minimum wage

"...Vancouver is also among the least affordable places in the world to find a home."

I think another piece of this puzzle is the minimum wage – the lowest in Canada! Try living in this city on 8 bucks an hour.

Shameful.

"Canada remains the only G8

"Canada remains the only G8 nation with no national housing plan. ", Monte Paulsen & Geoff Dembicki

Er, excuse me, that's wrong for a kick off!

The United States federal government no longer pays to build housing projects. Since the early 1990s, it has given money under HOPE VI to tear down distressed projects, to be replaced by mixed communities built with private partners.

Also, Canada is a decentralized federation. Do you writers seriously imagine that the federal government is going to take back the responsibility for social housing from the provinces? What on earth are you talking about?

This article is riddled with holes.

"The provincial government bills British Columbia as the "Best Place on Earth" but rarely mentions that Vancouver is also among the least affordable places in the world to find a home."

What did you expect? The best place in world to be, ... cheap? You know very well that density and height is opposed by many Vancouverites, even and often by those that want cheaper digs. Vancouver's high property taxes and development costs also contribute substantially to the high cost of residential properties.

US leads on 'Housing First' funding

While it's true that the U.S. has moved away from the development of large social housing projects toward smaller mixed-income projects, the anonymous commenter known as "realisticman" is simply wrong about the U.S. not funding social housing. Indeed, U.S. expenditures on redevelopment of social housing have increased.

With regard to the homeless, the U.S. has been funding Housing First since the early 1990s. The U.S. Congress in 1999 directed that Housing and Urban Development (HUD) spend 30 per cent of its funding on the method. The most recent of many authorizations came as part of the “Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009."

Housing First is endorsed by the United States Interagency Council on Homelessness as a best practice, and is similarly endorsed by government agencies that deal with the homeless in the United Kingdom. In 2007, HUD credited Housing First as a prime cause for an overall reduction in the number of chronically homeless individuals living on the streets or in shelters.

What did you expect? The best place in world to be, ... cheap?

Not necessarily 'cheap.' But one would expect that cost of living would be included in any qualitative assessment of regional living space. While you are right that many Vancouverites don't appear to have a very clear understanding of the relationship between density, height, and affordable housing, Paulsen & Dembicki draw attention, quite rightly, to the ideological contradiction inherent in billing a city as the 'best' while ignoring a major factor that should be taken into account in any reckoning of 'quality of life;' namely, affordability. Again, r-man, your steadfast insistence that the rest of the world really is/should be organized according to the same circumstances and principles that govern your subjective situation belies the extent to which your apprehension of social reality is merely ideological... in the end you lean on your arguments like a drunk on a lamp-post... more for support than illumination--which is what gives them their ideological character.

excellent article.

Thank you for an excellent analysis that so many in the public could learn much from. Many are simply are lacking the information of what drives protesters and activists, and are looking to hear about solutions to the housing crisis in a constructive manner.

Best Place in the World for 'leaky condo syndrome' housing

Once again the reporters miss the story, which is the B.C. government's de facto creation not just of homelessness but of our new and most lucrative industry, the one many of us refer to as the failed housing industry.

This is the legacy of a decades-old 'leaky condo' epidemic that has infected highrises, low-rises, condos, co-ops and even brand new single-family dwellings! There's no mystery here. Real estate developers, of whom our Premier is one, and building design mo'fessionals know perfectly well that the fifth-rate garbage so often concealed (or not!) under green and blue tarps will only keep the rain out for about five years, when yet another set of major repairs/restoration/redevelopment will be expensively required. It's worthy of an Olympic sport, surely!

With the help of the media, local architects and homebuilders have successfully perpetrated the fraud that construction this brazenly flawed is somehow the new normal, and worse, that equity in a toxic, leaky mess is somehow preferable to the substantial protections provided to tenants under residential tenancy legislation.

Taxpayers subsidized the failed housing industry for years in the form of those HPO repair loans but happily that tap has been shut off.

The good news: When enough suckers lose their shirts in B.C.'s failed housing economy, those grifters at the NRC may be forced to admit that all those energy-saving provisions from the '70s are the ultimate cause of this disaster. The question is, will they do it in time to prevent the Green people worldwide from importing Canada's embarrassing standard?

Monte Paulsen

The Housing First Program you cite operates in 9 States and the District of Columbia - hardly a national program. "Housing First moves the homeless individual or household immediately from the streets or homeless shelters into their own apartments." Just like the programmes in BC.

I was writing quickly and forgot the quote you say is wrong. It came from Wiki, perhaps you would like to go there and correct it.

You can find it here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_housing_in_the_United_States

Or, read more here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/21/us/21housing.html?_r=1

"The federal government no longer pays to build housing projects, which in Washington, Chicago and other cities became symbols of concentrated poverty.

