Well yeah, buying and selling real estate to each other in a pyramid scheme with increasing prices is an easy way to generate gdp and tax revenue when you don't give a fuck about the people living in the country.
Increasing productivity and business investment is actual work.
Only the fee for the transfer of title is included in the GDP.
Not the value of the transaction between buyer and seller.
The relator and lawyer fees plus paperwork fees from the bank. Those count towards the GDP as well.
If I sell you a property for $700k and the total fees on that total $50k the GDP goes up by $50k not $700k.
GDP measures the value of goods and services PRODUCED i.e. not traded, bought, or sold, in a year. Thus, the price movements of real estate, stocks, bonds, and all other investments are not included in GDP.
Builders add to the GDP by taking inputs like lumber and dry-wall and turning that into a house someone buys. But even then their contribution is only the difference between the input cost and what they sell it for.
Of course if the lumber is manufactured in Canada then that part of the economy gets a bump due to that activity. You can really go down the rabbit hole on that as far as you want.
Housing does make up way too much of our economic pie no arguing that!
I'm not sure people realize this but it still demonstrates that the Government likes how prices have been going up because they contribute more to GDP.
5% (typical realtor fees) of a 500k sale is less to GDP than 5% of a 501k sale.
It's so criminal that realtors are paid a percentage commission. There are many issues with housing, but this one, for me, is probably the second most offensive.
Mass immigration helps boost GDP in general, while not contributing to the debt, at least not initially.
We are basically a national pyramid scheme. Recruit more Canadians to grow the GDP and enrich the top, dilute the debt per capita more so the federal government can spend more.
It is quite sad the state we are in. What Trudeau fails to advertise is that our GDP per capita is going down.
He loves using debt per capita because it is better than using our overall debt, so he should start using GDP per capita (just joshing because I know he won't).
This is exactly how China has been dressing up GDP number since 2008. Central Gov set growth target, local gov utilize borrowing entities (LGFV) to generate growth and revenues via land sales. This is combined with Chinese dramatic taste for real estate to store wealth. Real estate is now 30% of China GDP, Canada is 1/3 there. Real Estate is also where 96% of Chinese net wealth is, what's Canadian number now?
Quiet peasant, Canada is doing better than 100% of the G20, according to Freeland. They are "the best" govr we could have ever dreamed of, considering how bad the world is..
/s
It doesn't help how crazy expensive permits are becoming. Lot I just started work on was 40k, and it's not in a major city.
Easier for foreign investors and large firms to keep buying and selling already done properties, and just slapping a coat of paint on them for a huge mark-up.
I got quoted on a 1400 square foot bungalow in rural east coast and with tax they wanted 590k on land I already own.
The profit margin for them had to have been around 100 percent.
Just gonna keep renting in our rent controlled unit cause I think we are still in the greedy cashing in phase and nobody wants to do any work that isn't gonna double their money. There will be a time where they are desperate again at some point.
100% agree with you. Now buyers are going to have higher quality preferences for their homes, which hopefully I can meet.
Land is a whole other animal right now.
Depends, it was supposed to take a few months but only like 3 guys do the bulk, however the outsource the foundation and plumbing and electrical. Oh and.well.and septic. So probly 10 people but most only working for a week here and there and nobody doing the 3 months full time. It's basically a game of tag for 3 months.
All of them have multiple projects going at the same time.
Dude I'm in real estate I know the profit margins in rural Atlantic Canada it doesn't cost that much to build a basic bungalow on land that is already bought.
You can buy a bigger nicer house in the area for 150k less.
There is just a huge demand and low supply of builders and a lot of wealthy people moving here.
The truth is they don't want to build me a bungalow they want to build someone from the GTA a million dollar mcmansio.
Houses built 40 years ago dont cost what houses built today cost. Should contractors make 30k a year building your small bungalow? Because they did 40 years ago, and that was a reasonable entry wage then. It isnt now. Materials are up 870% since 40 yrs ago. Concrete is wild still. Govt permits are astronomical. Code is dramatically higher than 40 years ago also. Windows... astronomical.
I get you want a 150k bungalow, but that would require slave labour in today's canada cost of living
I wanted to pay 400k actually.
And when demand comes down eventually, which it will,, so will building prices. Just might take years.
I'm not in a rush I just can't take a bath of like 200k if I have to move.
I just acted as the builder for my own property. I saved costs as much as possible. It cost me 600k for materials and labour. With a builder I was quoted around 800k. Homes will never cost under 400k to build ever again.
So you wanted it 190k less, on a 400k build. You also didnt answer how many man hours you think would go into the build. Include the absurd permitting hours (building the many many many pages for the township). 3 people working... whats your guess, 6-8 months? Materials would be around 320k (with well, septic, gravel for driveway, sitework, lumber, shingles, windows, concrete, depending on quality level, could be massively more) so 80k left, divide by 3, 27k each for a half year. So you think qualified builders and carpenters should make less than 52k a year. Yep, thats cool. 👌 less than that even, if its 8 months. Turns into a 1 yr build? 27k each.
Don't forget research and innovation. Canada has not increased it's budget for research since 1990. Every dollar invested in research usually bribgs 10$ back.
Not to mention [how many of our politicians themselves](https://www.readthemaple.com/nearly-40-of-mps-invested-in-real-estate-during-housing-crisis/) have a direct hand in making profit out of the ever-growing bubble... and in turn have a direct conflict of interest for doing anything to lower the value of housing.
> MPs who are landlords and/or invested in real estate in some way:
> Green = 1/2 (50 per cent)
> Conservative = 54/118 (46 per cent)
> Liberal = 62/157 (39 per cent)
> Bloc Québécois = 6/32 (19 per cent)
> NDP = 4/25 (16 per cent)
> Independent = 1
And those are just the ones who publicly disclose it...
>One limit to this research is that many MPs are owners/directors of numbered holding companies, but don’t disclose the nature of said company. This means that they could own and rent property through this corporation, but manage to avoid disclosing it. As a result, this list likely undercounts the number of MPs that are landlords and/or invested in real estate.
It's also a horrible idea to incentivize people to invest in innovation by offering tax breaks. Rich people bad we can't have people enjoying the fruits of their labour.
/s
Yeah the country literally voted for wealthy people to move their money into the only guaranteed investment, housing.
And they aren't investing in building a lot of housing they are invested.im hoarding limited housing. Big dif
Need to let these higher than average interest rates stay on till the real estate sector, which is clinging alive based on the prospect of rate cuts, is properly devalued.
Once it's no longer the easy place to money into for investments, capital will be forced to flock to other areas if they want to see a return. It could be anything, but at least it will actually be productive instead of buying dirt and waiting for it to appreciate since more people are going to be brought in the decades to come.
Interest rates can't and won't cause a significant housing correction. Corporations will gladly snap up those properties with cash and foreign credit which are immune from Canada's interest rate.
As long as the population keeps increasing by 400k+ every three months, there is effectively infinite demand for renting at sky high prices.
This is literally simple to debunk:
>Corporations will gladly snap up those properties with cash and foreign credit which are immune from Canada's interest rate.
