needs to really lean into remote working more. Requiring everyone at the office all the time is death given our current situation, and either having remote working or separate 'micro offices' in more remote suburban or rural areas allows us to diversify away from the urban sprawl' model and into a more of a 'livable community' model. 

[eyeball]

54 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

In the metros?!?!  you must be kidding! There is zero room for that.  We're already way past that.

Would you please get a grip. We've barely gotten started.

Only 29% oppose gentle density on their own block—challenging the idea that NIMBYism is an insurmountable barrier.

https://smallhousingbc.org/what-is-gentle-density-housing/

 

[CdnFox]

11 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Would you please get a grip. We've barely gotten started.

 

Ummmm.... suuuuurre kid... yeah... there's no population density in the major metros at all.....   unrelated subject were your meds changed at all recently? Asking for a friend. 

13 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Only 29% oppose gentle density on their own block

The fact that there are some people out there is dumb as you doesn't change anything

But the people who actually have something to gain or lose by getting it right know better

‘Going to make the situation worse’: B.C. mayor pushes back on housing targets - BC | Globalnews.ca

[Legato]

4 hours ago, eyeball said:

How do you get from modular homes to block after block of hi-rise apartment buildings filled with poverty stricken families?

 

Density.

[Shady]

22 hours ago, eyeball said:

If I was starting out these days around here I'd get my hands on a modest sized barge, install a few of these Amazon modular home components on it and drop anchor just about anywhere I'd like.

Install a few solar panels and windmill, a water collection system plus a holding/transfer tank system for sewage to take to the local pump out station and Bob's your uncle.

I bet you could probably accomplish that for around 200k or less. Unconventional for sure so what's needed in addition to land reform is finance reform that can think creatively outside the box.

Of course we're getting a long way down Lefty Boulevard now but that's just me.

Doesn’t sound like $72,000 per home.

 

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, Shady said:

Doesn’t sound like $72,000 per home.

 

Yeah but he went for their extended warranty! 

[Legato]

5 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Yeah but he went for their extended warranty! 

They tried the modular home experiment in England back in the 70's. Soon they became sought after by the "keep up with the Jones's" types. They're now just high density slums.

[CdnFox]

51 minutes ago, Legato said:

They tried the modular home experiment in England back in the 70's. Soon they became sought after by the "keep up with the Jones's" types. They're now just high density slums.

I'm sure they have their place and can be useful in some areas, but we've had modular homes in canada for years now. If they were commercially adaptable to widespread use it would have happened, and if they aren't giving gov't subsidies will only deplete our coffers while not solving the problem. 

He's basically put all our eggs in one basket and the concern is he owns the company that makes the baskets. Brooksfield  has major investments in modular homes and will certainly be getting involved with this

 

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, Shady said:

Doesn’t sound like $72,000 per home.

Were you planning on floating it in mid air somewhere? The land reform/density thing just doesn't do it for you at all? Colour me surprised.

You're so conservative you must be 127 years old, at least.

[Shady]

4 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Were you planning on floating it in mid air somewhere? The land reform/density thing just doesn't do it for you at all? Colour me surprised.

You're so conservative you must be 127 years old, at least.

Lol you’re actually defending spending 3 million dollars per home! Bwaaahaaahaaa! 🤣

[eyeball]

2 minutes ago, Shady said:

Lol you’re actually defending spending 3 million dollars per home! Bwaaahaaahaaa! 🤣

What are you babbling about Shady?

How did you get to $3 million laneway homes?

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Were you planning on floating it in mid air somewhere? The land reform/density thing just doesn't do it for you at all? Colour me surprised.

You're so conservative you must be 127 years old, at least.

So you're saying they're going to put a 75 thousand dollar home on 3 MILLION dolllars worth of land? and that's your defense to show they're NOT nuts?!?!

And i thought the gov't was donating the land?

[eyeball]

32 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

So you're saying they're going to put a 75 thousand dollar home on 3 MILLION dolllars worth of land?

Nope, not me.

If it was me spending 13 billion on modular homes you'd get around 180000 of them at 73000 a pop.

There's around 8 million single resident lots in Canada.

You're trying to tell me we couldn't find 180000 that would be appropriate candidates for a modest affordable home? Never mind blending in... you wouldn't even notice them.

 

Edited September 18, 2025 by eyeball

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Nope, not me.

 

Looking above it kind of was you  

 

Quote

If it was me spending 13 billion on modular homes you'd get around 180000 of them at 73000 a pop.

Were you planning on floating it in mid air somewhere? OH wait i've heard that somewhere before.....

Quote

There's around 8 million single resident lots in Canada.

Sure and as long as you put them on one you don't even have to lay a pad or hook up the sewer or electrical or anything! The house does that all for free by itself!

 

Quote

You're trying to tell me we couldn't find 180000 that would be appropriate candidates for a modest affordable home? Never mind blending in... you wouldn't even notice them.

Well considering they'd have to pay for everything else and the problem is they can't afford anything else including the land no, I really doubt it  

Plus you're forgetting that at least 20 to 30% of that money is going to get chewed up in the bureaucracy and not be available to buy anything.

So basically you can't count, you Don't know anything about the costs of actually installing a home, you don't understand how or where the market is and you're making numbers up in your head that don't make sense.

