I really hope that it is important (I am being factitious) to force everyone to switch refrigerants every decade or so, to something that is inevitably more expensive and less reliable. We need to be constantly scrapping and replacing all this otherwise working equipment, because it is bad for the environment.

What was accomplished with LLM is really cool, I am sure there will be many future applications of this technology, just like there were many new uses for WWW after DOTCOM bubble burst. However, I just don't see anyone investing into AI making any kind of return, considering that most of it will evaporate in the inevitable market correction. This will likely also take down Microsoft that all in on AI and maybe even Google.

I don't have to look it up to know that what you call improving is intensification, or tearing down single lot detached homes that families would want to live in and replacing it is prefabricated Soviet-style rental apartments.

Only if you exclusively build ground-level parking. Multi-story parking garages are effective use of land.

I am a homeowner. It beat the market. I had some extensive repairs that required excavation. It still beat the market.

This is happening almost everywhere and it is done with encouragement of city planners. It is ideological.

Explainer on 15-minutes cities.

For example:
The Rents of Whiteness: Dismantling Possession and Exclusion in Anti-Racist Urban Planning

Planners confront the rents of Whiteness in many forms, including neighborhood exclusion, environmental injustice, and the occupation of tribal lands. Conceptualizing these situations as racial rent-seeking clarifies how benefits captured by White communities are inexorably linked to harms done in non-White communities. I conclude with recommendations for dismantling these rents.

Planning against planning: Anarchist urbanism as a critical praxis

Taking up the debates between Marxist and anarchist currents within radical geography, this study argues that the value of anarchist urbanism lies less in offering scalable alternatives than in exposing how planning reproduces property relations, expert authority and capitalist spatial logics.

A link..

Really? 15 years ago means you purchased in 2010-2011. Rather implies that you would be better off in some aspect. Clearly, it is not from financial point of view, you'd pay more in rent and would have no equity. No roof or furnace costs would come anywhere near eating that equity, you'd have to have something really catastrophic, like foundation getting washed out, for that to happen. So why do you think renting is better?

No, they are owned by rich people. Why are you trying to make it about race?

Canada has no shortage of land. Can you please explain how homeowners could conspire to prevent more housing getting built outside the existing urban boundary? They can't. Only urban planners, that have authority to not issue building permits, could do that. It is really bureaucracy that does that.