Canada has very little private land ownership.The Federal Gov hoards land and creates a severe shortage of land for individuals to purchase. They need to open up the billions of acres of accessible land to 1st time buyers and then to existing property owners. Especially in the Province of Ontario. They also intentionally keep interest rates low so existing house/property owners can leverage their properties to buy mo…
The federal government doesn't "hoard" land around areas where people would want to purchase a first home. The vast majority of crown land is not around any major urban centers. Canadian tech workers make way above median income levels.
Investors account for 30 per cent of home buying in Canada, data show
171–180 of 207 posts
Re: Investors account for 30 per cent of home buying in Canada, data show
#172Not sure about Canada, but I make way above the median in tech in California and I have zero interest in buying a home. Having a home would be a huge hassle when I look for new work every 3 or 4 years. The math shows a home in almost any area in the USA is only a financial benefit after 8 or more years of staying in that home (compared to an apartment), when taking closing costs, maintenance, large upfront interest,…
Historically the breakeven point is 5-7 years. It changes though: it can go down to 3 years if property values are rising quickly, and can go up to 10 years if property values tank right after you purchase.
In our current high-inflation environment it makes a little more sense than usual to borrow money and sink that money into an appreciating asset, which is why there's still such strong demand for homes despite the higher interest rates. In a high inflation environment, rents go up, home values go up, salaries go up, but mortgage amounts do not.
The advice remains the same. If you know you're going to stay in the same spot for a decade (if you have young children for example) you should probably buy a spot if you can afford it. If you know you're definitely going to move in less than 5 years you should probably rent. If you're somewhere in between, you should make the decision that's best for you. There are non-financial advantages to owning a home and non-financial advantages to renting.
Re: Investors account for 30 per cent of home buying in Canada, data show
#173Earlier quoted context omitted.
Toronto tech salaries are not representative for all of Ontario either. Bay area tech salaries are 3x gdp per capita. Toronto tech salaries are 1.2x gdp per capita. Funnily enough, the 3x higher salaries in San Francisco actually make it more affordable than working tech in Toronto. https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/compare_cities.jsp?cou...
I just checked and in EU big cities like Munich, tech salaries are also around 1.0x-1.2x GPD per capita, making EU just as bad as Toronto. Man, the US is really in a league of its own for tech wages.
Meanwhile, in Poland tech salaries are 3x-4x the GDP per capita, which is why many of software developers own more than one house/apartment.
Re: Investors account for 30 per cent of home buying in Canada, data show
#174Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just checked and in EU big cities like Munich, tech salaries are also around 1.0x-1.2x GPD per capita, making EU just as bad as Toronto. Man, the US is really in a league of its own for tech wages.
Meanwhile, in Poland tech salaries are 3x-4x the GDP per capita, which is why many of software developers own more than one house/apartment.
What about the people who aren't devs?
Re: Investors account for 30 per cent of home buying in Canada, data show
#175Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bingo. Canada is empty. It has the second lowest population density in the world. Most land is owned by the crown and is simply parcelled out to the friends and family's of the ruling class. Adding to that, you have some of the worst zoning and development practices in the modern world. Most of the country is simple a piggy bank for money laundering in the form of empty condo towers.
Canada is empty for a good reason. Explore around and you'll see why. Sheer mountain, muskeg and tundra. Where people live are the places where it's reasonable to live. Everywhere else is misery or impossibility.
The land is owned by the crown. In private hands it would be used productively. It has nothing to do with "misery or impossibility."
Re: Investors account for 30 per cent of home buying in Canada, data show
#176Earlier quoted context omitted.
If there’s an affordability housing crisis at the level of Canada, where home prices are so wildly out of whack relative to median incomes, it’s IMO entirely reasonable to ban the purchase of investment properties in the single family homes market for anyone . This will never happen because of the political backlash, but housing as a speculative asset is fundamentally insane and corrosive to societies. Housing afford…
[flagged]
A sensible endgame is for the state to control all real estate, and we're all effectively renters.
This eliminates the speculation fiasco entirely-- there's no way to bid up a property if the price is determined by a standard, legally-defined formula, and there's no investor to profit from such games. At best, you could try to bribe someone into releasing a unit you wanted in the hopes you could scoop it up.
This also provides valuable levers for other social policy-- rent could be priced to encourage people to live near where they work for environmental reasons, or provide explicit blessings to favoured groups (reduced rent for veterans/schoolteachers/first responders/etc) and leases could be retired when there's a pressing need to replace a property (i. e. unsafe, or needs to be torn down for some new venture)
Re: Investors account for 30 per cent of home buying in Canada, data show
#177Earlier quoted context omitted.
A person I know of outstanding moral character (has adopted 3 kids) boasts about voting against any development in his area. I don't know what it'll take for people to see what you are saying
I don’t think people with moral character can be reasonably expected to always have moral views on every subject matter. Not to be political but this is what people mean when they talk about intersectionality. For example a women’s rights advocate might unintentionally exclude disabled women, or be harder on black women they work with than white women for being ghetto or ratchet.
You are being downvoted but you are right. It just depresses me to see that people I look up think this way. I have met others who also can't see that building is the solution because of more exotic reasons: those who want to impose price controls because they think this will somehow finally allow them to own that coveted flat in the center, those unwilling to allow the mass building of lower quality stock because who cares about poor people's houses, etc
A multitude of entitled opinions that in a democracy hinder the construction of houses for the future generation
Re: Investors account for 30 per cent of home buying in Canada, data show
#178Earlier quoted context omitted.
That would be so perverse if the government gave itself a monopoly on building housing. Just change zoning and make it legal for the private market to meet the need. Look at all the builders remedy projects in Santa Monica to see that this works.
What definition of "monopoly" are you using here...?
It being illegal, due to restrictive zoning, for private parties to build at higher densities.
Re: Investors account for 30 per cent of home buying in Canada, data show
#179Earlier quoted context omitted.
That would be so perverse if the government gave itself a monopoly on building housing. Just change zoning and make it legal for the private market to meet the need. Look at all the builders remedy projects in Santa Monica to see that this works.
Sorry, the "private market" had a chance to fix the problem but instead chose to squeeze tenants harder and harder for decades.
Housing is more or less maxed out with respect to zoning laws in a lot of places. Those come from the government. Rezone to allow higher density and people will build. It is functionally illegal to build more housing.
Re: Investors account for 30 per cent of home buying in Canada, data show
#180Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's funny because LVT would reward multi family investment properties while raising taxes for single family home owners.
How is that "funny"? The continued proliferation of cookie-cutter detached single family homes with useless lawns is big part of several problems we currently face as a society. Incentivizing denser housing is a good idea.
It is funny because people always pitch it in threads about investors. Investors are who will build more housing if zoning laws are changed. An LVT basically encourages investment in the land.
I am in favor of this but it doesn't stick it to who everyone is complaining about here, it benefits them.