Cost of housing in Canada

[Brad Sallows]

Not sure how government building low-income housing helps. People with low incomes can afford to buy rather than rent? Or is the definition of "low income" elastic to suit argumentation? Allowing government, with its deep pockets and indifference to its own anti-competitive practices (eg. subsidizing whatever it does to make it happen, if necessary) is good for the market by driving out everyone else?

Attempts to force housing creation aimed at any particular moderate to low income level will fail because the people above that level will, if the housing is in any way decent, be able to outbid the target audience...and the price of housing goes up. The housing problem is best solved by allowing developers to satisfy the uppermost wealth decile first, then the next one down, and so on. I suppose that grates some people's sense of fairness, but it does mitigate bidding wars at levels further down and when a person moves up, they are vacating a place somewhere else. Mostly, though, attempts to force "low income housing" creation must be paid for by someone if not the prospective residents, which means higher pricing somewhere else. Oops.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Then we can have factories make "low income cars" and farmers can section off "low income food" fields.....and together we can all aspire to be "low income" people to reap the bounty of these benefits.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Then we can have factories make "low income cars" and farmers can section off "low income food" fields.....and together we can all aspire to be "low income" people to reap the bounty of these benefits.

 

[Brad Sallows]

In that spirit, all the people who aspire to work for "non-profits" could trim their incomes to match exactly their fundamental needs and disavow luxuries, becoming themselves "non-profit".

 

[Good2Golf]

Let's not encourage treating housing as a vehicle for investment speculation. Driving up the average cost of housing lowers our collective quality of life.

I'm firmly convinced that Japan has zoning right; it's jurisdiction of the federal government, not the municipalities. having everything local hands way too much power to the NIMBYs.

Supply problems should also be strongly tackled by governments directly: build low income housing.

Да, товарищ!

 

[QV]

A pattern emerges...

 

[Colin Parkinson]

In Rona today, talking to the Persian lady with a heavy accent, meaning she is a fairly recent(5-10 years) arrival here, We talked about how gas is now $2.39 a litre, she said "Canada has a problem, you have a fool as a Minister, he is stupid" Methinks the Liberals are in trouble.

 

[lenaitch]

I am at the point where I believe private companies shouldn’t be allowed to own single dwelling homes. Many companies use our housing as a investment not a necessity. Simple example being in my relatively small city (approx 75k) one company bought up over 180 houses in the last two years, not to mention the other companies doing the same. We went from a city where a person working minimum wage could own a house to now requiring at least 25-30$ a hour to own one.

I wouldn’t trust everything Japan has going on, they are big on appearances but there is a dark underbelly to that society.

Interesting you should mention that. Regarding Sault Ste Marie ON:

From the link:

SooToday has confirmed that the same director of 14034686 Canada Inc. — a businessman named Nels Moxness — is also the director of 24 other numbered companies that own dozens of houses in Sault Ste. Marie. All told, his companies have purchased 129 properties, with the majority situated in and around the downtown core.​

​

Southern Ontario investor buying up homes in the Sault

Two dozen numbered companies directed by the same businessman have purchased a combined 129 properties, mostly downtown, according to records obtained by SooToday

www.sudbury.com

 

[Brad Sallows]

I suppose everyone who owns a rental property is keeping a low profile right now?

 

[Halifax Tar]

I suppose everyone who owns a rental property is keeping a low profile right now?

In Halifax they are persona non grata for many. And seen as some sort of social pariah.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Ah, yes. "How dare you provide something I need that I can't otherwise afford."

 

[Good2Golf]

…because 100% of Canadians can afford to own a house. There should be no need at all for rentals, right?


Or, Canada, the laggards that it is (just ask the G6), smarten up and crank down on allowing numbered company ownership of real estate that facilitates money laundering and other unpleasantries.

 

[Remius]

I was in the rental game for a few years. My then girlfriend at the time (now my wife) and I each had our own properties. When we merged households it wasn’t the best time to sell my condo so I opted to rent it out. I had a great tenant I wanted to keep her happy. My price was decent but just enough to break even on my costs. I made 100$ a month in in actual income when all was said and done. I was willing to absorb 100$ in increased costs if they went up before I would feel having to raise the rent. When my tenant gave me notice after three years (she was buying her own house) I opted to sell as the market was far better and got over asking.