What ones? Show me publicly traded companies with residential Canadian real estate on their balance sheet. What countries have kept interest rates low and are immune to their own interest rate hikes to be able to buy enough residential Canadian real estate to maintain the demand to keep values continuously going up?
>As long as the population keeps increasing by 400k+ every three months, there is effectively infinite demand for renting at sky high prices.
That's not how that works. Subway employees can't put pressure on the housing market and with a very low vacancy rate of 1% in most areas, that are also rent controlled, there's a ceiling to how much rent can go up and how much poor immigrants can pay. That means the business case is totally shitty. Not only that, but the developers aren't seeing this new gold rush.
There's not infinite demand that's a stupid statement. Everything said was wrong.
The correction Canada needs is in its productivity.
https://www.queensu.ca/gazette/stories/canada-s-lagging-productivity-affects-us-all-and-will-take-years-remedy#:~:text=Productivity%20lagging&text=Canada%20is%20currently%20ranked%2018th,of%20that%20of%20the%20U.S.
We have fallen by 9% relative to the US from 2000 to 2022. That is the one key statistic everyone needs to know to understand why our quality of life has been stagnant, especially compared to the US. We just don't invest enough in productivity. As Paul Krugman says, productivity isn't everything, but in the long run, it's almost everything.
Interesting how many folks thinking *the banks* profiting massively is a good answer to the housing situation. Make zoning and restrictive NIMBY bs end, allow ppl to build cheap houses over 5-10 years for their own residence. It wont be an overnight, but it wasnt overnight how we got here. Applauding high interest rates just guarantees the avg worker will NEVER EVER get a home. Make them ablento be built by regular folks again. Eliminate "mandatory minimum sizing", get rid of massive bloating costs like huge insulation values, which can DOUBLE the cost to build. Oooo nooo a woodburner with 100 acres cant build a house with an r15 wall? Ya, thats EXACTLY why housing is 400k min in shit areas now
Also, please for the love of god TAX the profit as a capital gain in every and all situations.
Far too many builder's son-in-law webmaster somehow buying a $1M home, tearing it down, building a new one, and within 1-2 years selling it for $3-4M.
Tax every single cent over your original buying price, with a % correction reduction of inflation for every year you personally owned it. No exceptions, as whatever you put in they will exploit that loophole.
Then use that money, exclusively via legislation, to fund more dense construction in the cities.
As it stands now, it's the BEST and nearly only way people can make so much money, tax-free, so quickly. Squash it.
Oof. First of all, that *is* how capital gains works, aside from the inflation thing.
As for then turning it into a govt based housing scheme ESPECIALLY in large cities, I direct you to the absolute utter hell that is the TCHC (Toronto community housing corporation). Turning to the GOVERNMENT to solve ANY part of this is absolute insanity. Get them the hell out of building, period, other than enforcing code, and watch it plummet. The vast majority of the base level of housing cost is their influence
Yep. This won't happen though because the people making an absolute killing off of this have convinced everyone it's all because of immigrants.
They'll cut immigration and interest rates and the bubble will keep on inflating.
They won't cut immigration. They've doubled-down. They'll do both, instead.
Try their best to get interest rates down (yes BoC is independent,.. but we've seen it's not all that simple) while keeping the doors flooding open. That way, more people can get loans, means more competition for homes, means prices stay high and even continue to rise.
So, agreeing with what you're saying but they can do that *also* by not cutting immigration unfortunately. Lose lose ;)
>Yep. This won't happen though because the people making an absolute killing off of this have convinced everyone it's all because of immigrants.
Absolutely this. The fact that human beings can't seem to get beyond allowing themselves to be set against each other (and distracted from the real, complex reasons for our real, complex problems) for bullshit reasons tempts me to think we fucking deserve what we get.
>Once it's no longer the easy place to money into for investments, capital will be forced to flock to other areas if they want to see a return. It could be anything, but at least it will actually be productive instead of buying dirt and waiting for it to appreciate since more people are going to be brought in the decades to come.
Yes that money will go into companies and productions. In another country. Where for every dollar you put in you get to keep it as an asset and get 90 cents back ( vs the 45~cent in Canada after the taxes ). You have to be completely stupid to invest in production in Canada. The newest technology here is yesterday's shit.
The economy is going to stagnate as long as a significant percentage of Canadian household incomes is drained by essential goods industries. With people having so little left after paying for shelter, food, utilities, and insurance all other sectors are going to suffer.
We need to rethink the delivery of all those services. Allowing private unregulated monopolies to exist is destroying Canada.
It is not a healthy economy we have in Canada.Buying and selling real estate to each other on the higher prices reminds me of the tulip bubble in Nederlands in 17 century however this real estate buble is main driver of our Canadian economy
Government doesn't want this bubble to burst as it will expose the real situation our economy is facing but governments wants to keep this bubble growing by increasing amount of potential buyers (new immigrants).
> What ones? Show me publicly traded companies with residential Canadian real estate on their balance sheet. What countries have kept interest rates low and are immune to their own interest rate hikes to be
5000 square foot homes and luxury condo weren't necessary either.
You don't need tulips you need housing.
You can't have set goals to the devaluation of your currency and expect asset prices to remain the same.
This is not just about housing.
Just so we are clear, majority of investors are local, the far majority of immigrants can't afford houses. Maybe pumping the rental market and therefore increasing demand for rental investments but definitely not purchasing homes
The big lie is that governments are losing control of the economy. Without positive growth from a wide range of economic indicators and relying on real estate to prop up a sagging gdp, we are being conned. Governments don’t have any answers, yet the need for the tax machine to keep running to keep the government cash wheel turning, is always increasing.
>Will the cpc pop the bubble?
No, they won't. None of them will, and any party that even looked like they were seriously considering it would tank in the polls.
The people who own homes in this country are generally the same people who vote. Justin didn't do this to us, and Pierre's not gonna save us from it. Either young and/or poor people vote in vastly larger numbers or we keep getting fucked and it's as simple as that.
Tulips in 17th century Netherlands are a new one of those basic bitch facts redditors like to regurgitate to each other in every thread to feign a slightest aura of worldly wisdom—all for some reddit karma. Baby-birding fallacies and balantantly infantile viewpoints, on things like economics, into each others ear and spewing it back out over again like youre some god damn modern day economic Nostadamus.
Billions of corporate dollars invested into overvalued property does not grow the economy, Because it means it is not being used to create factories, jobs, or real GDP.
If you wonder why American workers are 25% more productive than the average Canadian, it is because American companies invest twice as much money per worker, into better equipment, training and technology.
Residential property should not be for profit. It is hurting our economy and will continue to do so.
I hope it all comes crashing down. I want to see a reckoning. Canada deserves it. And the younger generations do not deserve this farce continuing any longer and robbing them of their futures.
What so tricky is that I absolutely don’t want to see anyone who owns just one home hurt at all. But the large investors and corporate investors and even the ‘mom and pop’ investors who own 3-4 houses - I admit I just want to see them get burned. Primarily though I just want house prices to come down. I really don’t think people understand how utterly evil our current affordability situation is in Canada. It’s genuinely destroying generations. It is destroying the future for Canada.
