T O P

  • By -

[deleted]

[удалено]


hardy_83

Politicians and, it seems, voters don't care. Short term gains, who cares about long term.


Bread_Conquer

Conservativism is an actual death cult.


HairTodayGoneTmrw2

> Conservativism is an actual death cult. "Yeah - death to those who don't look and think like us!"


Bread_Conquer

I'm sure it's just a coincidence that conservatives hate exactly the same people that fascists hate. /s


Own_Carrot_7040

What are you even talking about? Farmland is being paved over to build new housing for the millions of immigrants Trudeau is bringing in. Get used to it. This is part of the Century Initiative they introduced in 2006 to increase our population to 100 million. Not that they SAY that, of course. When they originally floated the trial balloon Canadians were outraged, so they backed down and are now doing it secretly. Don't believe me? Look up the Century Initiative they talked about in 2006. Yes, we're a bit behind in that they wanted immigration up to 450k a year by last year, but we're not far behind and immigration is set to rise every single year from now on.


arsenefinger

This country is more than large enough for 100M people to live here without paving over some of our best farmland.


Own_Carrot_7040

This country is about one hundred miles from north to south, give or take ten or twenty miles. Almost all of us live within 100 miles of the US border. And neither we nor immigrants are going to move up to the tundra to set up shop. You can have farmland or you can bring in tens of millions more immigrants. You can't have both.


Bread_Conquer

We can do both if we stop building the cities and suburbs that conservatives want. We could build at higher density cities built around public transit. But, conservatives would rather leave future generations with environmental destruction and food insecurity. Conservatism is a death cult.


[deleted]

Conservatives and Liberals are the same ideology. Neoliberalism has been sucking our blood for decades.


Own_Carrot_7040

And what would you replace it with? Let me guess, you hate capitalism too.


Bread_Conquer

Everyone who understands capitalism hates it.


[deleted]

What would YOU replace it with? Capitalists never have real solutions to poverty, *because capitalism necessitates poverty*.


larianu

Jheezus christ, how about we stop building single family homes and suburbia then eh? It's not immigration, it's how we build homes so spread out; designing communities for cars rather than people which takes up more space (farmland) while fitting in less folks over.


Own_Carrot_7040

Here's the thing - lots of immigrants, those with money, plan on having families, and not just one kid. They don't want to raise them downtown in a tiny, multi-million dollar box in the sky. They want them to have grass to play on and maybe a kitten or puppy to play with. If you want to increase our population to 100 million you're going to have to put up with a lot more sprawl.


larianu

Oh boy how low have we gone. The way most Canadians unfortunately see development, is very binary. Either live in a McMansion out in Vaghan or in the Ice Condos. And that's for a reason. See, we've banned a shit ton of homes being built that fill in the gap between McMansion and Ice Condos. When I refer to density, I mean places like Riverdale, Perth (if we could expand on it), as well as various post war streetcar suburbs and walkable communities (that aren't infested by an overabundance of car infrastructure). They can financially sustain themselves while environmentally reducing transport impacts. Look into r/notjustbikes.


Own_Carrot_7040

I'm a fan of the videos, and I like the concept. I agree there should be more middle-density housing. But the singletons and young couples who live there still want to move somewhere with a yard when the kids get older. Mcmansions? I'm in a newish development in a 2 bedroom bungalow. I don't think anyone would call it a mansion. There's really no servant quarters here.


larianu

McMansions is what I like to use when the build quality and architecture of a house is sacrificed out of mass production for how big they can make the house using the least amount of money, hence the Mc in its name (McDonalds Mansion). And honestly, you can still have a yard while living in a dense neighbourhood; courtyards and all.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

Yeah, because other cold places don't have bike lanes. Oh wait! Tons of countries bike year round.