Eyeball.... you just qualified to be a liberal housng minister!  😆😆😆

[Barquentine]

15 hours ago, Army Guy said:

rumors have it these homes will be built on government land, and rented

In Halifax they will be built on a large tract of land in the city that was once military housing. Don't know if they'll sell or rent.

[eyeball]

9 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Were you planning on floating it in mid air somewhere?

At $3 million each Carney must be planning on putting his modular homes up in Elysium.

9 hours ago, CdnFox said:

you Don't know anything about the costs of actually installing a home,

I built mine from scratch 40 years ago and I've been on a planning commission for even longer.

9 hours ago, CdnFox said:

you don't understand how or where the market is and you're making numbers up in your head that don't make sense.

You say $13 billion divided by 4000 makes sense?

The housing crisis is universal. The market for homes is everywhere.

[CdnFox]

5 hours ago, eyeball said:

At $3 million each Carney must be planning on putting his modular homes up in Elysium.

I suspect that it'll be 200k for the home, and the rest to brookfield owned companies for shipping and handling. 

Quote

I built mine from scratch 40 years ago and I've been on a planning commission for even longer.

Dog houses don't count

Quote

You say $13 billion divided by 4000 makes sense?

It only makes sense if you're a liberal.  I'm sure it makes sense to you.

Quote

The housing crisis is universal. The market for homes is everywhere.

Absolutely a blatant lie.  THis is a made in canada problem and they've been warning about it since 2015.  Justin trudeau ran on 'solving the housing issue' in his first election. 

And was warned 4 years ago that if he didn't settle down on immigration the problem would get massively worse. 

This is NOT global, this is 100 percent internal. 

[Shady]

Carney’s cabinet is imploding.  Rumours are that 3 more cabinet members are going to resign.

(Blair, Wilkinson and Guilbeault)

This government is going to collapse much sooner than I could have imagined.

[eyeball]

3 hours ago, CdnFox said:

I suspect that it'll be 200k for the home, and the rest to brookfield owned companies for shipping and handling. 

Yeah well I certainly don't have much faith in getting much bang for the buck either.

In the meantime rezoning and relaxing building codes to spur new innovative housing development on the ground by motivated new owners are local solutions that can be put into motion almost immediately.

More nimbys are in fact getting it but motivating planners will certainly take some effort. It'll be like pulling the same teeth that often prevents the certification of perfectly good foreign health care workers.

3 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Absolutely a blatant lie.  THis is a made in canada problem and they've been warning about it since 2015.  Justin trudeau ran on 'solving the housing issue' in his first election. 

And was warned 4 years ago that if he didn't settle down on immigration the problem would get massively worse. 

This is NOT global, this is 100 percent internal. 

Ok. Have it your way, Canada sucks. It doesn't change anything I've suggested doing above.

[CdnFox]

3 hours ago, eyeball said:

Yeah well I certainly don't have much faith in getting much bang for the buck either.

In the meantime rezoning and relaxing building codes to spur new innovative housing development on the ground by motivated new owners are local solutions that can be put into motion almost immediately.

Rare case where we agree. 

Quote

More nimbys are in fact getting it but motivating planners will certainly take some effort. It'll be like pulling the same teeth that often prevents the certification of perfectly good foreign health care workers.

The cities have become drunk on the revenue from builders.

Quote

Ok. Have it your way, Canada sucks. It doesn't change anything I've suggested doing above.

It doesn't, but it creates the framework we have to live with for trying to implement it. 

There are other things that can be done. One of the reasons developers are slow to build and even more so right now is that the nature of the game requires that all their units be sold before the complex even completes. THat makes it almost impossible to build in anywhere but the most popular areas and with a ban on foreign investment projects get cancelled left and right. 

So one of the simplest answers if you're going to spend billions is to tell developers you'll sign a document today guaranteeing the gov't will buy any unsold units at a set price that's enough for the deveoper to make a few small bucks but less than they hope.  

But now they've got their guarantee. Tjhey can borrow money cheap from any bank with that guarantee in hand. They can build and still sell as many units as they can at higher prices knowing they won't lose money on the deal no matter what. They'll stll be motivated to sell it all, the gov't probably won't be stuck with very many homes. 

If the gov't DOES buy the homes they can rent them out and increase the rental pool and recover their investment, while still retaining their equity. 

The brilliance of this is the gov't can now drive where building happens. Need more rural? No sweat, tell developers you'll give them a sweet deal on buildings built there? Density is your thing? No problem, only high density projects will qualify. 

ANd you ALSOL get the benefit of helping to drive the rental market. By setting the rents at reasonable levels for the gov't owned places you help keep other landlords more competitive. 

Housing prices going up to fast? No big deal, sell some of the units and put more product on the market.  You even have your own stable of 'first time buyer' properties if you decide to do something for those people. 

And if you put 25 billion into it, you wind up with 25 billion dollars worth of revenue properties, so it's not like you're really going into debt. If you have to buy up properties from developers because the market is low, you can always sell when the market is higher and recoup the money. 

And it's real work on things the market actually needs so you don't drive inflation up like you do with unnecessary publi works or hand outs. Or gimmies for industry. 

You would need a gov't team to assess where and when to green light developers projects and you would avoid ones that are already highly likely to be profitable because they'll do those themselves

Yes it's an original idea of mine and no i've never heard of it actually being done so i can't point to successes but i know my stuff and done right that works for everyone. There WAS a way to immediately increase building and employment overnight. Carney just didn't know enough to know what it was.