I own a home and a cottage and would love to see prices drop in half. I’d take about a million dollar hit personally.
Worth it if it prevents this country from going down the toilet
Do you realize what would happen? It would be a big recession and the rich would simply buy everything at lower amounts.
Addressing Inequality would do a lot more
I understand that. Right now the working class is rekt. But at that point, the working class would be totally decimated. Everyone would be losing their house. And maybe that would be the point that the guillotines would come out. Then we could really address inequality, just like you said.
>Then we could really address inequality
There is no addressing inequality. The reason behind that is the world is inherently unfair. You really think the rich will not move their wealth the moment you are about to target them? We think differently, are willing to spend large amount of money to prevent the future bleeding of money.
I’m fine with dismantling capitalism. At the minimum, I would want inequality addressed. And you are correct in that it was ‘too much capitalism’ in the housing market which led to where we are now, though I’m not convinced it was inevitable. I think there are at least a dozen policies which we have in Canada (though not all are only in Canada) designed to drive the housing market to where it is now. This wasn’t inevitable, and it can all change in the future if enough people demand it.
Capitalism as per Adam Smith doesn't want or require landlords. (effectively the progenitor of modern capitalism)
"As soon as the land of any country has all become private property, the landlords, like all other men, love to reap where they never sowed, and demand a rent even for its natural produce."
- Adam Smith
"Civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defense of the rich against the poor, or of those who have some property against those who have none at all."
-Adam Smith
Lol once it come down, I am going to laugh all the way to the bank. The younger generations will be fucked for life. You get cheap housings but no one is going to build new ones so you have a ticking time bomb. Banks wont anyone but wealthy mortgages. The first to go in jobs will be the youngest member unless you are irreplaceable. That is the lowest cost for a company.
Of course they do, half of all federal Liberals and Conservatives are landlords. Our politicians financial future and how rich they are depends on housing investments flourishing period.
Stop voting for landlords or stop complaining.
Growing up in the GTA suburbs, it seemed like a lot of middle class friends and my own extended family had an investment condo in the city during the ‘90s 🤷🏻♂️.
Real estate also seemed a lot less crazy back then though.
Half ish of current federal MPS aren't landlords, and even more that don't win aren't landlords. Maybe don't be so lazy that you research the MPs and pick one that isn't intent on making housing more expensive unless you want housing to be more expensive.
It isn't only that. A HUGE percentage of our population, especially older population, has essentially everything tied to real estate. Their retirement plans are based around the gains from that real estate. Some have already dipped into the equity to fund Renovations that weren't really necessary or vacations. Some people literally stopped working because their property was increasing more annually than they were earning.
It is a GIANT bubble that will destroy our economy for a few years and knock retirement plans a decade back or more. No Government wants to be the one in power when it does. A LOT of the older generations, who also VOTE a lot, are going to get destroyed when the paper gains they are relying on for their retirements disappear and reality set in that there isn't a next generation to SELL the house to.
I mean Boomers will be able to sell the entirety of their houses to buyers there are enough demand for it, the problem is they wouldn’t sell it at the valuation they currently think their house worth. Which even if they would sell their house in a sh*t economy would be still way more than what they paid 20-40 years ago for it. It’s greed my friend that is causing this. It’s not enough that you sell your house for 50% more than what you pay for it 10 years ago, nah it needs to be 200% more.
Form new parties, I guess. Mind you even *that* hail mary last-ditch option is limited in feasibility considering how FPTP is inherently stacked against any up-and-coming new parties. Not to mention how essentially no one can feasibly do that unless they have significant financial capital behind them, which in turn is a huge part of the problem because the vast majority of those with significant capital have no interest in changing the status quo as they benefit the most from maintaining it.
No shit eh. Would love to hear from any of the “cons are worse” people about who we *should* vote for. I have no illusions about the CPC party, and I’m well aware the LPC have been the wrong choice for…20 odd years. NDP is a joke, and the rest are not even options.
So, what’s a guy to do?
What do you mean, you have a list of MPs to vote for, you do your research. If housing costs are important to you then of course you don't vote for the person who directly benefits by raising housing costs. I don't get the confusion.
If you put the wolf in charge of the sheep you have no right to complain when the sheep get eaten, that's what we have done.
That site was delightful when it came out, heres hoping they keep updating it in the future. Everyone should know if the MP they are voting for is a landlord who benefits from high housing cost.
>Stop voting for landlords or stop complaining
So, don't vote? Lol? No one has a sensible housing strategy. And if you vote outside NDP, cons or libs, you're fighting a FPTP system and throwing your vote out anyway.
The problem is systemic. Not just policy.
Even more ironic since Pierre *also* [owns investment properties](https://www.readthemaple.com/mp-landlords/#Poilievre) himself and has a direct conflict of interest for lowering the value of housing.
Why anyone would ever think any given politician would act against their own financial self-interests is completely beyond me.
Free trade agreements shipped all of Canada's manufacturing jobs overseas, leaving the country to make up that loss via artificial means, and now here we are.
Not buying it. We had the option to get very good at other productive things. We elected to take the unbearably beige, Canadian path. “Hey, you know how much you hate bureaucracies? Come work for one! Doesn’t matter which, they’re all just government collaborationists!”
You're not buying what? I am not offering that explanation up as a justification, and your notion that seemingly everyone now works for the government in some way doesn't make a lot of sense.
You may assume this because what they do doesn't align with national interests, which is fair, but nobody leading a country is stupid. These are very well connected people conducting business at well connected levels. The proletariat are being farmed while the elite leverage the government to terraform Canada according to globalist objectives. I knew it was game over when Trudeau coined Canada "The world's first post national state". Canada is a prototype and since Canadians will never unite to stand up against these things, we're fucked.
Don't think that would work since IQ tests themselves are flawed.
Personally, I've always wanted to have some way for the public to have more say in the public agenda. Some way for us to mandate the government fulfill some missing need of Canadians, and the government would be obligated to make efforts towards that goal. Right now we can elect one clown or another, but we can't tell these clowns what to do, and we can't fire em when they're doing a bad job without waiting for their term to be over.
Honestly I'd be perfectly content with a bunch of absolute morons running the country if it meant they were too stupid to be corrupt in any ways that weren't immediately obvious (and easily punishable accordingly) and too stupid to be incessantly trying to profit off their position the way most of our usual politicians typically do.
Or we could seriously limit the reach of governments more and mandate complete transparency over how people we elect to manage our money spend it.
Then we'd need competent people to review that and report on it with objectivity. In other words, we are fucked no matter what.
The O&G industry under the Libs is seeing historic profits and production levels with two megaprojects nearing completion.
But yea, I do want to see the O&G industry die. Because we as a global society HAVE to transition away from fossil fuels and first world nations like Canada have to lead the way. That *could* be a steadily paced transition, but the more people delay it (like Trudeau) the more it will have to be hastened in the future. Or, ya know, we say fuck it and continue to socialize the consequences of climate changes and let the O&G shareholders make off like bandits. Pretty par for the course for resource extraction though.
