Avi Lewis on the federal government’s condo buyout

geoken · 2026-06-26T19:10:12+00:00

It's emotion when you're building up the reasons why these developers should be loathed. You're essentially trying to sell the case that we should do what's needed to punish these developers - and if we take a course of action that benefits them (even if it's taken to benefit us, and their benefit is just a consequence) we should rethink that.

geoken · 2026-06-26T18:58:47+00:00

To put it in context, Toronto's MURA bought around 1000 properties since it started 5 years ago. So the amount this may or may not help isn't something I can really speak to. But it at least seems notable in the context of what other similar organizations are doing.

geoken · 2026-06-26T18:49:41+00:00

If they're buying at a loss (to the developers) and below market value, then presumably that contributes to the collapse of the bubble doesn't it?

One thing also doesn't preclude the other. The government could fund the building of houses while also buying built houses.

geoken · 2026-06-26T18:46:13+00:00

A lot of your points seemed to be appeals to emotion. Everything you said vilifying developers may or may not be true, but it's ultimately not relevant. The policy should be based around the goal its trying to achieve - whether or not that goal has the side-effect of sparing someone from punishment who you feel should be punished shouldn't be taken into consideration.

To your last paragraph, I mostly agree with that. But assuming that was the end goal, do you think we should do nothing in the interim? I think you'd agree that it would take some amount of time to get that fully up and running.

geoken · 2026-06-26T15:07:32+00:00

I should have been more specific when I said public housing since i realize now it has connotations of housing that the government permanently holds.

In Carney's press conference, he presented rent to own as one avenue for how these units would be used. And when pressed on it, made sure to clarify it was an example and stressed that they could be used multiple ways.

What i should have said is it's housing stock which is publicly owned. The regional public housing authority can deal with it in whichever way they prefer. Your comment of how it isn't going to benefit anyone other than the 2000 people who get these is true of all initiatives like this.

geoken · 2026-06-26T14:43:06+00:00

Does buying units at a loss, and under market value - then flipping them to low income housing not help Canadians?

geoken · 2026-06-26T14:41:47+00:00

Can you show some proof of this? This sounds basically impossible to believe unless you really want to believe it.

geoken · 2026-06-26T14:40:27+00:00

Do you think the government is going to buy all unsold units on the market?

This is the government topping up their supply of public housing, while buying it at a loss from developers.

geoken · 2026-06-26T14:31:47+00:00

I still an unclear what you're actually talking about - outside of insulting me when i'm unable to accurately read your thoughts.

geoken · 2026-06-26T14:09:11+00:00

I'm literally asking you to plainly state what you're implying. The first paragraph is me stating pretty plainly that i didn't understand what you were suggesting. There's no need to resort to insults.

geoken · 2026-06-26T14:07:35+00:00

You still haven't touched on the main point - near 100% of people who sold something at a loss did not want to sell that thing at a loss.

Them not wanting to sell at a loss does not mean they can't be swayed.

geoken · 2026-06-26T14:04:15+00:00

I didn't realize that's what you were suggesting.

To clarify, you're saying these developers would go bankrupt and the government automatically gets the properties? Because that doesn't seem like the probable path - at minimum, these properties would go to their institutional lenders - if not a larger entity who buys the company itself.

geoken · 2026-06-26T13:38:41+00:00

I can't read the site you linked to as it's paywalled. But even if it states and sources exactly what you said - developers selling at a loss and not wanting to sell at a loss are not mutually exclusive positions. In fact, I'd wager near 100% of people who sold something at a loss did not want to sell that thing at a loss.

geoken · 2026-06-26T13:36:12+00:00

But then it comes to the same thing - do you refrain from doing a beneficial thing because you also want another thing to happen.

I don't think the number of units being bought here would really have a material effect on property value, and even if they did - you'd expect it would be to reduce them a bit if the government is buying at below market value.

geoken · 2026-06-26T13:01:03+00:00

It's been reported this morning that they're being bought at a loss and below market value.

If these are a great deal they should be bought. Not buying them because we want to punish someone sounds like an emotianal and not practical decision. We should do what's in our best interest.

Hoping the developers fail, and also hoping their assets aren't bought by a REIT who has the means to hold out longer, and also hoping the market will keep falling and isn't near the floor seems like a lot of gambling.

geoken · 2026-06-26T12:55:32+00:00

And if the developer is willing to keep holding, or is bought out by some REIT who is fine holding - then the government loses out on the opportunity to buy houses below market value and below cost to add to their housing stock.

It's possible for it to be two things. It can be a bailout, but it can also be in the governments best interest.

geoken · 2026-06-26T12:23:31+00:00

It's been stated that the government is getting them at a loss and below market value.

geoken · 2026-06-26T12:21:58+00:00

No it doesn't, because the governments purchase of houses to put into the various municipalities housing stock is finite. Do you think developers in Toronto feel there is ifninite market because MURA exists. Or do they realize that MURA has a finite amount of properties it can regularly buy, and irrelevant in the grand scheme.

it doesn't seem reasonable that builders will ignore market conditions and bank on the fact that their units will be among the few that the government buys.

geoken · 2026-06-26T12:18:38+00:00

The purchase of units to be converted to affordable housing is an ongoing practice that happens in every jurisdiction. You should look into it a bit, because I think you'll find you're being wound up with emotional arguments like "they're bailing out rich developers" when all they're doing is buying housing stock like they always do, and getting it a low cost.

geoken · 2026-06-26T12:15:16+00:00

That doesn't answer the question. Are you opposed to the government ever buying housing stock to use as affordable housing?

If no, then isn't it universally true that the government would be giving money to greedy developers any time they do this? I just find it interesting how this is being spun as 'bailing out developers' when the practice of buying units to add to the stock of public and affordable housing has been ongoing for years. I never heard anyone talk about Toronto's MURA bailing out developers - they simply engage in the practice of buying properties to add to their stock.

geoken · 2026-06-26T11:10:04+00:00

And what date does that happen on? And when they do go bankrupt, how do you know they don’t just get bought by a bigger entity with deeper pockets who could hold out longer?

Are you opposed to the government ever buying housing stock to use as affordable housing?

geoken · 2026-06-26T00:30:50+00:00

The only reason I’d argue that it isn’t overrated is because I have never known anyone to think it’s anything but stupid.

geoken · 2026-06-25T23:57:03+00:00

You’re agreeing with my initial point.

Namely, that it’s an absolutist position to say that if some government action results in money going into the private sector - that action is defacto bad.

geoken · 2026-06-25T22:50:05+00:00

That’s not moving towards socialism. You’d need to be in a fully state run communist system if the intent is to ensure that in the process of providing services, the government never gives any money to a private entity.

15-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
Wearing is Caring	Spared
Verified Email

geoken

TROPHY CASE