Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Canada to ban foreigners from buying homes

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

701–710 of 817 posts

Re: Canada to ban foreigners from buying homes

#701

Post by chii »

peeters wrote: post #690
bennysomething wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an interesting question, what is worse for buyers, blind or open bids? Blinds bids prevent bidding wars. They use them in Scotland. Not sure if buyer or seller is better off using them.

Blind bids prevent bidding wars, but from an idealistic standpoint they don't find the true price of a home. Particularly when you have buying agents routinely advising their clients to bid 50k over what turns out to be the next highest bid. Though psychology comes into play in a bidding war, at least it's happening because the asset for sale is highly desired. It's efficient.

Blind bidding, but the winning bid only pays the 2nd highest bid. This will lead to an actual price as the highest bid. The only problem is that the seller won't receive the highest price, even if they know what it is afterwards.

Re: Canada to ban foreigners from buying homes

#703

Post by monkeywork »

eyelidlessness wrote: post #700
CountSessine wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're fighting scarcity. You still won't win the bidding war - it just won't be as one-sided. Stop championing scarcity by blaming scapegoats. Either we limit Canada's crazy-high immigration rate (1% of population every year) or we build more homes which is mostly gated by illiberal zoning laws passed by municipalities. But both of these policies are very popular so you'll be swimming upstream, politically. While yo…

> Either we limit Canada's crazy-high immigration rate (1% of population every year) You could just stop there, it’s clear where your priorities lie. I’m not Canadian (and don’t worry I’m not emigrating), but I welcome a “crazy high” 1% population immigration rate and I don’t see a conflict with that and reasonable housing policy. Many major cities already see this kind of growth regardless of where people are moving…

>You could just stop there, it’s clear where your priorities lie

This is such a toxic take - listen I know there are xenophobic people out there, but just because someone brings up the fact that our immigration is high doesn't make them one.

Canada builds on average something like 189K houses a year, our current immigration targets are 400-450K ppl per year. We have the LOWEST housing stock in the G8 while having one of the largest immigration numbers, plus due to the selection / scoring methods for our immigration policy they are often entering the country with a sizable nest egg which allows them to enter the housing market sooner.

Add on top of all this that Canada has a blatantly broken provincial nomination process which allows people to get perm residency faster if they have a province nominate them - it was intended to get people to put down roots in those provinces, instead people use it to fast track PR status and then immediately move to Toronto, Vancouver or Montreal. This again stresses an already saturated market and infrastructure.

Canada needs immigration - there is zero doubt about it - however the rate needs to be lock step with the infrastructure and housing needs that population boost brings with it.

Canada needs to:

1. Slow immigration by roughly 1/3 for a period of 3-5 years. 2. Massively increase housing stock during that period, possibly shifting some of the entrance requirements for people in #1 from white collar workers to trades to help with this. 3. Close the provincially nominated loop holes, either do away with the system and not allow fast tracks or require that if you fast track you need to stay in the province until you become a full citizen - moving revokes your PR status. 4. In Canada's smaller cities start doing deed restrictions like Colorado did with Vails Indeed program, this will help with smaller towns / cities having their native population priced out by people fleeing the larger cities.

None of those takes are xenophobic or anti-immigration. A person can be pro immigration but be against the current policies that surround it. You muddy the water and come off as dishonest and toxic when you automatically assume malice.

Re: Canada to ban foreigners from buying homes

#704

Post by monkeywork »

ch4s3 wrote: post #261
CountSessine wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're fighting scarcity. You still won't win the bidding war - it just won't be as one-sided. Stop championing scarcity by blaming scapegoats. Either we limit Canada's crazy-high immigration rate (1% of population every year) or we build more homes which is mostly gated by illiberal zoning laws passed by municipalities. But both of these policies are very popular so you'll be swimming upstream, politically. While yo…

> Stop championing scarcity by blaming scapegoats. Either we limit Canada's crazy-high immigration rate (1% of population every year) or we build more homes which is mostly gated by illiberal zoning laws passed by municipalities. But both of these policies are very popular so you'll be swimming upstream, politically. I'm all for building more houses in cities/high demand areas, but doesn't Canada only have a populati…

Canada on average builds around 198K houses per year. Our current immigration targets are around 400-450K per year.

The houses are being built across the country, immigration tends to drive people to 3 main cities in the country.

The 3 main cities have a hard time expanding and building due to zoning laws, NIMBY, and basic infrastructure (transit, roads, education, health).