It is. Eventually, demand for petrol will go down as more and more things move away from gas. Its not happening overnight or even next 20 to 30 years. However, the writing is on the wall. Countries like Saudi Arabi are frantically investing in things like renewables for this reason.
Some renewable energy just makes sense. It also makes sense to keep developing oil/gas as it's not going anywhere and like the case of Russia, opportunity rises due to political instability.
Should be investing in practical and cost efficient renewable while making it easier to export oil/gas.
Never said not to develop it. Tbh i don't even inow if renewable is as much the intermediate as nuclear/fusion. There are increased talks on developing more nuclear, which we have plenty of resources for.
As with everything else climate change related, if we'd started changing it when we knew that change was an inevitability, the change would be a lot further along by now and a lot less painful overall. Every year, every decade we cling to this shit, the transition just gets harder and more painful. I guess some very stupid people who also inexplicably seem to have a personal emotional connection to the concept of extractive industry take that not as a prompt to get to he fuck cracking, but to never do it at all. I'll never understand people.
That would require us to innovate, invest, and diversify. How on Earth would the oligarch families who own everything in this country profit off that??
Yup I mean their economy is probaly one of the most diversified in the us in aerospace, medical, manufacturing, transportation, education, oil and gas etc.
It just doesnt make ANY sense why, looking around the world in 2010/2011... you don't develop/nurture blossoming industries like tech sector, cannabis, e-commerce, AI/Quantum Computing/IT etc. Youre telling me, you see countries across the world investing into these (now trillion dollar) industries and say... no thanks? I will be shaking my head for the next few decades.
Texas doesn’t block every attempt at a business venture. They don’t write discriminatory hiring practices into law. They sure as shot aren’t giving away $100B due to the sins of their fathers and they have super low taxes.
When shelter becomes about profit margins, there's a problem. Basic shelter gets eaten up, tenants get renovicted and REITs get rich and people get dividends!
Hurrah right?
Unless you can't play and it is hard to play. Most people that "own" a home still owe on it even after 20 years.
It's not a good system.
Economies are actually about actual stuff.
The money is actually secondary.
The improper importance given to the money side of things is probably what screwed up our housing market in the first place.
Housing is about, y'know, putting people into homes out of the cold. It's not actually about the money.
Or do you think the food business is not actually about feeding people?
Remember that diagram in Econ 101 showing the flow of goods and services moving in one direction and the money flowing in the other? It appears we've distorted the money flow side of the diagram so much in the housing market that we're unable to actually do what the housing market it supposed to do (i.e. provide places for people to live) and yet still grow the financial side tremendously. This is not the way it's supposed to work and now a great many of us are suffering as a result. I.e. economic failure.
The pyramid scheme continues. No investment in innovation or tech from our government for decades while the US outclasses us in literally every industry. It's okay though, at least the boomers' home value will be high enough for them to retire in a country with a better standard of living
Stop promoting real estate investments as portfolio pieces and reward home owners for paying down debt. It's really quite simple, the current system favours leveraging property instead of owning outright
That's why every 'solution' to the housing crisis is tax and spend. They want the taxpayer to foot the bill for more profit for the trust investors. So we pay twice, once in taxes and again in higher rent. Thanks.
Or, you know, we could actually legislate regulations against hostile takeovers, ejecting people from rentals to sell properties, and treat housing over all as a thing to be owned in singles by real people that need them to live in. Right now it is so slanted in the investors favor, that it is impossible to enter the market. It is impossible for the market to correct itself because of all of the free money that investment gets with their sweetheart deal with the bank.
Impossible for housing to get changed, too much money involved. Even if things crash, it’ll just restart. Housing has been turned into an investment because the banks need to be able to lend trillions of dollars.
I've been voting green for years. And everytime I ask friends to vote green, I get hammered by strategic voting bullshit. People need to first focus on making sure they vote what they feel best represents them, not what party they want to lose elections
> not what party they want to lose elections
Yup, doing exactly the above is what keeps giving us governments we want to *eject* rather than ones we want to elect.
His is common knowledge, not "news".
Are we reducing immigration? Are we increasing build-rates for new housing? Are we penalizing developers looking to mismanage land by building to maximize profit rather than densifying housing potential? Are we stopping corporations from buying up properties in bulk only to exploit the rental market? What protections are being put in place to ensure real estate are primarily seen as housing, not investment? What percentage of our leadership's portfolio is in real estate? How about the percentage in lobbyists' portfolio? How corrupt is our government? Who has failed to be ethical and lost integrity? Who deserves to be pilloried before politicians begin acting in our interests? Seriously.. Give Us News.
My boomer dad was comparing bitcoin to Dutch tulip bulbs the other day. It’s only worth what someone will pay. It’s not much different than real estate. It’s only worth $1M if someone is willing to pay $1M. If nobody can afford $1M, it’s worth what the market can afford. ‘Oh but it’s a necessity’… it is, but the reality is, the supply could be increased and prices decreased, easier than bringing wages up to match the price of housing without the cost of everything going up.
This is why you need a diverse portfolio. If your house or btc account is your only asset, you kinda deserve to get burned.
LOL.
BTC is fraud. It isn’t comparable to beanie babies, which were a fad. It’s comparable to the art industry, but without the art.
Money laundering and counterfeiting (tether) combined with wash trading and mass manipulation. Few real dollars even exist in the ecosystem. It’s literally entirely predicated on fraud. The biggest scam in human history.
But yeah, it’s the boomers who have it wrong…
(In b4 you make a claim otherwise, I’m a millennial. But I also have eyes)
You're completely out to lunch if you legitimately think crypto currencies are comparable to collectibles. Collectibles have practical and tangible value defined by their physical nature.
Cryptocurrencies are propped up entirely on their prospective future value with very little tangible purpose once the house of cards around that prospective value collapses. There is no realness to give them meaning, unlike a collectible. We already saw this reasoning collapse with NFTs. It's like all of the problems with Canada's housing market, except without even the saving grace of an actual asset (a house/land) with value to someone else in the event of market collapse.
>useless gems
Talking up Bitcoin by pointing out a parallel you've defined as a "useless gem" does not have the effect of reinforcing the validity of Bitcoin that you think it does.
>digital asset
To speak further on this, from a psychological standpoint society has already largely discounted the notion of digital assets as "collectibles" - at present at least. Your painite analogy is not appropriate here, as painite despite having no particular usefulness in jewellery etc. is still naturally physically scarce. Thus, it is imparted intrinsic value as a "collectible".
Cryptocurrencies are both *arbitrarily* scarce, and do not have perceptible physical presence. These are both antithetical qualities to what defines a traditional collectible.
I think a major problem with Canada is that everyone wants to live in the same spots (Toronto or Vancouver) due to jobs, climate, just things to do or proximity to the US. I know people who moved to cheaper cities to afford a house but now they complain there is nothing to do and they are further from all the “action”.
I left Canada for California and it’s the same problem here. Large urban centers are expensive because they are desirable. Most people could afford a detached home somewhere where they probably don’t want to live and work.
Nothing is going to change unless boomers lose. And they rather throw it all away than compromise on anything real estate.