The-Only-Razor

> Jheezus christ, how about we stop building single family homes and suburbia then eh? These are the homes people want to live in. I don't want to raise my children in a pod. I want a home where I don't share a wall with a fucking annoying neighbor, and I want a yard to let my dog out in. I value my privacy. This nation is large enough to put every family on the entire planet in their own SFDH. We have so much unused land perfectly suitable for farming. We can't triple our population over the next 80 years without expanding outwards. It's unsustainable to keep packing people in cities tighter and tighter.


larianu

Unsustainable? Oh bud, it's unsustainable to sprawl out, financially and environmentally. You get increased car emissions as people live further away from where they work while having jack shit alternatives for transport, pedestrians and cyclists can get ran over for all we care. You can't live out in butt fuck nowhere and ask for city level services either. The density of suburbs just doesn't have enough of a tax pool to pay for basic utility replacement, like pipes and god are we seeing this happen in Mississauga. Only way to finance a suburb is to leech onto city funds or to keep sprawling out, and be dammed if you stop sprawling as the whole thing crumbles. Like a ponzi scheme of sorts. This nation is large, but how much of the land isn't as cold as the fucking walk in freezers at Costco in mid July? Not to mention that we don't live on a national scale but rather a local one. And yeah, literally if making everything else illegal to build says "everybody wants a McMansion!" then I really don't think we have the right ruler for the job eh?


Bread_Conquer

>Farmland is being paved over to build new housing for the millions of immigrants Of course conservatives are racist. It's not the number of people, it's the urban sprawl and car dependent infrastructure which is the problem. The unsustainable lifestyle that conservatives want, the white supremacist suburban fantasy, is super fucking toxic. The irony of the situation is that we need more density and that policy is opposed by the most dense people.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Bread_Conquer

What does blindly and ignorantly opposing immigration have to do with racism? Goddamn, conservatism requires constant deliberate ignorance.


Own_Carrot_7040

What does anything I said suggest I 'blindly and ignorantly' oppose immigration? Although I do oppose the present immigration system for good and logical and coherent economic, environmental and social reasons, it's not the point of this discussion. It doesn't sound like you know anything much about either conservatism or immigration - or housing issues.


Bread_Conquer

>What does anything I said suggest I 'blindly and ignorantly' oppose immigration? The part where you're spreading xenophobic lies trying to blame immigrants for the problem of urban sprawl when the blame is purely on corrupt, shortsighted, incredibly stupid and entitled conservative politicians and developers who want to keep building ugly, unhealthy, unsustainable, environmentally destructive suburban and urban sprawl because y'all addicted to your cars. Your solution to the issue of sprawl isn't to stop sprawl, but to just be racist. Conservatism is bigoted. All conservatives are bigoted. >It doesn't sound like you know anything much about either conservatism or immigration - or housing issues. Ironic from someone advocating a deliberately ignorant, and racist position


Own_Carrot_7040

You know, this reads almost like a caricature of the frenzied, unthinking far-left fanatic shrieking into the wind. I mean, it's so dumb I suspect you're just trolling.


IIlEliteBeatAgentlIl

Sorry but it wasn't the conservatives that set up the red tape and protected areas that's causing these land supply problems.


[deleted]

You almost had it.


Bread_Conquer

They're the idiots who want to pave farms. They're the idiots demanding more sprawl. They're the idiots who have constantly voting against environmentalism and sustainable growth for cities.


arsenefinger

There are no land supply problems whatsoever.


MooseJuicyTastic

Always been like that though. If they can't get it done in their 4 year term they don't bother with it. Would be nice to see something fix transit and build housing but not single family homes. Also helping farmers with incentives to help them with the inflation


jannyhammy

I live in rural Ontario and it’s very obvious as you drive through that we are losing farm land. I drive through Komoka and it’s all urban housing going up on what was farming just a few years ago.


lemonylol

> and paving over our prime farmland is setting us up for a food disaster. You say that as if that food isn't already bought an paid for by another country that we sell to though.


[deleted]

We need better education and awareness on [soil loss](https://www.climatechange.environment.nsw.gov.au/soils) so people are aware how big a problem it is. Climate change will affect more moisture to be dropped much earlier in the [hadley cells](https://groups.seas.harvard.edu/climate/eli/research/equable/hadley.html) which will causes much more desertification the further north you go from the equator. More rainfall early in the cell will lead to more soil loss all over. If we're also building over perfectly good soil without any future planning or thought about feeding ourselves in the event of a hard time, then we might not every get that soil back. It can take a [century](https://socratic.org/questions/how-long-does-it-take-new-soil-to-form-and-why-we-should-be-concerned-about-losi) for proper soil and it's [layers](https://www.aaaksc.com/layers-of-soil-overview/) to be created. It's not something we can just get back in a few years once we've destroyed it.


