Without affordable housing, Vancouver risks becoming an economic ghost town • Hacker News Board

Re: Without affordable housing, Vancouver risks becoming an economic ghost town

#531

Post by otoolep » Sat, Feb 13, 2016, 6:18 AM UTC

api wrote: post #507

otoolep wrote: post #479

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as I can see this is exactly what is happening. More powerful computers and communications are amplifying the power of individuals, and as a result making relationships even more important. And cities have always been the places of innovation and relationships. Just even more so now.

But it's not just cities. Philadelphia and Baltimore and Atlanta are big cities, but they aren't the right cities. It's a small number of them. It's not just urbanism, but also brand.

True, but as someone from Europe, I can tell you the branding has always been the case. NYC, Boston, SF, and LA, were always the outstanding cities relative to those you mention above. We rarely heard of, rarely saw in movies and TV, many other cities outside of those few.

I'm not saying you're wrong -- far from it -- but the brand has been there for longer than the phenomenon we're discussing here. Perhaps the tech has just made it even more pronounced.

Re: Without affordable housing, Vancouver risks becoming an economic ghost town

#532

Post by vehementi » Sat, Feb 13, 2016, 6:19 AM UTC

neptunespear wrote: post #360

falsyvalue wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd say $750-1000 CAD is per month is on the low end. In general I find that renting near the train system is about $1200-1300 CAD for 1 bedroom, but that's on eastmost side of the city which is about 15-20 mins out of downtown (by train). Average dev salaries are maybe 60k CAD?

If you extend your search to Burnaby/New West, you can easily find 1 bedrooms for $700-1000 that are close to a frequent bus route (e.g. 106, 123). You're not paying a premium to live close to Skytrain, but commuting to downtown doesn't take an hour by transit either. There's actually not a lot of data on Vancouver dev salaries out there. I've heard ranges from $50K to 70K depending on the source.

glassdoor is accurate and actually under shoots reality.

also https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/18UwaThgGikSXzinnLNHx...

tldr lol if you only start out at 70k

Re: Without affordable housing, Vancouver risks becoming an economic ghost town

#533

Post by ambicapter » Sat, Feb 13, 2016, 6:30 AM UTC

Grishnakh wrote: post #501

thinkdoge wrote: post #486

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's an idea. Make utility services scale with people density. Relax restrictions on how much they can profit off sqft. Single home dwellers are penalized with increased upkeep costs and higher density buildings are encouraged.

What? That's crap. Why should single home dwellers have to pay more for water and electricity and gas just because their house is bigger? Then you'll have apartment dwellers running the heat with the windows open. Utilities should be paid per-use, just as it is now. People with bigger houses are naturally going to pay more because a bigger house usually needs more power/fuel for HVAC, unless their house is more effic…

> And that leads me to one big problem in the rental market is that landlords never spend a dime on improving or renovating homes for better energy-efficiency, because the tenant has to pay all the utilities.

If that were the case they could charge 'fixed utilities' at a reasonable price and then when they upgrade for energy efficiency they reap those gains.

Re: Without affordable housing, Vancouver risks becoming an economic ghost town

#534

Post by jgh » Sat, Feb 13, 2016, 6:34 AM UTC

cdransf wrote: post #519

This is becoming increasingly true of LA too. Unless you're rent controlled and have been there for a while the price for an apartment is further and further out of reach. There's construction everywhere but the price of living in those new buildings is even more than the increasingly expensive older areas and a lot of new construction has begun with what seems like little to no consideration for its impact on traffi…

I know only one or two people who actually own their own place in LA. Everyone else rents.

Everyone.

Re: Without affordable housing, Vancouver risks becoming an economic ghost town

#535

Post by cdransf » Sat, Feb 13, 2016, 7:19 AM UTC

jgh wrote: post #534

cdransf wrote: post #519

This is becoming increasingly true of LA too. Unless you're rent controlled and have been there for a while the price for an apartment is further and further out of reach. There's construction everywhere but the price of living in those new buildings is even more than the increasingly expensive older areas and a lot of new construction has begun with what seems like little to no consideration for its impact on traffi…

I know only one or two people who actually own their own place in LA. Everyone else rents. Everyone.

We've been rent controlled for 3 years or we wouldn't be able to be here now. I know one person that owns a place and everyone I know who's wanted to start a family has left.

Re: Without affordable housing, Vancouver risks becoming an economic ghost town

#536

Post by avdempsey » Sat, Feb 13, 2016, 7:21 AM UTC

DrScump wrote: post #458

klipt wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you think of the government as the "ultimate landlord", then property tax is just another form of rent and Prop 13 is just another form of rent control . It has most of the same positives and negatives as rent control: > forces an incentive not to move Check, if you move your property tax will go up > and owner's have little incentive to bring up to standard something they are not going to get an ROI on Check, the…

Completely false; the Jarvis-Gann Amendment ("Prop 13") has nothing to do with rent control. You may intend to instead argue that both JGA and rent control provide disincentives to move (and I would not disagree), but that's a different statement.