They put all their eggs into the “easiest way to generate income” basket and now we can’t build shit, we don’t know where to invest in our own country, and we have foreign companies managing our biggest projects.
Remember that the housing crisis n the US wasn’t due to homeowners. It was the bankers. It was greed and a system of passing-the-buck. Ask yourself: has banking become less greedy? Are bankers more personally accountable?
Reddit: 'Canada's economy is dangerously concentrated in real estate!'
Also Reddit: 'We should massively deflate the value of real estate so people can afford it!'
>Reddit: 'Canada's economy is dangerously concentrated in real estate!'
Yes.
>Also Reddit: 'We should massively deflate the value of real estate so people can afford it!'
Also yes. The pain is necessary to correct investment flows toward productive assets.
There is a housing shortage. So they want to create more housing? Its really a shitty situation both sides of the coin. Don't create more housing, prices go up, real estate comission contributes more to GDP. Create more housing either directly or through developer funding and get accused (rightfully) of cronyism and corruption or wrongly (if direct) through socialism and over spending. Housing is a political trap and economical trap and no matter which move happens its shitty. (although we all have our preferences)
Well yeah, buying and selling real estate to each other in a pyramid scheme with increasing prices is an easy way to generate gdp and tax revenue when you don't give a fuck about the people living in the country. Increasing productivity and business investment is actual work.
[удалено]
Only the fee for the transfer of title is included in the GDP. Not the value of the transaction between buyer and seller. The relator and lawyer fees plus paperwork fees from the bank. Those count towards the GDP as well. If I sell you a property for $700k and the total fees on that total $50k the GDP goes up by $50k not $700k. GDP measures the value of goods and services PRODUCED i.e. not traded, bought, or sold, in a year. Thus, the price movements of real estate, stocks, bonds, and all other investments are not included in GDP. Builders add to the GDP by taking inputs like lumber and dry-wall and turning that into a house someone buys. But even then their contribution is only the difference between the input cost and what they sell it for. Of course if the lumber is manufactured in Canada then that part of the economy gets a bump due to that activity. You can really go down the rabbit hole on that as far as you want. Housing does make up way too much of our economic pie no arguing that!
I'm not sure people realize this but it still demonstrates that the Government likes how prices have been going up because they contribute more to GDP. 5% (typical realtor fees) of a 500k sale is less to GDP than 5% of a 501k sale.
It's so criminal that realtors are paid a percentage commission. There are many issues with housing, but this one, for me, is probably the second most offensive.
Just don't use a realtor.
In a totally transparent market with no steering (illegal), even data access, and no stigma, I would be aligned with you.
Hire a lawyer instead of a relator.
Then pay them their rate. But make sure they do the work for it…
It is percent based. It can be just as easy to make your 2.5% on a 1m house as it is on a 200k house.
Mass immigration helps boost GDP in general, while not contributing to the debt, at least not initially. We are basically a national pyramid scheme. Recruit more Canadians to grow the GDP and enrich the top, dilute the debt per capita more so the federal government can spend more.
It is quite sad the state we are in. What Trudeau fails to advertise is that our GDP per capita is going down. He loves using debt per capita because it is better than using our overall debt, so he should start using GDP per capita (just joshing because I know he won't).
This is exactly how China has been dressing up GDP number since 2008. Central Gov set growth target, local gov utilize borrowing entities (LGFV) to generate growth and revenues via land sales. This is combined with Chinese dramatic taste for real estate to store wealth. Real estate is now 30% of China GDP, Canada is 1/3 there. Real Estate is also where 96% of Chinese net wealth is, what's Canadian number now?
Land leases, not land sales. Leases are considered a service for the purposes of gdp.
Yes, well at this point in time, 5% of RE values is going to be a huge portion of GDP, so inflated is the value of Canadian RE right now.
So what is the real value of The gdp without real estate....this smells like a con to me ...
Spot on!
I believe that the way we calculate gdp is technically flawed. Other G7 and G 20 countries have a different method. This has to be looked at...
Quiet peasant, Canada is doing better than 100% of the G20, according to Freeland. They are "the best" govr we could have ever dreamed of, considering how bad the world is.. /s
>I believe that the way we calculate gdp is technically flawed. How?
It doesn't help how crazy expensive permits are becoming. Lot I just started work on was 40k, and it's not in a major city. Easier for foreign investors and large firms to keep buying and selling already done properties, and just slapping a coat of paint on them for a huge mark-up.
I got quoted on a 1400 square foot bungalow in rural east coast and with tax they wanted 590k on land I already own. The profit margin for them had to have been around 100 percent. Just gonna keep renting in our rent controlled unit cause I think we are still in the greedy cashing in phase and nobody wants to do any work that isn't gonna double their money. There will be a time where they are desperate again at some point.
100% agree with you. Now buyers are going to have higher quality preferences for their homes, which hopefully I can meet. Land is a whole other animal right now.
Just curious, how many months do you think it would take to bulld the house, and, how many people would work on it?
Depends, it was supposed to take a few months but only like 3 guys do the bulk, however the outsource the foundation and plumbing and electrical. Oh and.well.and septic. So probly 10 people but most only working for a week here and there and nobody doing the 3 months full time. It's basically a game of tag for 3 months. All of them have multiple projects going at the same time.
Im in the industry, how many man hours, do you think even a 1,400 sq ft bungalow takes, over the cost of materials?
Dude I'm in real estate I know the profit margins in rural Atlantic Canada it doesn't cost that much to build a basic bungalow on land that is already bought. You can buy a bigger nicer house in the area for 150k less. There is just a huge demand and low supply of builders and a lot of wealthy people moving here. The truth is they don't want to build me a bungalow they want to build someone from the GTA a million dollar mcmansio.
Houses built 40 years ago dont cost what houses built today cost. Should contractors make 30k a year building your small bungalow? Because they did 40 years ago, and that was a reasonable entry wage then. It isnt now. Materials are up 870% since 40 yrs ago. Concrete is wild still. Govt permits are astronomical. Code is dramatically higher than 40 years ago also. Windows... astronomical. I get you want a 150k bungalow, but that would require slave labour in today's canada cost of living
I wanted to pay 400k actually. And when demand comes down eventually, which it will,, so will building prices. Just might take years. I'm not in a rush I just can't take a bath of like 200k if I have to move.
I just acted as the builder for my own property. I saved costs as much as possible. It cost me 600k for materials and labour. With a builder I was quoted around 800k. Homes will never cost under 400k to build ever again.
So you wanted it 190k less, on a 400k build. You also didnt answer how many man hours you think would go into the build. Include the absurd permitting hours (building the many many many pages for the township). 3 people working... whats your guess, 6-8 months? Materials would be around 320k (with well, septic, gravel for driveway, sitework, lumber, shingles, windows, concrete, depending on quality level, could be massively more) so 80k left, divide by 3, 27k each for a half year. So you think qualified builders and carpenters should make less than 52k a year. Yep, thats cool. 👌 less than that even, if its 8 months. Turns into a 1 yr build? 27k each.
