Submitting for this truly astonishing quote:

" Landlords in Quebec, however, feel they need to catch up to other provinces as Quebec is still one of the most affordable places to live in the country, said Jean-Olivier Reed, a spokesperson for the Quebec Landlord Association (APQ)."

  • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    How the hell does luxury=affordable to build. Affordable housing would be cheaper to build wouldn’t it?

    What they meant to say was “we have built luxury housing because it is more profitable”

    • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Those mean the same thing. Affordable for the developers = revenue - cost > 0. I think they said it explicitly a paragraph earlier, that they build what’s profitable.

      • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        Affordable housing can still be profitable to the land/building owner, It just isn’t as profitable. Under our capitalist system line must go up and profits come before providing enough housing for all.

        • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Of course. But if the land/labor/materials have gone so high in price, it is possible that even with zero profit the final price for units goes beyond what is considered affordable housing. I don’t know if that’s the case in Montreal or not.

          With that said, even if affordable housing is not profitable for land/building owner, it’s still “profitable” for the community around and in that future building. So from that angle, even if it’s unprofitable for the land/building owner, it should be “profitable” for the public/government. And if that’s the case, then it’s kinda pointless to rely on the market to find it profitable enough to build affordable housing.

          But then someone would say that would mean some builders won’t make as much as they otherwise could which means line won’t go up as much, government bad, free market good, fml… ☠️

          In any case, I think we should put the market in its place and build affordable housing without waiting for it to consider it profitable. That’s a perfect example where even creating new money can be a net benefit.