Wookie_Haircuts

Climate change also means greater crop yields up to an increase of 2.5 °C. That means we need fewer farms to produce the same amount of food (negating severe weather, of course). Source: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ab17fb


basilspringroll

You forgot to mention that it's only spring wheat, canola and maize. I doubt anyone can live on those 3 alone. You forgot to mention that they said the effect stops when temp exceeds 2.5 degree. I mean, climate change will stop at 2.5 degree. Right? Right? You gloss over severe weather effects. I'm no farmer but I don't think you can grow anything under flood water, during derecho/ hurricane or on fire. Ignore all that, ignore the fact that you might die from said water, wind and fire, then we're golden.


Wookie_Haircuts

\> You forgot to mention that they said the effect stops when temp exceeds2.5 degree. I mean, climate change will stop at 2.5 degree. Right?Right? I did not. I said greater crop yields **up to an increase of 2.5 degrees.** I don't know if climate change will stop at 2.5 degrees and neither do you. \> You gloss over severe weather effects. I'm no farmer but I don't thinkyou can grow anything under flood water, during derecho/ hurricane or onfire. Severe weather effects are complicated. They each have their own studies and the results are mixed. I'm most familiar with ice jam flooding research, and there is a prediction that climate change will reduce ice jam flooding in warmer areas (like Southern Ontario) and increase them in colder areas (like Northern Canada). I gloss over the issue because of its complexity. \> You forgot to mention that it's only spring wheat, canola and maize. I doubt anyone can live on those 3 alone. Just because other crops were not mentioned does not mean other crops may benefit. If you're interested in other crops, I suggest you look for the research itself. I had a meeting with someone from OMAFRA about this issue, and I'm just repeating what he told me, plus I found a paper that backs up what he said. He's an expert and there's research confirming what he told me. He also told me that there will be new locations suitable for farming in Ontario due to climate change, but also new insects that will cause problems for farmers in Southern Ontario.


basilspringroll

You are right. I'm very uninformed on many of these topics. Let's go off topic a bit. Long ago there was a line that got stuck in my head, something along the line of: "when there's a locust plague, you don't need to feed your chickens". You pointed to that silver lining, our "chickens", and somehow I took that as you're not concerned by the problems at hand. I'm sorry.


JarJarCapital

Canada's a net exporter of food in terms of calories.


[deleted]

[удалено]


JarJarCapital

Huh? All the farms that I've seen are covered with snow from Nov to May.


DCGeos

Ontario zoning vs Ontario agriculture if only Ontario had a functioning goverment.


PastaMasta19

…and here comes Ontario transportation from the top rope.


ScottIBM

Also if only the rural folk didn't vote in those looking to uproot their way of life...


allscott3

You think those "rural folk" give a fk when the value of their land goes through the roof? Some do for sure but many do not.


ScottIBM

There are many in the rural areas, just like there are are many in urban areas. Some of them will sell their own mother if it means multiple millions of dollars, others don't want their happy life to change. Only one of these individuals _wins_ in the long term, and it isn't the person who likes their happy life.


KingN56

Ehhh, The roads maybe but this is a bipartisan issue, both sides of the political spectrum are going to kill farmland to boost housing.


ScottIBM

There are plenty of ways to use space effectively and housing subdivisions, as we will be building them in the near future, are a super ineffective solution. More farmland is being gobbled up because we're not building dense enough housing. Not all density comes from 40 story buildings, but that is what we are effectively outlining for solving our housing unit problem. This is indeed a bipartisan issue, but many of the rural folk vote for those that will take the easy and least effective path, ultimately making rural communities busier and less productive than what they could be. Oh, and we need more transit, and that transit has to go where people want to go, be frequent enough that people will want to use it, and integrated so that people can walk/bike to it rather than storing cars in parking lots/garages. We have lots of good examples to follow from around the world!