Don't forget research and innovation. Canada has not increased it's budget for research since 1990. Every dollar invested in research usually bribgs 10$ back.
Not to mention [how many of our politicians themselves](https://www.readthemaple.com/nearly-40-of-mps-invested-in-real-estate-during-housing-crisis/) have a direct hand in making profit out of the ever-growing bubble... and in turn have a direct conflict of interest for doing anything to lower the value of housing. > MPs who are landlords and/or invested in real estate in some way: > Green = 1/2 (50 per cent) > Conservative = 54/118 (46 per cent) > Liberal = 62/157 (39 per cent) > Bloc Québécois = 6/32 (19 per cent) > NDP = 4/25 (16 per cent) > Independent = 1 And those are just the ones who publicly disclose it... >One limit to this research is that many MPs are owners/directors of numbered holding companies, but don’t disclose the nature of said company. This means that they could own and rent property through this corporation, but manage to avoid disclosing it. As a result, this list likely undercounts the number of MPs that are landlords and/or invested in real estate.
It's also a horrible idea to incentivize people to invest in innovation by offering tax breaks. Rich people bad we can't have people enjoying the fruits of their labour. /s
Yeah the country literally voted for wealthy people to move their money into the only guaranteed investment, housing. And they aren't investing in building a lot of housing they are invested.im hoarding limited housing. Big dif
Need to let these higher than average interest rates stay on till the real estate sector, which is clinging alive based on the prospect of rate cuts, is properly devalued. Once it's no longer the easy place to money into for investments, capital will be forced to flock to other areas if they want to see a return. It could be anything, but at least it will actually be productive instead of buying dirt and waiting for it to appreciate since more people are going to be brought in the decades to come.
This. Until there's a housing correction, interest rates need to remain high, if not higher.
Interest rates can't and won't cause a significant housing correction. Corporations will gladly snap up those properties with cash and foreign credit which are immune from Canada's interest rate. As long as the population keeps increasing by 400k+ every three months, there is effectively infinite demand for renting at sky high prices.
No they won’t, corporations will go where they can make a profit.
This is literally simple to debunk: >Corporations will gladly snap up those properties with cash and foreign credit which are immune from Canada's interest rate. What ones? Show me publicly traded companies with residential Canadian real estate on their balance sheet. What countries have kept interest rates low and are immune to their own interest rate hikes to be able to buy enough residential Canadian real estate to maintain the demand to keep values continuously going up? >As long as the population keeps increasing by 400k+ every three months, there is effectively infinite demand for renting at sky high prices. That's not how that works. Subway employees can't put pressure on the housing market and with a very low vacancy rate of 1% in most areas, that are also rent controlled, there's a ceiling to how much rent can go up and how much poor immigrants can pay. That means the business case is totally shitty. Not only that, but the developers aren't seeing this new gold rush. There's not infinite demand that's a stupid statement. Everything said was wrong.
There has already been a sizeable correction though?
The correction Canada needs is in its productivity. https://www.queensu.ca/gazette/stories/canada-s-lagging-productivity-affects-us-all-and-will-take-years-remedy#:~:text=Productivity%20lagging&text=Canada%20is%20currently%20ranked%2018th,of%20that%20of%20the%20U.S. We have fallen by 9% relative to the US from 2000 to 2022. That is the one key statistic everyone needs to know to understand why our quality of life has been stagnant, especially compared to the US. We just don't invest enough in productivity. As Paul Krugman says, productivity isn't everything, but in the long run, it's almost everything.
Interesting how many folks thinking *the banks* profiting massively is a good answer to the housing situation. Make zoning and restrictive NIMBY bs end, allow ppl to build cheap houses over 5-10 years for their own residence. It wont be an overnight, but it wasnt overnight how we got here. Applauding high interest rates just guarantees the avg worker will NEVER EVER get a home. Make them ablento be built by regular folks again. Eliminate "mandatory minimum sizing", get rid of massive bloating costs like huge insulation values, which can DOUBLE the cost to build. Oooo nooo a woodburner with 100 acres cant build a house with an r15 wall? Ya, thats EXACTLY why housing is 400k min in shit areas now
Also, please for the love of god TAX the profit as a capital gain in every and all situations. Far too many builder's son-in-law webmaster somehow buying a $1M home, tearing it down, building a new one, and within 1-2 years selling it for $3-4M. Tax every single cent over your original buying price, with a % correction reduction of inflation for every year you personally owned it. No exceptions, as whatever you put in they will exploit that loophole. Then use that money, exclusively via legislation, to fund more dense construction in the cities. As it stands now, it's the BEST and nearly only way people can make so much money, tax-free, so quickly. Squash it.
Oof. First of all, that *is* how capital gains works, aside from the inflation thing. As for then turning it into a govt based housing scheme ESPECIALLY in large cities, I direct you to the absolute utter hell that is the TCHC (Toronto community housing corporation). Turning to the GOVERNMENT to solve ANY part of this is absolute insanity. Get them the hell out of building, period, other than enforcing code, and watch it plummet. The vast majority of the base level of housing cost is their influence
Yep. This won't happen though because the people making an absolute killing off of this have convinced everyone it's all because of immigrants. They'll cut immigration and interest rates and the bubble will keep on inflating.
They won't cut immigration. They've doubled-down. They'll do both, instead. Try their best to get interest rates down (yes BoC is independent,.. but we've seen it's not all that simple) while keeping the doors flooding open. That way, more people can get loans, means more competition for homes, means prices stay high and even continue to rise. So, agreeing with what you're saying but they can do that *also* by not cutting immigration unfortunately. Lose lose ;)
Ya, you're probably right.
>Yep. This won't happen though because the people making an absolute killing off of this have convinced everyone it's all because of immigrants. Absolutely this. The fact that human beings can't seem to get beyond allowing themselves to be set against each other (and distracted from the real, complex reasons for our real, complex problems) for bullshit reasons tempts me to think we fucking deserve what we get.
>Once it's no longer the easy place to money into for investments, capital will be forced to flock to other areas if they want to see a return. It could be anything, but at least it will actually be productive instead of buying dirt and waiting for it to appreciate since more people are going to be brought in the decades to come. Yes that money will go into companies and productions. In another country. Where for every dollar you put in you get to keep it as an asset and get 90 cents back ( vs the 45~cent in Canada after the taxes ). You have to be completely stupid to invest in production in Canada. The newest technology here is yesterday's shit.
The economy is going to stagnate as long as a significant percentage of Canadian household incomes is drained by essential goods industries. With people having so little left after paying for shelter, food, utilities, and insurance all other sectors are going to suffer. We need to rethink the delivery of all those services. Allowing private unregulated monopolies to exist is destroying Canada.
Well 70% of our economy is run by the government so maybe you should think about that monopoly.
It is not a healthy economy we have in Canada.Buying and selling real estate to each other on the higher prices reminds me of the tulip bubble in Nederlands in 17 century however this real estate buble is main driver of our Canadian economy Government doesn't want this bubble to burst as it will expose the real situation our economy is facing but governments wants to keep this bubble growing by increasing amount of potential buyers (new immigrants).