You're being down-voted because Klipt is agreeing with GP that by holding down the costs of property owners Prop 13 makes the holding down of property revenues by rent control more tolerable for the owner.

Re: Without affordable housing, Vancouver risks becoming an economic ghost town

#537

Post by imh » Sat, Feb 13, 2016, 7:23 AM UTC

shostack wrote: post #461

gozur88 wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Its hard to imagine the current real estate inflation in the case where home owners had to pay taxes against the fair market value. Prop 13 exists in California because that's exactly what was happening. Prior to its passage you paid on the assessed value of you house, and it didn't stop prices from double digit percentage increases every year. People who'd owned their homes for decades were being forced to sell bec…

While that sucks, that sort of self-correcting market pressure is in fact required for a healthy real estate market. Yes, people would have been pushed out as prices increased. But as areas gentrify, there is no guarantee that the farmers and tradespeople who lived there get to stay forever. That's how other markets work. It sucks to those pushed out, but eventually taxes increase to the point where demand for the ar…

You say that's how other markets work, but I can't think of any other market where an increase in the price of something you already own can make owning it unaffordable. If I buy stocks, or gold, or a car, and it gets more valuable, I'm not taxed until I sell, right? Does the same argument hold for those?

Re: Without affordable housing, Vancouver risks becoming an economic ghost town

#538

Post by DrScump » Sat, Feb 13, 2016, 7:36 AM UTC

avdempsey wrote: post #536

DrScump wrote: post #458

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Completely false; the Jarvis-Gann Amendment ("Prop 13") has nothing to do with rent control. You may intend to instead argue that both JGA and rent control provide disincentives to move (and I would not disagree), but that's a different statement.

You're being down-voted because Klipt is agreeing with GP that by holding down the costs of property owners Prop 13 makes the holding down of property revenues by rent control more tolerable for the owner.

No, I'm being downvoted as a protest proxy against Prop 13, which I didn't advocate or defend -- I just tried to clarify the history. (I wasn't even of voting age when it passed.)

Rent control existed in many CA cities well before Prop 13 and is orthogonal. The impetus for Prop 13 was that frequent and growing property tax rate (as well as assessment) increases during Willie Brown's control of the Assembly, combined with high mortgage interest rates, were driving longtime residents (especially seniors and others on fixed incomes) out of their homes.

Most rental property owners are not lifelong, continuous owners that benefit significantly from Prop 13, and I guarantee you that those who are aren't giving any rent "discounts" because of Prop 13 savings -- the market (and law) sets the rents.

Re: Without affordable housing, Vancouver risks becoming an economic ghost town

#539

Post by ido » Sat, Feb 13, 2016, 7:47 AM UTC

GFischer wrote: post #424

ido wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$80k AUD is €50k, sounds pretty close to me.

So, not worth jumping through all the extra inmigration hoops compared to Australia or New Zealand, not to mention the language barrier. My grandfather was German-born and they didn't grant the citizeship to him, and I remember the ridiculous requirements he faced trying to get it (and he was more German than most actual Germans, a Fischer Reuter Spangemberg and more German surnames all the way down) http://www.spieg…

Yeah I guess it depends on your situation. For us it was a lot easier due to EU freedom of movement laws. It just sounded funny ("funny") cause it always seemed so much easier than moving to the US when I looked into it.

I also know a lot of Israelis who got German citizenships via their grandparents, but there might be special rules that make it easier for victims of the nazis (and their descendants) or people that fled the country.

Either way the salary is probably never a reason to move to Germany (I don't think wages are higher than in any other western country), I meant more like that it's not a reason NOT to move in that particular example.

Re: Without affordable housing, Vancouver risks becoming an economic ghost town

#540

Post by shostack » Sat, Feb 13, 2016, 7:47 AM UTC

imh wrote: post #537

shostack wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While that sucks, that sort of self-correcting market pressure is in fact required for a healthy real estate market. Yes, people would have been pushed out as prices increased. But as areas gentrify, there is no guarantee that the farmers and tradespeople who lived there get to stay forever. That's how other markets work. It sucks to those pushed out, but eventually taxes increase to the point where demand for the ar…

You say that's how other markets work, but I can't think of any other market where an increase in the price of something you already own can make owning it unaffordable. If I buy stocks, or gold, or a car, and it gets more valuable, I'm not taxed until I sell, right? Does the same argument hold for those?

I'm referring to other real estate markets in the country.

Also, in this case, if the price of your home appreciates, it is likely the price of other homes appreciated, so your gain may not actually amount to anything (particularly after realtor fees). Likewise, you are taxed every year on real estate.