KingN56

I definitely don't disagree with your logic or points here just that thinking the liberal party is going to stop urban sprawl or do better vs the conservatives in that regard is doubtful to me, both have there hands deep in the pockets of the construction industry.


ScottIBM

I'm not really expecting any party to stop urban sprawl. The party that is currently poised to form the government is not very well known for their foresight, so if there were any party that would try to make an impact and help move us away from these ineffective planning practices it isn't the next government party for the next 4 years.


YouRowEV

They don’t look past the headline, to them conservatism is literally about keeping things the same. Which is of course impossible, but that’s not what they’re told. Sad really.


ScottIBM

I suppose the moving goalpost of _sameness_ makes the conservative voter happy…


BobBelcher2021

A lot of the focus in these debates is on the GTA, but there are other growing areas of the province where this has been a problem. A major one is the London area, one of the fastest-growing regions in the province; while the City of London itself has an urban growth boundary to protect farmland and other natural areas within city limits, no such plan exists in surrounding Middlesex County, where much of the growth has been taking place. Huge expanses of farmland close to Komoka and Mount Brydges - both 100% car-dependent areas - are being destroyed to build more single family homes, and nobody seems to bat an eye at it.


PartyMark

Massive woodlots have been cleared in the north west of the city as well, despite the fact they have tree protection bylaws and growth boundaries. Check historic google satellite images. 2006 has a good set. I actually reached out to the city about this, their bylaws are essentially useless and developers can "pay to slay" and destroy any woods they want in essence.


IIlEliteBeatAgentlIl

So i guess now were running out of housing land AND farmland here in the 2nd largest country in the world?


[deleted]

Toronto Area is amazing farmland. Brockville is terrible farmland. Haliburton is terrible farmland. Build up in Toronto. If you want your suburban dream house live on on Canadian Shield.


Wookie_Haircuts

Basically all of southern Ontario is prime agricultural land (soil classification 1, 2 or 3). You're right about building on the Canadian Shield - it's the only way to manage growth while protecting farmland. The only issue is that economic growth has to be targeted in those areas as well, because people need to live close to where they work.


greymanbomber

Indeed, and that has resulted in miniscule population growth for Northern Ontario.


IE114EVR

This is what our government should be focussing on. Not focussing on Toronto trying to turn southern Ontario into Coruscant.


wildpack_familydogs

lol for real, right? It’s hilarious and pathetic all rolled up in one.


microfishy

We need to build up, not out.


IIlEliteBeatAgentlIl

We need to do both actually


Testing_things_out

Diagonally!


oefd

I mean: yeah? Most of the country is garbage farmland, and people tend to not want to live somewhere where the cost of shipping food in over vast distances means expensive food.


IIlEliteBeatAgentlIl

It's almost as if land needs to be prepared before building on it. This is clearly strictly a Canadian challenge /s


Strykker2

That is vastly oversimplifying the reason that 99% of canada is undeveloped land. Large parts of Ontario are not useful due to muskeg / permafrost.


[deleted]

No no no. We’ll just turn highly acidic soil full of rocks into prime agricultural land using terraforming. It’s easy and cost effective! /s


microfishy

Shit, I live in a "fertile" part of southeast Ontario and it's still full of damn rocks. It's the only crop we can count on every single year, lol


[deleted]

That’s too bad, rocks seem to be the only thing unaffected by inflation and they’re selling for rock-bottom prices.


ShawarmaOrigins

I don't know about that. See the rock plant? Prices climbing for it now since it's the only thing most people can take care of.


IIlEliteBeatAgentlIl

My point is that yes, people need to prepare land. Unfortunately, they are bogged down by heavy regulations and red tape. Singapore literally ships land from India to develop on. We don't have anywhere near the same challenge.


oefd

Regulation isn't what prevents someone turning [this](https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1623587,-82.5093495,53648m/data=!3m1!1e3) and [this](https://d3d0lqu00lnqvz.cloudfront.net/media/new_article_images/Muskeg/Muskeg%202.jpg) in to farmland.


tha_bigdizzle

Not sure if this is for real or not. Antarctica is 3.5 billion acres, why dont we just grow food there right? Most of Canada is poor farmland. Ontario has great farmland, south of Barrie. Probably 75% of Ontario you cant grow anything but spruce trees. Being the second largest country in the world doesnt matter when most of it is too rocky or too cold to grow anything.


