I would actually think they aren't so worried about their various financial interests (which if they are substantial are traditionally supposed to be in blind trusts in the case of the leaders), but more or less are worried more about the voters. Once the boomers die off, over the next couple of decades, I think you'll see a gradual, but dramatic shift in perspective about the governments involvement in housing strategy.

The government thought, couldn't run a lemonade stand without 40 layers of bureaucracy, so I mean be careful what you wish for.

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 2 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

which if they are substantial are traditionally supposed to be in blind trusts in the case of the leaders

I'm referring to the various real estate developers, banking and other corporate donors who donate through organized individual donations and otherwise have access to politicians that voters can only dream of. Like Mirko Bibic having drinks with the CRTC chair.

I think you’ll see a gradual, but dramatic shift in perspective about the governments involvement in housing strategy.

Probably, but fascism may not wait that long.

The government thought, couldn’t run a lemonade stand without 40 layers of bureaucracy, so I mean be careful what you wish for.

I don't believe that, especially given how many serious industries the gov't of Canada used to run and still does to this day. I'm the opposite of a Thatcherite believer. I prefer gov't bureaucracy to corporate bureaucracy. :D There's little choice in-between for many sectors.

E: Or at least a choice between gov't and corp bureaucracy.