this post was submitted on 15 Nov 2023
49 points (98.0% liked)

Vancouver

1744 readers
2 users here now

Community for the city of Vancouver, BC

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
all 13 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 years ago (1 children)

How else will my house become an exclusive commodity that nobody can afford if everybody gets one?!

Fucking communism.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 years ago

Right? People should learn to be more rich... smh

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I am shocked! Who could've seen that coming?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I am interested to hear how the ABC will explain this decision?

[–] RehRomano 15 points 2 years ago (1 children)

their answers mostly hovered around it being “divisive.” if you’re wondering what the fuck that means in the context of more housing for people, I’m right there with you.

they also said the provincial regulations will take care of this. That’s literally not true because of Shaugnessy’s exclusive zoning status.

in short, they don’t have a coherent argument against Boyle’s motion outside of pettiness.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Just read the press release on their website.The main reason they said is because it would waste city staff time and resources... So basically as u said, no reason.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

it would waste city staff time and resources

Meanwhile they do exactly that with the speed cameras motion. "Let's study this for two years more, even though it has been continuously studied for the past decades".

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

Ah, if we assume their formula to calculate usefulness of initiatives is "resources spent"/ " return". No wonder they will do the speed camera. When return is 0 the usefulness becomes infinite. I have been humbled.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

In a statement, ABC Vancouver councillor Rebecca Bligh said the motion would have "wasted precious staff time" and called the motion redundant, given motions recently passed by the city and province to add more housing.

Don't worry, they've already solved the housing crisis!

[–] RehRomano 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

wow thank godness for their restraint, god forbid we have too much housing in this city and it becomes too cheap to live here. BULLET DODGED!

[–] zephyreks 4 points 2 years ago

Eat the landlord class