31–40 of 619 posts
Of all the things that a person can own, land seems the least justified to me. There is a finite amount of it, you did not create it, you cannot destroy it, and essentially all ownership derives from conquest, in recent or ancient history.
In Spain they'll give a residency permit to foreigners buying a home over 500k euros.
Visited recently and there seemed tons of empty housing and it’s quite cheap.
Canada is also bringing in one million immigrants a year to feed the exploitative low paying job market and to try to stave off recession. These immigrants tend to gravitate in either Toronto or Vancouver. Meanwhile corporate and rich investors are snapping up any property they can get their hands one. In Ontario the Premiere is reclassifying conservation land owner by his buddies to allow them to build developments.…
Instead of being critical of the decisions of others, what do you suggest? Arm chair critics are a dime a dozen, what are your ideas on how to address the housing problems?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Immigrant_Investor_Pr...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's already covered in the law. Most provinces are requiring that "beneficial ownership" of any corporation is reported to the government. https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/british-columbia-finalizes... What is more likely is that some foreigner would use a relative in Canada, who has PR or citizenship, to buy the property on their behalf. But foreigners buying home in Canada was never that big of an issue. I think…
While I didn’t follow the news closely, this seems to have come from the Vancouver and Toronto real estate markets. City level laws might have been tried but they lack teeth. This issue is also leading towards a vacancy survey and tax for vacant houses to provide material to escalate (I feel) if necessary. And worldwide, people might want cheaper housing but they din’t want their own house value to decline. The forme…
Of all the things that a person can own, land seems the least justified to me. There is a finite amount of it, you did not create it, you cannot destroy it, and essentially all ownership derives from conquest, in recent or ancient history.
is this really true? you can definitely do things to it that would make it uninhabitable, no longer "fertile", or any other terms that essentially come to the same conclusion of the land being essentially destroyed.
at least as far as the context of desirability to be owned
There is still the immigration-by-visa route, no? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Immigrant_Investor_Pr...
This seems like a good idea and it carves out exceptions for foreigners who are residents. I presume this puts pressure on other countries to do the same, since investors are looking for other opportunities.
Of all the things that a person can own, land seems the least justified to me. There is a finite amount of it, you did not create it, you cannot destroy it, and essentially all ownership derives from conquest, in recent or ancient history.
We just haven't yet gotten to the point where we can access any of the land not on this planet.
Good symbolic act, but as the fine article states, it’s unlikely to have material effect on housing affordability for the average person until supply is increased.
I'm happy they've taken a step in the right direction, an I'm hopeful they'll take more.