this post was submitted on 21 Jun 2024
90 points (95.9% liked)

Canada

7203 readers
251 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories


πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities


πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


πŸ’» Universities


πŸ’΅ Finance / Shopping


πŸ—£οΈ Politics


🍁 Social and Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca/


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Just to make things easier for people.

The video talks about the glut of micro units having issues selling due to how undesirable they are for people actually living in them and not aligning with a more realistic price.

The numbers on why a lot of people can't hold onto these investments:

Shrinking units, the ones discussed in the video is around ~300sqft:

Substantially less of newer units are owner occupied:

top 13 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net 40 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Cool, let's convert them into housing for homeless people. No I won't think about the landlords

[–] poo@lemmy.world 20 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Landlords aren't real people tbh. Fuck em.

[–] MisterD@lemmy.ca 11 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Many of them are shell companies. We need a way to put them in jail.

How about if you own 20% of a company that is convicted of a crime, you do 20% of the time. After all, you got to benefit from 20% of the profits because of crime..

[–] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 10 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I'll settle for fines being substantially bigger than the profit obtained from the crime.

[–] LostWon@lemmy.ca 8 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

For hands-off investors, maybe. Directly responsible parties should see jail time though.

[–] LostWon@lemmy.ca 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

According to the video, the places aren't being built to be attractive to live in but to be cheap upfront investments for landlords (so not just small but crappy layouts and quality overall), and the majority of said landlords are "middle class" (their words) couples rather than large companies.

[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago

You know the system is broken when housing is prioritized and built for the landlords prefences and profits before being built as a functional residence.

[–] Blaster_M@lemmy.world 34 points 4 months ago (2 children)

TLDR: Nobody wants to spend 2 grand to live in a closet.

[–] ThePrivacyPolicy@lemmy.ca 6 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I wonder how easy it is to reconfigure floor plans in condos? Surely there will come a time where we just have so many small and undesirable units that the building owners need to consider making livable size units again. I don't know a single person whose lived in one of these micro sized units and not talked about how horrible that living situation is for their mental health, yet in my city we just keep building thousands of these units every year now.

[–] SamuelRJankis@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

If you're referring to combining units I don't think it'll really be practical. The 300sqft mark is on the lower end of what is technically okay for people with some heavy consideration into functional design and lifestyle. Essentially a single person who probably spends a lot of time outside.

This is a pretty good video(13:03) on the topic .

[–] SuperSpruce@lemmy.zip 1 points 4 months ago

Just price it right and people will rent. For a single person this is all they really need.

[–] Omega_Jimes@lemmy.ca 7 points 4 months ago

It just doesn't make sense. I don't want granite counter tops and Italian taps, I want a roof and a floor and a place for a bed.

Honestly, I just want a little strawberry box house, but I'd settle for a condo outside of town.

[–] GameGod@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 months ago

What a fantastic video, good explainer.