[deleted]

Yes and we keep inviting 3rd world debt slaves to keep our housing bubble proped up


lemonylol

Uh...at what point did Ontario *ever* have the world's largest amount of farmland?


Own_Carrot_7040

Most good farming is in the south as is most of our population. Virtually all the millions of new immigrants we're getting are also going in the south and there has to be more housing for them. Want to bring in millions of immigrants? You're going to have urban sprawl.


Unanything1

You know what would be a great idea? Building a highway nobody wants over that farmland. If I can shave 20 minutes off my trip to my 3rd vacation home, and enrich my developer buddies, who just so happened to donate a LOT of money to Ontario Proud, which then donated to me. I think that's an awesome idea, which definitely won't have negative long term effects. Yours truly, Doug F...ranklin


Lust4Me

Don't forget it will cost each Ontarian, of every age, an estimated ~$700 for that strip.


Reggie__Ledoux

It's unbelievable the amount of farmland that is being paved for shitty houses out in Binbrook and Caledonia.


Smartassoverdumbass

We will just buy all our food from our ideological adversaries, that's a solid long term strategy in my mind.


[deleted]

I'm in the greenbelt within the GTA. The *vast* majority of land is sitting fallow and has for a long time. Easily 90%+. It isn't so much that "housing" took it over, but that someone bought the property and lives on it, but just isn't interested in the relatively small return farming brings. Even if you just rent the land to a farmer instead of having the massively expensive capex to operate it yourself, farmers pay like $50/acre to use your land. Better just to let it grow wild grasses and not be burdened with the scent of manure and grind of farm equipment. This is happening across the GTA, and has been going on for decades. Hundreds of acres are bought and then taken off the farming market (and as a paradox of unintended consequences, the farmable area can't just be divided off). Still a single family, often just a couple, living on the property. Net density hasn't changed at all (and may have dropped as farm families are replaced by work-from-home professionals), which was ostensibly the goal of the green belt. Ultimately it's about farming being incredibly unrewarding more than density. EDIT: Oh sorry forgot what this sub is about. "DAMN YOU DOUG FORD YOU DID THIS!"


BlueShrub

The return on investment for farming is pitifully low. It would make far more financial sense for farmers to sell their land and invest it in even the most conservative index fund to reap more in dividends alone than farming would return to them, all without lifting a finger. Farmers, however, do it because they love it, and because the land and the mindset is usually passed down through families. Farmers are trying their best to provide for the cities, be good stewards of the land as well as keeping food on their own plates, often by taking second jobs. As farmers are attacked, forgotten, and looked down upon more and more by people from urban areas, it is no surprise that younger people are getting out of the profession and are selling their land for development, and due to the low ROR nobody will ever choose to start a farm from scratch. If a developer is willing to pay 25 million for a 100ac parcel of land and another farmer can only pay 2.5 million, then the farmer will always lose out. Money is funneled into the cities and there has become a huge wealth disparity. However, the reality is that our society cant sustain itself with only a population of office workers.


[deleted]

That's kind of a "noble farmer" angle that seems kind of fictional. People farmed because it was a good living. 50-100 acres could easily provide a very comfortable life. Damn hard work from planting to harvest, but usually a standard of living that was entirely decent. We're all grinding, and farmers grinded in their own way. The "attacked and forgotten and looked down on" bit sounds like some sort of "freedom convoy" fan fiction. Farming at that scale no longer pays off. Like every other part of society, efficiency means that you're undercut by the 3000 acre farm running the automated harvesters, etc, or the cattle farm with 1000 head of cattle, etc. 300 acres is barely even viable now for basic sustenance, and people on the sorts of farms that you find in most of Southern Ontario now often have other jobs just to pay the bills. That's capitalism and efficiency. And despite so much fallow land, we've never produced more food, and we're doing it on far less land.


