Live data from Hacker News

Billions in 'unknown' funds flowing into Canada's housing market [video]

bnnbloomberg.ca

261–270 of 395 posts

Re: Billions in 'unknown' funds flowing into Canada's housing market [video]

#261

New Zealand has a similar housing problem. House prices are skyrocketing and pricing out young people. A 25-30% rise in the past year has meant few people are saving fast enough to get a deposit. But two or three years ago the govt. banned overseas buyers. There is no reason to suggest the ban is not effective. It even bans non-permanent residents, so plenty of legitimate residents (work visas) can't purchase propert…

Could it be as simple as money being funneled through NZ nationals to buy up houses? I mean housing prices are up everywhere it seems, one could think there's an evil shadowy cabal of rich investors buying up properties. But, and I'm not an economist or anything here, on the other hand there's a few forces pushing average people to it; we've recovered from the housing crisis from 2008 onwards. Savings account interes…

My first thought. Pay someone else to buy the house for you and hold onto it.

Unless you restrict the number of houses private individuals can own and massively restrict what corporate owners can buy, not much will change.

Re: Billions in 'unknown' funds flowing into Canada's housing market [video]

#262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let us assume it is not overseas buyers - what factors are left? Is it just access to cheap credit that drives investment into the housing market all over the globe?

This is speculation on my part, but I think the wealth transfer from the baby boomer generation to their kids is playing a part. I've seen estimates ranging from $30 to $70 trillion to be passed down. At least anecdotally (in the United States) I have many friends in their 30s-40s that are buying new homes with money from their parents. Or their parents buy the home and they live in it.

It is wealth transfer from Baby Boomers to their kids.

Demographics also plays a role. We saw a massive boom in the 1950s, 1980s, and now in the 2000s. This boom is less sharp, and more spread out then the previous ones.

The war generation all had kids between 1944 and 1950 (5-10 year span). The Boomers all had kids in the mid 70s to mid 80s (10-15 year span). The children of Boomers are now buying houses. So it's a longer cycle, this time around (15-20 year span).

Re: Billions in 'unknown' funds flowing into Canada's housing market [video]

#263
post #53

When the fed suppresses interest rates and back stops the mortgage market, residential realestate starts to look like risk free treasuries with a ~9% yield.

If it looks like either the stock market or the housing market is about to crash, the fed will print unlimited amounts of money to prevent that. The only problem is that the rational action with that knowledge is to buy in as soon as possible, with all your cash, thereby making the bubble even bigger. It's a death spiral of inflation.

I agree. Also sounds like a great way to transfer more wealth from the poor to the rich considering only the rich have the ability to quickly funnel most of their wealth between different types of investments.

Re: Billions in 'unknown' funds flowing into Canada's housing market [video]

#264
post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not? It seems obvious that cheap credit would drive up prices. For example people could just be bidding up to what they can pay off in about 30 years. If they simply do that, cheaper credit would rise house prices.

But then why not before these low rates? If people were bidding up to maximum lending capacity as a % of total income back when mortgage rates were, say, 6%; and now they do the same but at mortgage rates of 2%; then there is a ceiling to house prices, but we've passed that ceiling a long time ago. So something else must have changed, too. (I did this math some time ago for the Dutch market and our prices were alread…

It's likely simply scarcity related.

If you can borrow 800k based on your income and you accept 200 square metres for that price, and there is such scarcity (100 viewings per home, 2% success rate) that you're unable to find a home, it may lead you to accept a 190 square metre home at the same 800k price.

If such a trend continuous for a decade, you may see that suddenly people accept to pay 800k for a 100 square metre home (such as happened in Amsterdam, the Netherlands).

The net effect is that housing prices per square metre doubled: a 100 square home went from 400k to 800k, and a 200 square home went from 800k to 1.6m.

No change in financing capacity is necessary for this to occur. Only a shortage of homes creating a cycle where people keep accepting less space at the same price, thereby increasing the prices per square metre throughout the entire market, thereby pushing prices of homes up.

I believe that's what's happening. The media fuels this process by constantly writing articles about shortages (even though objectively speaking, in the past decades home sizes have sharply increased while household size (persons-per-home) has decreased, i.e. there is objectively more housing per person than ever before).

Of course there is a limit to this logic. But in the Netherlands for example, the average space per person is about 50% higher than in Germany (culturally quite similar country). So there seems room for Dutch to accept smaller homes. And there's some examples (e.g. Hong Kong) that show that a high-income country with housing shortages also can push people to accept smaller homes in their budget.

This effect isn't immediate because prices are sticky. People cannot accept too much change rapidly without believing its overpriced. Over time, these 'overpriced' price levels are normalised and seen as the new normal, accepted, and a new concept of 'high' emerges. But it's not instant. Second, homes are mortgaged and thus must pass an appraisal. Appraisers also don't accept radical changes as they're based on reference objects of a few months ago, so there's a limit to the speed of price change.