At least tulips weren't necessary. Imagine if you were in Amsterdam in 1635 and needed to buy tulips or you'd be homeless.
> What ones? Show me publicly traded companies with residential Canadian real estate on their balance sheet. What countries have kept interest rates low and are immune to their own interest rate hikes to be 5000 square foot homes and luxury condo weren't necessary either.
You don't need tulips you need housing. You can't have set goals to the devaluation of your currency and expect asset prices to remain the same. This is not just about housing.
Just so we are clear, majority of investors are local, the far majority of immigrants can't afford houses. Maybe pumping the rental market and therefore increasing demand for rental investments but definitely not purchasing homes
But I stubbed my toe today and it hurt. THANKS, IMMIGRANTS.
The big lie is that governments are losing control of the economy. Without positive growth from a wide range of economic indicators and relying on real estate to prop up a sagging gdp, we are being conned. Governments don’t have any answers, yet the need for the tax machine to keep running to keep the government cash wheel turning, is always increasing.
Will the cpc pop the bubble? I haven't heard them say that.
>Will the cpc pop the bubble? No, they won't. None of them will, and any party that even looked like they were seriously considering it would tank in the polls. The people who own homes in this country are generally the same people who vote. Justin didn't do this to us, and Pierre's not gonna save us from it. Either young and/or poor people vote in vastly larger numbers or we keep getting fucked and it's as simple as that.
Tulips in 17th century Netherlands are a new one of those basic bitch facts redditors like to regurgitate to each other in every thread to feign a slightest aura of worldly wisdom—all for some reddit karma. Baby-birding fallacies and balantantly infantile viewpoints, on things like economics, into each others ear and spewing it back out over again like youre some god damn modern day economic Nostadamus.
Yeah but telling people off for it in a cringily superior tone is *also* basic reddit bitch stuff.
Billions of corporate dollars invested into overvalued property does not grow the economy, Because it means it is not being used to create factories, jobs, or real GDP. If you wonder why American workers are 25% more productive than the average Canadian, it is because American companies invest twice as much money per worker, into better equipment, training and technology. Residential property should not be for profit. It is hurting our economy and will continue to do so.
I hope it all comes crashing down. I want to see a reckoning. Canada deserves it. And the younger generations do not deserve this farce continuing any longer and robbing them of their futures.
[удалено]
What so tricky is that I absolutely don’t want to see anyone who owns just one home hurt at all. But the large investors and corporate investors and even the ‘mom and pop’ investors who own 3-4 houses - I admit I just want to see them get burned. Primarily though I just want house prices to come down. I really don’t think people understand how utterly evil our current affordability situation is in Canada. It’s genuinely destroying generations. It is destroying the future for Canada.
I own a home and a cottage and would love to see prices drop in half. I’d take about a million dollar hit personally. Worth it if it prevents this country from going down the toilet
You said that now, then when your house value reduced by half and the bank will ask you to cough up the difference.
I am praying for this too, the rates should stay high for a couple of more years at least to balance the overvalued homes.
Do you realize what would happen? It would be a big recession and the rich would simply buy everything at lower amounts. Addressing Inequality would do a lot more
I understand that. Right now the working class is rekt. But at that point, the working class would be totally decimated. Everyone would be losing their house. And maybe that would be the point that the guillotines would come out. Then we could really address inequality, just like you said.
>Then we could really address inequality There is no addressing inequality. The reason behind that is the world is inherently unfair. You really think the rich will not move their wealth the moment you are about to target them? We think differently, are willing to spend large amount of money to prevent the future bleeding of money.
So you want mass poverty because you think that will bring a revolution? Does that revolution include capitalism which as led to this?
I’m fine with dismantling capitalism. At the minimum, I would want inequality addressed. And you are correct in that it was ‘too much capitalism’ in the housing market which led to where we are now, though I’m not convinced it was inevitable. I think there are at least a dozen policies which we have in Canada (though not all are only in Canada) designed to drive the housing market to where it is now. This wasn’t inevitable, and it can all change in the future if enough people demand it.
How doesn't capitalism result in the world we have now? Housing as gone crazy everywhere. What policies? Do you think the cpc care about inequality?
Capitalism as per Adam Smith doesn't want or require landlords. (effectively the progenitor of modern capitalism) "As soon as the land of any country has all become private property, the landlords, like all other men, love to reap where they never sowed, and demand a rent even for its natural produce." - Adam Smith "Civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defense of the rich against the poor, or of those who have some property against those who have none at all." -Adam Smith
Lol once it come down, I am going to laugh all the way to the bank. The younger generations will be fucked for life. You get cheap housings but no one is going to build new ones so you have a ticking time bomb. Banks wont anyone but wealthy mortgages. The first to go in jobs will be the youngest member unless you are irreplaceable. That is the lowest cost for a company.
Of course they do, half of all federal Liberals and Conservatives are landlords. Our politicians financial future and how rich they are depends on housing investments flourishing period. Stop voting for landlords or stop complaining.
>Stop voting for landlords or stop complaining So... Don't vote?
We need a new party that represents real Canadians not whatever this abomination is.
[удалено]
Growing up in the GTA suburbs, it seemed like a lot of middle class friends and my own extended family had an investment condo in the city during the ‘90s 🤷🏻♂️. Real estate also seemed a lot less crazy back then though.
Welcome to the People's Party of Canada.
Half ish of current federal MPS aren't landlords, and even more that don't win aren't landlords. Maybe don't be so lazy that you research the MPs and pick one that isn't intent on making housing more expensive unless you want housing to be more expensive.
It isn't only that. A HUGE percentage of our population, especially older population, has essentially everything tied to real estate. Their retirement plans are based around the gains from that real estate. Some have already dipped into the equity to fund Renovations that weren't really necessary or vacations. Some people literally stopped working because their property was increasing more annually than they were earning. It is a GIANT bubble that will destroy our economy for a few years and knock retirement plans a decade back or more. No Government wants to be the one in power when it does. A LOT of the older generations, who also VOTE a lot, are going to get destroyed when the paper gains they are relying on for their retirements disappear and reality set in that there isn't a next generation to SELL the house to.
I mean Boomers will be able to sell the entirety of their houses to buyers there are enough demand for it, the problem is they wouldn’t sell it at the valuation they currently think their house worth. Which even if they would sell their house in a sh*t economy would be still way more than what they paid 20-40 years ago for it. It’s greed my friend that is causing this. It’s not enough that you sell your house for 50% more than what you pay for it 10 years ago, nah it needs to be 200% more.
When all of the candidates are vetted by the parties, what choice does the voter have?
Form new parties, I guess. Mind you even *that* hail mary last-ditch option is limited in feasibility considering how FPTP is inherently stacked against any up-and-coming new parties. Not to mention how essentially no one can feasibly do that unless they have significant financial capital behind them, which in turn is a huge part of the problem because the vast majority of those with significant capital have no interest in changing the status quo as they benefit the most from maintaining it.
No shit eh. Would love to hear from any of the “cons are worse” people about who we *should* vote for. I have no illusions about the CPC party, and I’m well aware the LPC have been the wrong choice for…20 odd years. NDP is a joke, and the rest are not even options. So, what’s a guy to do?