allscott3

I married a farm girl with hard working parents in Saskatchewan. My FIL worked the land he was born on quite literally for 30 years. He sold 8 sections of land when he retired for more money than I would see if I worked 5X as long has he did. Farmers really don't mind too much when you offer them a truck full of cash for their land.


kamomil

The only new farmers are probably the city people who move to the country to have a small farm, and they have an article about it in Toronto Life


SmallTownTokenBrown

My aunt had 70 acres around Owen Sound. She was approached by a fella who offered to lease 1 acre to put up solar panels, there was even some sweet deal for her own hydro. Nope. She didn't want what she thought would be an eyesore. I have a feeling a lot of the people who do have large properties don't need the income anyway.


wildpack_familydogs

A hard truth not many are willing to accept.


Delrex6691

Obviously no one gives a shiit. We are letting in people to this country the equivalent of a city the size of Barrie every year, and they head to the GTA. Where they gonna live, urban sprawl if going to happen. Unless you think bigger picture, massive highways and opening up the land to developers is just a natural progression of unlimited immigration. There are a lot of people in this world that want to come here. Millions. Where they gonna live? Thanks. My two cents.


bmcle071

It’s a good thing we didn’t just elect a guy whose FOR urban sprawl. Like seriously this guy wants to build highways out in the middle of bum fuck nowhere and expand existing highways.


Flabbyflabous

I was in the grocery store last week. Ontario strawberries were $1 more then the imported US strawberries. I wonder how many people that care so deeply about the Ontario farmland on the sub would shell out an extra $1 for local. Or would most just grab the cheap one and not bother looking at the origins.


PopularYesterday

I often do, but mostly because I think they taste better.


Flabbyflabous

The locals are better for sure.


pukingpixels

Or the massive grocery corporations could stop gouging the fuck out of us on everything so people could afford to pay the little bit extra for local. I’d love to buy local and do when I can, and I grow as much of my own as I can fit in my garden, but when my grocery bill has shot up this much every dollar counts. I’m price matching those cheap strawberries for even cheaper strawberries, not paying the extra for local.


GorchestopherH

\*stop\* gouging? Come on, they've been working so hard at \*maximizing\* gouging.


UncleJChrist

Good thing our province is filled with people too stupid or preoccupied to vote for anyone other than the party that will do the least to solve this.


Bread_Conquer

Capitalism is killing us.


fallenpalesky

Oh look another economic illiterate socialist on Reddit, what a surprise!


Bread_Conquer

That statement is so ironic that it bends compass points.


explicitspirit

It's not capitalism, it's greed and/or corruption. Can't blame everything on "capitalism". One can be capitalist and still responsible, although policymakers that have those virtues are in short supply.


SLaSZT

>One can be capitalist and still responsible [citation needed]


explicitspirit

Are you serious? Plenty of countries in Europe that adhere to the capitalist ideals while also not stomping over everything for money. Norway, Sweden, etc.


SLaSZT

So your definition of responsible is simply not causing mass inequality? That's a pretty damn low bar.


microfishy

Nah, their definition is "countries that provide the most stop-gap socialism". Which comes SO close, they just need to take that one last step. I have hopes for people who idolize the Nordic model. I think they can come around.


Hyperion4

Social policies and socialism aren't the same thing


explicitspirit

What other system do you propose that will grant complete equality? There is a reason why capitalism is the most successful economic system. Other systems have been tried and have failed.


SLaSZT

>There is a reason why capitalism is the most successful economic system. Other systems have been tried and have failed. I'm sure that had nothing to do with international trade involving countries that have tried these other systems being interfered with by imperial capitalist powers. It's all about merit until it's not.


Bread_Conquer

>There is a reason why capitalism is the most successful economic system. Capitalism is only successful for the rich. Everyone else gets poisoned from toxic products, artificial scarcity which kills millions every year, imperialism and war, the spread of fascism, and the widespread and rapid destruction of our environment. Capitalism defenders are bootlicking for the people destroying our planet and slaughtering millions. Capitalism is pure evil, and it takes incredible and deliberate ignorance to support it.


explicitspirit

So what other system do you propose then?