Since the early 1990s, it has given money under a program called Hope VI to tear down distressed projects, to be replaced by mixed communities built with private partners. In a pattern that critics disparage as “demolish and disperse,” some former tenants return but most scatter with rental vouchers, destroying community ties. District officials say they have learned from past mistakes. ..."

In 2006, The Village Voice called HUD "New York City's worst landlord" and "the #1 worst in the United States." The criticism is based upon decrepit conditions of buildings and questionable eviction practices.

As for your "Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009". This was due to the foreclosures in the USA and irrelevant to Canada.

"In the wake of the bursting of the United States housing bubble and the collapse of the American subprime mortgage industry, this bill was introduced by Rep. John Conyers (D-Michigan) on February 23, 2009."

Unless, of course, you have some inside information on foreclosures that we don't know about.

The other point is that since the Federal Government in Canada withdrew from MURBs in Canada the responsibility has shifted to the provinces, as I mentioned. Any attempt to take back this responsibility would be opposed by Québec, for one. Just yesterday when Ignatieff was questioned on this he said consultation was needed but he would not say anything concrete would be done under a new Liberal government.

Realistic? Man?

I'm delighted to read that the anonymous woman or man who cower behind the misnomer "realisticman" has discovered Wikipedia. How wonderful for you!

Please continue reading. For in the very same source,
you may discover that the U.S. government funds Housing First not directly but by making payments to local organizations. Or you may learn that the aforementioned housing bill included components aimed at funding homeless reduction. (Specifically, Public Law 111-22.)

I have no idea who you are or what your agenda is, but I find your misleading citations far from realistic.

Monte Paulsen

The vast majority of this, and indeed, all Web 2.0 and later web sites use nicknames. I doubt it is going to change and I don't detect any problem with it. No need to be disparaging.

The Public Law you cite, 111-22 is, as I said before, specifically for cases where foreclosure is occurring, which is not applicable to Canada and is not a new initiative for creating more housing.

As I said, "Just like the programmes in BC."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_housing_in_Canada

"Public housing in Canada is a federal, provincial, or local program designed to provide subsidized assistance for low-income and poor people. Increasingly provided in a variety of settings, public housing used to be one or more blocks of low-rise and/or high-rise housing operated by a government agency."

Canada does have a policy and this is delivered by the provinces.

http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/co/prfinas/index.cfm

"Programs and Financial Assistance

Financial assistance takes the form of forgivable loans or non-repayable contributions, and can be used to fund repairs, renovations, accessibility modifications, the creation of low-income rental units, and home adaptations.

In September 2008, the Government of Canada announced $1.9 billion, over five years, for housing and homelessness programs for low-income Canadians. As part of this investment, the renovations programs were extended for two years, until March 31, 2011.

These programs are available for low-income households, seniors, and persons with disabilities and are cost-shared and delivered by Provinces and Territories in most jurisdictions."

Brilliant and thorough analysis

Thank you Monte and Geoff! This is the clear case why there MUST be non-market, that is, state intervention in the real estate market. Without a comprehensive national, provincial and local housing strategy that uses tax dollars to alianate real estate from the market, that is, build subsidized and public housing, Vancouver will become the urban resort of the developers' wet dreams. The market demands housing for profit. We must intervene to provide housing for people.
So how to get there? This article is a fabulous basis for an immediate political program. Any federal, provincial and civic party with a whit of sense and ambition to overturn Harper, Campbell and permanently terminate the NPA would gain tremendous public support in this city by moving forward with this analysis.
Meanwhile the activist community and those like myself who believe the broader forces of the market will eventually limit any strictly electoral political program, the question of tactics is paramount. There must be a public and consistent policy of non-violence and increased action with wide participation and serious discipline.

housing

There is lots of cheap housing in the province for welfare recipients in places like Kitimat, Ft. St. John, Salmon arms, etc. If people are not working, they clearly don't have to live in Vancouver. Also, as a student, I have often rented shared accomodation for around $300 per month, sharing a 2 or three bedroom in the suburbs. People are often homeless by choice, not for lack of affordable accomodations. People should watch this documentary about the East side to see how much resources the homeless have in Vancouver (to the tune of $70,000 per individual per year) that they do not take full advantage of. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6-1oo-b3Ds

interesting...but somewhat lacking

found the article somewhat informative, but it unfortunately neglects to consider the point of view of any of the people that may be in a position to address the problem (policy makers at the municipal, provincial, federal levels)....could no one be contacted for an opinion or position?

also, Monte, you are a journalist here - you might benefit from having a slightly thicker skin when it comes to comments section. all i can see from this thread is that you were the first to go ad hominem