• Turkey_Titty_city@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 years ago

    the people who own property have more political influence and they don’t want more housing. they have been voting against development for 30+ years. why would they miraculously become pro development?

    • zephyreks
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      There’s a lot of people, but they just don’t vote. Young people don’t vote or participate in local politics, and that’s the problem.

  • OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Wow, another fantastically researched article that thinks building more houses will solve the problem. Thank goodness houses take up no space, are central to where people want to be, won’t cause traffic issues and scale with the population!

    • zephyreks
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      I mean… They sort of are and sort of do?

      1. Vancouver really isn’t that big. It’s also really well-connected by transit. Currently, only downtown is dense (and some small pockets around SkyTrain stations), though that’s been slowly improving with new developments.

      2. See: New York, Hong Kong, Singapore, London, Tokyo

        • Bardak
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 years ago

          This seems to be a very pedantic argument where you are using the word housing to mean exclusively single family housing were are the author of the article is pretty clearly using the term to mean all forms of housing including condos and apartments.

    • RehRomanoOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Sorry if I’m confused, but are you suggesting housing doesn’t scale with population and traffic? Without new housing prices and traffic will only get worse with people sprawling further out for fewer units.