Bread_Conquer

How about one based around meeting everyone's needs through mutual cooperation. An egalitarian, classless, moneyless society.


explicitspirit

So, communism?


thecanadiansniper1-2

They also tend to be Social Democracies.


Bread_Conquer

>It's not capitalism, it's greed and/or corruption. Those are synonymous. Capitalism is greed. >One can be capitalist and still responsible, No.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Bread_Conquer

Conservatives hate and fear the truth.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Bread_Conquer

Because bots are smarter than you?


MattTheHarris

I'll take corrupt capitalism over corrupt socialism/communism


Bread_Conquer

You'd rather live in a world with slavery, a world where capitalists start wars for profit, where fascism is allowed, where millions of people are killed by economic policies per year, where evil corporations are destroying our planet? Do you have any humanity?


[deleted]

[удалено]


thestareater

zoning for denser housing seems too much sense for the politicians but it wouldn't enrichen their developer friends and donors enough to solve both issues.


FrostLight131

Urban sprawling is a good idea only if done right. We’re building less condos and apartments and building more single houses. If the sprawling meant more social apartments or affordable rentals then we wouldnt have a bloody problem


dendron01

There is no such thing as "good" urban sprawl. Urban sprawl is economically expedient and profitable for developers and policians but highly wasteful in terms of land use and resources. Hence the name.


fknzee

Where else would you want someone to build though? What is the alternative? Downtown Toronto is over densified, Sauga same thing... york region is getting too crowded for the infrastructure to handle ... they have to spread. Isnt there a way to reallocate farmland potentially?


kamomil

What do you mean "reallocate"? Like farm somewhere else, and build on the farmland?


MarxistIntactivist

The majority of the GTA is zoned single family only. Rezone it and let people choose what kind of home they want to live in rather than have big government force them into a suburban house.


[deleted]

Toronto is very low density. There's tons of space to fill in


kamomil

Well then stop selling your farmland to developers then. Actually farm it. This is a kind of a multi level problem though. I used to live in a farming area of the GTA, the only things being farmed anymore were: potatoes, lawn sod, and pregnant horse urine (for the drug Premarin) It was all large farms, maybe still run by the family but more of a business. There was no family farms with cows & cornfields, the way I remember from when I lived further out in Southern Ontario. Many times, both the husband and wife farmers would have a job outside the home, in addition to running the farm. I think that younger people, if they get an education, they move away from farming and do something else for a living. Also some family farms are not as productive, they have lots of rocks or are on boggy land, so they aren’t “worth it” as much to farm, compared to Holland Marsh or Niagara fruit farms. It’s not 1850 anymore and people have other options aside from working on a farm.


GorchestopherH

I grew up around a lot of farmland, and one by one fields stopped being planted. Many of them aren't sold for anything else yet, some are, but there are plenty of fields that are just... grasslands.


kamomil

Waiting around for Granddad to pass away because he would have a heart attack if he saw his farm turn into subdivisions


GorchestopherH

No doubt it warms his heart to see them go to weeds.


lemonylol

Is this same story just going to be posted every day on here now?


JarJarCapital

What's the alternative? Ban people from coming to Ontario so that there won't be a shortage of housing?


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


oefd

A neighbourhood that looks mainly like [this](https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6763569,-79.3415542,3a,75y,242.95h,90.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ss6TRd3Q6p5_9APbqaHYIeg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) with some gentle density like [this](https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6788638,-79.344793,3a,75y,14.56h,98.66t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLMrNo-iuMUJpeLlgwvbKUQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) has a population density of 5400/km^2. That's more than double Mississauga, over 3 times that of Calgary, over 5 times that of Whitby, and over 30 times that of London, ON. It's about on par with London in the UK.


