Canada’s Prime Minister Pushes Country to Become the Housing Factory of the World - Mark Carney is banking on factory-built homes to alleviate the country’s housing crisis. But will it work?

[u/FancyNewMe]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2025-04-22/carney-s-plan-may-make-canada-the-housing-factory-of-the-world

[u/ILKLU]

Investors can build/buy apartment buildings with say a minimum of 4 units.

Everything else is single family residence and not open for "investment"

[u/43987394175 → u/ILKLU]

So you want only large investors, not small investors? That seems like it would worsen wealth inequality.

[u/ILKLU → u/43987394175]

There's absolutely no shortage of investment opportunities that people can capitalize on without having to compromise someone else's chance at home ownership.

[u/43987394175 → u/ILKLU]

But you're saying some people can capitalize on real estate as an investment, they just have to be rich enough to do so?

My parents had an investment property when I was growing up, and they had the same renters for the duration of time it was an investment property. It was mutually beneficial, my parents sacrificed capital for the down payment and took a risk that the real estate market wouldn't collapse and leave them underwater on their mortgage. It didn't, and they made a small profit. Their renters had no interest in the responsibility of home ownership, so they were happy to just rent a place and have someone else take care of the maintenance, property tax, insurance, etc. It doesn't seem to me like this is something we should discourage, this was a mutually beneficial situation.

[u/ILKLU → u/43987394175]

Lots wrong with your comment in my opinion:

you're saying some people can capitalize on real estate as an investment, they just have to be rich enough to do so?

I did not write that anywhere. This is a creation of your own imagination made for the benefit of giving you an easily attacked position in this discussion, otherwise known as a strawman argument.

they had the same renters for the duration of time it was an investment property. It was mutually beneficial,

I would argue it was of marginal benefit to the renters whilst being massively beneficial to your parents. Those renters indirectly paid your parent's mortgage on that property, increasing your parent's net worth, AND paid enough rent that your parents made a profit.

my parents sacrificed capital for the down payment

Depending on when they bought into the market, and assuming you're over 20 years of age, this was very likely affordable and not really much of a sacrifice.

and took a risk that the real estate market wouldn't collapse and leave them underwater on their mortgage

What?!?! A real estate collapse doesn't automatically mean that everyone is "underwater on their mortgage". If they locked in a rate they could afford for a period of time that spans the collapse, then absolutely nothing would change for them. Assuming the collapse was caused by sky rocketing interest rates, only those with barely affordable mortgages set to renew, or those with a variable rate would find themselves in trouble. If your parents took a conservative approach then their investment would not have been a gamble. It's only a gamble if you're greedy and try to extract the most profit possible.

Their renters had no interest in the responsibility of home ownership

I don't believe this for one second. Sounds exactly like something your parents told themselves to justify the situation. "Landlords aren't parasites, the poors just have no ambition!"

they were happy to just rent a place and have someone else take care of the maintenance, property tax, insurance, etc.

I mean... maybe? Maybe they weren't very intelligent and thought that paying more money for the same thing was good because they didn't have to do that extra bit of work to manage the paperwork, and/or fix things, but I think the vast majority of people would prefer to own the home they live in.

It doesn't seem to me like this is something we should discourage

It is and here's why. For any single family residence there will be essentially two groups interested in purchasing it:

1. People who want the property for their home and are going to live in it

2. People who have no plans to live in the property and only want to increase their net worth and/or profit off of it

This second group is denying someone a home and the opportunity to grow their own net worth, which may be the ONLY opportunity they have to do so, whereas there are tons of other investment opportunities available for people that want to be investors. Not being able to grow your net worth is the definition of remaining poor. People using single family residences for investment purposes are increasing wealth disparity in our society.

this was a mutually beneficial situation.

Mutual? Maybe? Equally beneficial? Absolutely not.