Just out of curiosity are you Canadian, from the US, or other? I ask because there is a cultural difference between what people in the US and Canada expect from their government.
The essence of the problem is the low occupancy rate and rapid inflation of housing prices in Vancouver, fueled largely by foreign nationals buying Vancouver property as an investment rather than actually living there. This prices Canadians out of the market.
Generally the Canadian attitude to government focuses on asking it to solve these kinds of problems in an "interventionist/activist" model: intervene in the market to affect change.
In the US, I found people generally prefer the government to focus on "freedom-to": erring on the side of providing people with too much liberty to do as they please, rather than too little.
I think this is just a cultural difference and not so easy for Americans to understand. I hope this comment was helpful in conveying the Canadian perspective.
I am American, and thank you for your viewpoint. Does a 'Canadian attitude to government' translate into enforceable legislature? Even in the US, it's a mix of attitudes, but one consistent law needs to prevail.
I have lived overseas for 8 years, and in Montreal for a year. As a libertarian I do believe you should be free to do things, unless those things impinge on somebody else's freedoms.
Being priced out by foreign investment does not seem to be a reason to have government intervention. Empty houses en masse should lead to big drops in property values after the initial buying spree spike.
Keeping your home up to code and paying taxes is one thing, but enforcing occupancy is another. How about if you travel 6 months out of the year for work? Why should you be penalized/fined for not staying home?
What is the period of occupancy - 4 days a week; 1 week per month; 2 months per year? Who decides, and how to gauge it?
I always think of the following ab adsurdum-like argument: Most crimes occur at night. Government is responsible for everyone's safety. Curfew is mandated for your own good from sundown to sunrise. Just a thought.
There are many places in the world that have close to none in property taxes. You just a flat rate city services / council tax. Property tax was partially created to incentivize the usage of unused land to reduce the externality of it.
"fueled largely by foreign nationals buying Vancouver property as an investment rather than actually living there. This prices Canadians out of the market."
The majority of property is bought by Canadians. The last time I looked it was 15% foreign, 85% Canadian.
However those numbers are for home sales overall, not a survey of who owns unoccupied homes. In addition, in many ways it's not much better if a house is foreign-owned or not if it's empty, since it still takes much-needed property supply off the market and artificially drives up housing prices.
The essence of the problem is the low occupancy rate and rapid inflation of housing prices in Vancouver, fueled largely by foreign nationals buying Vancouver property as an investment rather than actually living there. This prices Canadians out of the market.
Generally the Canadian attitude to government focuses on asking it to solve these kinds of problems in an "interventionist/activist" model: intervene in the market to affect change.
In the US, I found people generally prefer the government to focus on "freedom-to": erring on the side of providing people with too much liberty to do as they please, rather than too little.
I think this is just a cultural difference and not so easy for Americans to understand. I hope this comment was helpful in conveying the Canadian perspective.