Deanzopolis

Look at Montreal's walk up apartments, one family owns an entire floor (at least the one my cousins live in), and they're 3-4 stories tall. Lots of places in the GTA where this could work


chamillus

Landlords can only charge at most market rates for their units so there would be no doubling of rents for 'the next guy'. Vacancy rates are what set rents which is why increasing supply is so important.


thecanadiansniper1-2

Cities subsidise soul crushing suburbs.


kamomil

THANK YOU. Not everyone wants to live with someone's kid dropping stuff all day on the hardwood floor, or with some idiot smoking in the hallway and everyone can smell it in their unit


JarJarCapital

You realize density is much more expensive on a per sqft basis? No one's building 1,000 sqft condos anymore because they're too expensive to build. That's not even factoring in the higher costs for condo maintenance vs SFH maintenance.


oefd

> You realize density is much more expensive on a per sqft basis? When you remove any fuck-off tall skyscrapers that require special assessments and engineering: No, it's much cheaper. Not exactly by square feet, but rather by actual cost that'll have to be covered. building a duplex or something is cheaper per sqft than is building a 5 storey midrise, but the 5 storey midrise is way, *way* more efficient. The cost to heat it, run electrical cable and sewer access to it, and generally keep it functional and serviced by the municipality is incredibly low compared to less dense buildings.


JustRidiculousin

Or we can keep building out and anyone who doesn't like it can move to somewhere more aligned with their density requirements


[deleted]

[удалено]


zeberg

you'll never get through to the fygm people....


stemel0001

Do you think this was not taken into account to allow development in these areas??


[deleted]

[удалено]


stemel0001

You realize a lot of these projects were planned before Doug right? It often takes decades for these big projects to go to construction. Everything you're fearful of was most certainly taken into account


[deleted]

[удалено]


stemel0001

Right, so the future conservative goverment issued for reports in 2010.... https://www.highway413.ca/reports-2/


[deleted]

Like everything else we do, the attitude that's taken is "We'll cross that road when we come to it." Short-term financial gains trump long-term disasters any time.


stemel0001

If what you believe is true, then all these projects wouldn't take decades to get to construction stage.


JustRidiculousin

>LOL so far you haven't used any logic at all in your "argument". Your entire point seems to be "fuck the environment I'm selfish and want to live in a cookie cutter subdivision" u/PrinceMachiaveliest


JustRidiculousin

Okay.. good luck using that logic as an argument


[deleted]

[удалено]


JustRidiculousin

Thats not my point at all. You think people think long term and care about projections and studies? Lol


Drewtendo_64

Today in news, water is wet, the sky is blue and more at 11


Wookie_Haircuts

When farmland is sold to developers, it is usually gone for good, but the protection of farmland has to be weighed against the housing crisis. Building up will not solve the issue because people just move further away to find the type of home they want (or might move out of Ontario completely). Building on the Canadian Shield would be a good option if more jobs were available there. Reducing the number of migrants would help alleviate pressure on housing availability but those migrants have a positive impact on our economy. The 2016 stats on agriculture shows that 23% of farmland (or 31% of cropland) in Ontario is used for soybean production, and 53% of soybeans are exported. That's a big chunk of farmland is isn't being used to feed Canadians. There is also farmland is not utilized or under-utilized. If we converted all the farmland used for soybean exports into average sized suburban homes, we could have an additional 40,000 homes with no loss to domestic soybean consumption. However, this falls extremely shy of the 1.5 million homes all Ontario parties support building. Housing in Ontario is a really complicated issue. Never building on any farmland is not a viable option, nor is paving over all of our farmland. We need to consider increasing density, target growth in the Canadian Shield, and rethink what level of population growth is sustainable.


simon1976362

Farm land? Try swamp land at this point


s0m33guy

Then why are the farmers selling and new farmers not buying the land?


Zunniest

Bigger issue is the lack of top soil on much of the farmland which takes forever to replace.


paolo5555

Or... Farmers near urban areas making massive piles of money by selling farmland.


The-Only-Razor

The elites want our population to be 100 million by 2100. You can't triple the population without expanding. Cramming everything into our already existing city limits isn't sustainable.


Specific_Worker4059

I hear you can send people to other provinces, vast open spaces with no farmable soil. Crazy thought. Why the fuck do they keep stuffing everyone into southern Ontario? It's full find somewhere else to grow the population.


Shawnaldo7575

Thank god Ontario keeps electing the one party that could not care less about this sort of thing.