I am glad I no longer am dealing with a rental. Despite having a good tenant it was more work than I wanted and can’t imagine dealing with a bad tenant or one that doesn’t pay.

 

[mariomike]

Recently, the Swiss investment bank UBS named Toronto as the number one real estate housing bubble in the world — not only above Vancouver, but also above London, Paris, San Francisco, New York, Tokyo, Hong Kong, and so on.

Global Real Estate Bubble Index 2024

Our analysis of residential property prices in 25 major cities shows bubble risk in housing markets declined further in 2024. Miami now shows the highest bubble risk for cities in this study, followed by Tokyo.

www.ubs.com

'The missing middle:' How Toronto became the biggest housing bubble in the world

Episode 172 of the Down to Business podcast

financialpost.com

Toronto builds houses, where a single family may live, and it builds gigantic skyscrapers, but it doesn’t construct many new four- to six-level multi unit buildings. She talked about why this is and why it may be too late.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Meanwhile, in BC

 

[Brad Sallows]

It'll be interesting to see whether the vacancy tax and flipping tax work at cross purposes. It'll be ironic if the arithmetic works out so that holding a property off the market and paying vacancy tax works out better than paying the flipping tax.

 

[mariomike]

Saw this in gun politics. Replying here.

QUOTE

>416/905 people into their homes apartment buildings.

END QUOTE

In 416, 62.3 per cent of residential land is exclusively zoned for detached houses.

The land in our area has not been graded down to put in housing grids. The housing follows the land.

Densification would change the character of a stable neighbourhood and devalue the properties.

Don't know how much of 905 is exclusively zoned for detached houses.

 

[Good2Golf]

Saw this in gun politics. Replying here.

QUOTE

>416/905 people into their homes apartment buildings.

END QUOTE

In 416, 62.3 per cent of residential land is exclusively zoned for detached houses.

The land in our area has not been graded down to put in housing grids. The housing follows the land.

Densification would change the character of a stable neighbourhood and devalue the properties.

Don't know how much of 905 is exclusively zoned for detached houses.

And the 37.7% that isn’t detached housing has significantly higher housing density and absolute numbers than detached houses. And closer to the LPC’s targeted demographic. And easier to campaign the numbers than trekking house to house.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Not sure how government building low-income housing helps. People with low incomes can afford to buy rather than rent? Or is the definition of "low income" elastic to suit argumentation? Allowing government, with its deep pockets and indifference to its own anti-competitive practices (eg. subsidizing whatever it does to make it happen, if necessary) is good for the market by driving out everyone else?

Attempts to force housing creation aimed at any particular moderate to low income level will fail because the people above that level will, if the housing is in any way decent, be able to outbid the target audience...and the price of housing goes up. The housing problem is best solved by allowing developers to satisfy the uppermost wealth decile first, then the next one down, and so on. I suppose that grates some people's sense of fairness, but it does mitigate bidding wars at levels further down and when a person moves up, they are vacating a place somewhere else. Mostly, though, attempts to force "low income housing" creation must be paid for by someone if not the prospective residents, which means higher pricing somewhere else. Oops.

Except when the developers come into a low rent place and drive out out the renters by jacking up the prices and developing the area to benefit from the low purchase price vs the higher resale, thanks to the areas that already have high rent/purchase costs creating less incentive to work in that area.
The developers don't generally give a shit about the low renters and where they live afterwards, they also don't give a shit about increased infrastructure costs (water, sewage, power and transportation) They only address any of that, because they are forced to. We seen unregulated real estate development in SE Asia and it's a mess. As much as the developers like to complain about government interference, they are the ones who expect government to deal with the issues they don't want to get involved in.

 

[Brad Sallows]

If only developers had such an easy time developing without the consent and connivance of city hall. They can only develop under terms set by politicians. If the situation is unacceptable, it's the politicians you ought be aiming at.