Re: Billions in 'unknown' funds flowing into Canada's housing market [video]

#265
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's the ideal outcome. Housing should not be an investment. You should just live in it and it depreciates. People should be able to make normal profits by building new ones. Nobody should profit from buying and selling old ones.

There wash a time that home ownership was considered a liability, not an asset (source: “Rich Dad, Poor Dad”.

That's a terrible source.

Re: Billions in 'unknown' funds flowing into Canada's housing market [video]

#266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. They sold their last house for $1.4M. They bought it for $400K 12 years ago. They've never had a job that earned them more than $100K. They have just bought something else for $1.5M which needs $200K spent to get it to how they want it (renovating bathrooms, kitchen, etc).

> They have just bought something else for $1.5M which needs $200K spent to get it to how they want it (renovating bathrooms, kitchen, etc). They are putting $200k into an asset which is already 10x+ their income? Ouch. I can't wrap my head around a financial decision like that.

If you look at income and ignore their wealth, maybe it seems strange. But they have > 1.4 million in equity. They're allocating At the end of the day they'd be sitting on a mortgage that's only 2-3x their annual income, that's very reasonable.

Re: Billions in 'unknown' funds flowing into Canada's housing market [video]

#267

New Zealand has a similar housing problem. House prices are skyrocketing and pricing out young people. A 25-30% rise in the past year has meant few people are saving fast enough to get a deposit. But two or three years ago the govt. banned overseas buyers. There is no reason to suggest the ban is not effective. It even bans non-permanent residents, so plenty of legitimate residents (work visas) can't purchase propert…

I’ve talked with a friend in NZ who have recently purchased 5 houses all to rent, all have mortgages, and none in expensive cities (think South Island outside CHCH and Queenstown). They work full time in Auckland in a business they run. The housing crisis has been this way since at least 2000 or so. It won’t change until: - Stamp duty for buying rentals / converting to rentals, maybe 10-20% - Limit the number of exis…

I'm from Ontario, Canada. I find that it's average people getting into the real estate game as a way of protecting their wealth against inflation and not wanting to play the stock market.

People blame internation investors, but that is only a small problem.

People say we should build more homes, but Ontario already has 10s of thousands of approved homes to build, that have not yet been started. Lack of skilled trades. Developers that are just sitting on the permits as they finish other projects.

I think the simple solution is an extra tax on people that own more than 2 homes. An even higher tax if you own more than 3 homes, and so on. Keep increasing the tax rate, on each home a person owns.

Re: Billions in 'unknown' funds flowing into Canada's housing market [video]

#268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a reason increasing supply wouldn't be an easier solution?

Supply is increasing, but if that increased supply gets snatched up by investors then you haven't really increased supply for people who need a place to live.

These investors want tenants. The more supply, the more (ceteris paribus) rents drop. The more rents drop, the lower the rates of return on the home, meaning the asset is worth less and prices drop for those buying homes, too. Supply leads to lower rents and prices.

There's no magic way around these economic laws.

Of course if demand grows faster, then prices still go up. But in absence of supply increases it'd be even worse. Supply definitely helps.

Re: Billions in 'unknown' funds flowing into Canada's housing market [video]

#269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a reason increasing supply wouldn't be an easier solution?

Yes increasing supply will help, and my suggestions encourage increasing supply over turning existing stock into rentals, but if the new supply is all rentals that doesn’t help owner occupiers much. What needs to happen is owner occupiers are given a competitive edge when bidding for a property over a landlord. Hence more taxes and disincentives for buy to let purchasers. So for example a property selling for $1m, wh…

> What needs to happen is owner occupiers are given a competitive edge when bidding for a property over a landlord. Hence more taxes and disincentives for buy to let purchasers.

A vibrant rental market is a great thing for many reasons (e.g. look up any study on labour mobility). Not sure why we should have tax advantages for home owners and tax disadvantages for the rental market. It's certainly not equitable to the renter class. And there's tons of evidence that home owner tax advantages flow mostly to incumbent home owners who gain the proceeds from any tax advantages spent to help new home owners get into the market.

Re: Billions in 'unknown' funds flowing into Canada's housing market [video]

#270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may be right for that class of visa, but there are many others: https://www.immigration.govt.nz/new-zealand-visas/options/li... . And yes, the prices can be driven up by cheap loans, but from memory they were already rising steadily before the covid stimulus measures. I am still unconvinced that there exists in NZ a mechanism that can generate so much money and drive up the prices to these levels. Haven't been ba…

I think what you're seeing is everyone previously investing in stocks, business, etc. are now going all-in on property. Mum and Dad are pulling their supers and investments and gifting it to their kids for their first home. It is entirely unsustainable. But we've been saying this for 15 years now.

huh? both Mom and Dad - you lost a great number of people right there.. pulling their supers? over-65 wealth is that common? and this one, really interesting.. "gifting" .. what is that ? I see tooth-and-nail fights over any piece of money in sight among otherwise ordinary relatives.. Mostly Los Angeles SoCal but everywhere in California really.. "gifting" ?!?
Post reply on HN