Re: Canada to ban foreigners from buying homes

#705

Post by monkeywork »

cameronh90 wrote: post #392
techsupporter wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that's what the person you replied to mean when they wrote: > hitting the limits of sprawl (congested highway commute time) There's only so far you can bus, train, drive, bike, walk, seaplane, helicopter, hyperloop, or transporter in to go to work. Canadian cities are, just like cities in the US, hitting this limit rather aggressively. In cities where sprawl isn't physically prohibitive, like Calgary or Toronto,…

> There's only so far you can bus, train, drive, bike, walk, seaplane, helicopter, hyperloop, or transporter in to go to work. Canadian cities are, just like cities in the US, hitting this limit rather aggressively. Canada's largest urban area is 5.6 million people. London, Paris and Seoul are around double that, NYC is 19 million and Tokyo is 37 million. Why are Canadian cities hitting this limit at such a comparati…

Don't look at the population look at the land area - and also look at the available public transit options.

Toronto has a laughable subway / train network given the urban sprawl and distance that people are commuting.

If I pay to take one of the most expensive toll highways in the world I can get from my home to the office in just under an hour.

Re: Canada to ban foreigners from buying homes

#706

Post by monkeywork »

voisin wrote: post #446
armagon wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Goodness, I live in a rural area, and the house prices are only insane, instead of egregiously insane. I don't know how I'd afford a home for a young family if I was just starting out today.

I concur with this. The story of insane housing prices being limited to TO and Vancouver is a 2016 story. Since the pandemic, it has hit ever podunk town in the country. Look at rural Nova Scotia and New Brunswick for evidence. Same price increases on a percentage basis as in significantly more populated areas. It’s interest rates!

NS/NB/PEI rates went nuts due to lack of building and people from Ontario buying places unseen and well above asking (and from their point of view why not - sell your house in Ontario and you could buy 5 of them in NS at inflated prices and still be mortgage free).

Go and look how many of these homes are on AirBNB and summer short term rentals every year and then sit empty the rest of the time.

Re: Canada to ban foreigners from buying homes

#708

Post by chii »

imtringued wrote: post #449
AzzieElbab wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think people are missing the fact that for many Canadians values of their homes represent their live savings. So while homeownership remains high in Canada doing something substantial about re prices would ruin peoples lives.

>I think people are missing the fact that for many Canadians values of their homes represent their live savings. Let's ignore the property itself, which is a depreciating asset which was built and can be improved through manual labor. That land is going to stay the same no matter how much you pay. Paying more for the same plot of land doesn't make it better. You don't get a bigger plot or a plot of better quality by…

> Betting on ever growing populations is a pyramid scheme by the way.

it has been a good bet in the past. Whether it remains a good bet is unknown - that's what makes it speculative. However, i don't see the population declining within the investment time period of a typical person buying the home.

Re: Canada to ban foreigners from buying homes

#709

Post by throw82473751 »

FredPret wrote: post #586
woah wrote: post #574

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These kind of little tweaks to symptoms of the housing shortage are ultimately useless band aids. After a decade of stopping foreigners and corporations from buying houses, slapping the wrists of landlords who have vacant units, and mandating that the bidding process is emotionally nurturing, house prices will still be higher if there is more demand than supply. In a world where there was enough housing supply, you w…

This, 100%. The rules can be whatever they are, but the participant with the most market power will always end up having the upper hand somehow

Sure! But still or even more then, wouldn't hurt to remove this intransparency aspect and what feels very unfair? Or what's the downside?

Re: Canada to ban foreigners from buying homes

#710

Post by rank0 »

gammarator wrote: post #602
rank0 wrote: post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Homeowners don't need to orchestrate and elaborate scheme, they just vote for the politicians who will prioritize increasing home values because that will help them financially. Or y'know...maybe homeowners don't want to have their neighborhood become overcrowded. Not everyone wants to live in a megacity with traffic, air pollution, constant bustle, and restricted personal liberty. If financial gain is your only mo…

> maybe homeowners don't want to have their neighborhood become overcrowded. Then it’s time to collect your scarcity-generated windfall and move someplace rural you’ll like better! Super-common, and you can even complain self-righteously about the terribly governed crime-ridden hellhole you’re leaving behind.

I live in a duplex the middle of a big city with practically no zoning restrictions. I love it here. You're the one complaining self righteously.

I am quoting my original comment because it seems like you didn't read it:

> Not everyone wants to live in a megacity with traffic, air pollution, constant bustle, and restricted personal liberty.

> If financial gain is your only motive as a homeowner, you would actually WANT an increase in density. As you cram more people into a smaller space, the land underneath becomes more valuable. Increased density attracts amenities, restaurants, businesses, nightlife...etc, all of which raise the value of your property.

Do you have an actual response? Or do you just need to be outraged at something?

Post reply on HN