• Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    The housing situation in the USA and in Canada are different though. You would be shifting the cost from those able to snatch the good deals while the crash happens to the whole population having to pay back banks through increased taxes over decades.

    Don’t forget all the job losses that come with that, can’t buy a cheap house if you don’t even have a job!

    • bouh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Government decides who pay taxes. Shitty governments decide everyone pays the same. Good government redistribute.

      In the early 20th century people responsible for crisis, bubbles and stuff were severly punished. It can be done.

      Also, you should get familiar with the story of the boiling frog. Wishing things won’t get worse will only get you dead eventually.

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Our housing market as a whole is worth 6.1T

        You think you could tax the rich enough to compensate for the insurance on… $400B worth now insured by the CMHC…

        Good luck refunding this without impacting everyone in the long term and good luck not getting all those houses in the hands of those who already have a fortune to buy them!

        Remember 2008 in the USA? The people who ended up getting their hand on the cheap houses were those that already had a stack, including foreign investors, regular folks came out of that worse off because they lost their house and couldn’t afford to buy another one, in the end you just increase the number of people in the market for cheap housing! 👍

        • bouh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Insurance can collapse and their owners die in an alley. The mistake in 2008 was to save their asses. In early xxth century they would have. Now we pay them billions so they would have the courtesy to retire.

          Also congratulations on discovering about how fucked up a free market is for things people need to live. Housing should not be a market.

          • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Dude, that insurance is US! The government insures mortgages with less than 20% in downpayment because banks don’t want to loan money for mortgages because they don’t want to deal with repossession and having to sell them!

            • bouh@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              You don’t care about selling houses. Their purpose is to shelter people, not to be sold on a market.

              The sooner the market crash to oblivion, the sooner people can actually live there. A government has the power to say no to bank and insurance shitters. You don’t actually have to pay them your right to live. The society doesn’t have to comply to every desire of these shitlords.

              Yes, the economy would collapse. That would be for the best if you take care of the things that actually mater : house and food.

              But I have no illusion about this kind of event happening in America. You guys are too hard into the free market and your capitalist overlords.

              • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                Ok, let me repeat that.

                CMHC is an insurance ran by the government. The government not respecting 400b in financial engagement would lead to the total collapse of our economy as businesses pull out of Canada. You and me are the ones who would be eating shit at that point, it wouldn’t impact people that are already rich.

                What you’re wishing for is worse than the status quo and would kill more people than what’s currently happening and you probably would be one of the ones who would be affected the most otherwise you wouldn’t be complaining about the system in place at the moment.

                • bouh@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  Island defaulted on its debt in 2008. Island is still there with us. It wasn’t the end of the world even it there were tough times.

                  Now you can have tough times for a few years while you rebuild a sane system, or you can have tough times until the end of times.

                  Saying that the rich will benefit more is a fallacy, or a tautology. It shouldn’t be a reason to do nothing.

                  • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    10 months ago

                    The situation is vastly different. In Iceland it was the banks going bankrupt that lead to their economy crashing, what you’re suggesting in Canada would be the citizens getting their house repossessed leading to the economy crashing and then bringing banks along for the ride.

                    Look at the USA in 2008, not Iceland. Shit didn’t get better for the vast majority, it only got worse, even today.

                • bouh@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  Btw I’m a privileged one. I live in Europe and I have a salary quite above average. Which means I’m in the 30% wealthy.

                  Fear of things getting worse is how the rich keep people in apathy: do nothing, or else it’ll get worse. It’s how they discard left arguments and solutions : this will mean the apocalypse door you and me, but especially you.

                  It’s propaganda. Do nothing while people die rather than trying your chance at the future. If you look at the propaganda you’ll see that the only chance they encourages you to take is the one that earn them your money for a chance to become one of them. “there is no alternative”.

                  Liberalism survives only because of fear and propaganda. People die everyday because of it, and the next crisis will kill many more only for the system to sustain itself until the planet is no more livable.

                  • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    10 months ago

                    The fact that you’re in a position of privilege is what allows you to say you don’t mind seeing the system crash, you’ll be ok while things get worse for the poorest. Even a decade of the economy being in the gutter would be worse for most than the current situation. Better not be able to afford a house and having to rent with roommates than not be able to find a job and having to live in the street.

        • bouh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          You can’t buy a house if it’s not a free market. That’s the whole point.

          • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            It is a free market though, it’s even advantageous to people who don’t have that much money because they can still get a mortgage without a huge downpayment. Back before CMHC mortgages were private loans, the previous owner would be the one financing the new owner at whatever rate they felt was appropriate and at whatever downpayment they felt was appropriate. Today you need 5% and if your credit score is good enough then the bank can’t say no.

            But you wouldn’t know that because you’re in Europe and you’re here talking about the Canadian housing market like you had any idea how it works.

            • bouh@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              So you’re telling me there are no problem of housing in Canada and no one is poor or dying because of it? But then why are we even talking if housing problems are unknown in your country?

              • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                I’m not saying that, I’m saying they people saying they want to see the bubble bursts and everything crash in Canada just don’t understand what would happen if it did and it would make the issues with the housing bubble look like a freaking joke and would create a lot more poverty and kill a whole lot more of those who are complaining now and it would solve absolutely nothing for these people in the long run because they would just have more people competing against them for cheap housing while the rich would snatch all the properties getting repossessed. More demand, less offer, we’re back to the same bubble in a couple of years with the average citizen even poorer than before, just like in the USA after 2008.