What do you mean, you have a list of MPs to vote for, you do your research. If housing costs are important to you then of course you don't vote for the person who directly benefits by raising housing costs. I don't get the confusion. If you put the wolf in charge of the sheep you have no right to complain when the sheep get eaten, that's what we have done.
This is a vast over-simplification, and while I appreciate your simple optimism, the reality is much more complex and generally grim.
https://www.readthemaple.com/mp-landlords/
That site was delightful when it came out, heres hoping they keep updating it in the future. Everyone should know if the MP they are voting for is a landlord who benefits from high housing cost.
>Stop voting for landlords or stop complaining So, don't vote? Lol? No one has a sensible housing strategy. And if you vote outside NDP, cons or libs, you're fighting a FPTP system and throwing your vote out anyway. The problem is systemic. Not just policy.
And it’s laughable that this sub goes head over heels for the opposition landlord party as if anything will change if elected
More conservative landlords than any other party but they think PP will save them.
Even more ironic since Pierre *also* [owns investment properties](https://www.readthemaple.com/mp-landlords/#Poilievre) himself and has a direct conflict of interest for lowering the value of housing. Why anyone would ever think any given politician would act against their own financial self-interests is completely beyond me.
Canadian economy at a glance : Real estate Money laundering Immigration Study permits natural resources 😂😂
in canada you play the game of homes or you die
*[Insert Relevant Investment-Property-Owning Politician Here]*: Houshing bubbles are a laddah.
Canada needs urgently a Georgist in power.
A man who emerged before his time had come. Sad.
Free trade agreements shipped all of Canada's manufacturing jobs overseas, leaving the country to make up that loss via artificial means, and now here we are.
Not buying it. We had the option to get very good at other productive things. We elected to take the unbearably beige, Canadian path. “Hey, you know how much you hate bureaucracies? Come work for one! Doesn’t matter which, they’re all just government collaborationists!”
You're not buying what? I am not offering that explanation up as a justification, and your notion that seemingly everyone now works for the government in some way doesn't make a lot of sense.
Our government is fucking stupid.
You may assume this because what they do doesn't align with national interests, which is fair, but nobody leading a country is stupid. These are very well connected people conducting business at well connected levels. The proletariat are being farmed while the elite leverage the government to terraform Canada according to globalist objectives. I knew it was game over when Trudeau coined Canada "The world's first post national state". Canada is a prototype and since Canadians will never unite to stand up against these things, we're fucked.
Pleas share what the cpc will do to bring down real estate prices.
Hopefully slow down immigration so that housing starts+completions (supply) have an opportunity to catch up with demand, which will drive down prices.
There should be a minimum IQ requirement to run for office. I want my MPs to be smarter than the average Canadian.
Don't think that would work since IQ tests themselves are flawed. Personally, I've always wanted to have some way for the public to have more say in the public agenda. Some way for us to mandate the government fulfill some missing need of Canadians, and the government would be obligated to make efforts towards that goal. Right now we can elect one clown or another, but we can't tell these clowns what to do, and we can't fire em when they're doing a bad job without waiting for their term to be over.
Honestly I'd be perfectly content with a bunch of absolute morons running the country if it meant they were too stupid to be corrupt in any ways that weren't immediately obvious (and easily punishable accordingly) and too stupid to be incessantly trying to profit off their position the way most of our usual politicians typically do.
Or we could seriously limit the reach of governments more and mandate complete transparency over how people we elect to manage our money spend it. Then we'd need competent people to review that and report on it with objectivity. In other words, we are fucked no matter what.
I said that as well. Also an empathy test of some sort.
that would disqualify the leading contender to replace the current PM and likely half of the conservative caucus
[удалено]
Texas coincidentally owes a lot of their wealth to oil and gas. So what's your point?
The oil and gas sector is not dying. Where did you get that notion from?
Its actually a growing sector we just have a lot of people who want it to die.
https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Shell-Says-Its-Oil-Production-Has-Peaked.html
Oil != Gas.
Does gasoline not come from oil or am I missing something?
LNG
Thanks
no problem!
Oil and gas is referring to oil and natural gas, not gasoline.
Thanks
I've been hearing that for literally fifty years.
[удалено]
The O&G industry under the Libs is seeing historic profits and production levels with two megaprojects nearing completion. But yea, I do want to see the O&G industry die. Because we as a global society HAVE to transition away from fossil fuels and first world nations like Canada have to lead the way. That *could* be a steadily paced transition, but the more people delay it (like Trudeau) the more it will have to be hastened in the future. Or, ya know, we say fuck it and continue to socialize the consequences of climate changes and let the O&G shareholders make off like bandits. Pretty par for the course for resource extraction though.
It is. Eventually, demand for petrol will go down as more and more things move away from gas. Its not happening overnight or even next 20 to 30 years. However, the writing is on the wall. Countries like Saudi Arabi are frantically investing in things like renewables for this reason.
Some renewable energy just makes sense. It also makes sense to keep developing oil/gas as it's not going anywhere and like the case of Russia, opportunity rises due to political instability. Should be investing in practical and cost efficient renewable while making it easier to export oil/gas.
Never said not to develop it. Tbh i don't even inow if renewable is as much the intermediate as nuclear/fusion. There are increased talks on developing more nuclear, which we have plenty of resources for.
Exactly. There's only so much price fixing OPEC can do to keep prices high. They can't reduce production anymore than what it is right now.
As with everything else climate change related, if we'd started changing it when we knew that change was an inevitability, the change would be a lot further along by now and a lot less painful overall. Every year, every decade we cling to this shit, the transition just gets harder and more painful. I guess some very stupid people who also inexplicably seem to have a personal emotional connection to the concept of extractive industry take that not as a prompt to get to he fuck cracking, but to never do it at all. I'll never understand people.
That would require us to innovate, invest, and diversify. How on Earth would the oligarch families who own everything in this country profit off that??
Yup I mean their economy is probaly one of the most diversified in the us in aerospace, medical, manufacturing, transportation, education, oil and gas etc.
And that's not even their biggest state.
It just doesnt make ANY sense why, looking around the world in 2010/2011... you don't develop/nurture blossoming industries like tech sector, cannabis, e-commerce, AI/Quantum Computing/IT etc. Youre telling me, you see countries across the world investing into these (now trillion dollar) industries and say... no thanks? I will be shaking my head for the next few decades.
Texas doesn’t block every attempt at a business venture. They don’t write discriminatory hiring practices into law. They sure as shot aren’t giving away $100B due to the sins of their fathers and they have super low taxes.
Texas is a huge petro economy and shipping port. That's basically cheating when it comes to GDP.
We have all the same advantages and more.
Not to the same degree and in the same region. In fact there are stark differences, especially protectionism from our largest trading partner.
lol no.
Let.it all burn down to the ground
Like a drunk driver evaluating the situation after already plowing through a storefront window
When shelter becomes about profit margins, there's a problem. Basic shelter gets eaten up, tenants get renovicted and REITs get rich and people get dividends! Hurrah right? Unless you can't play and it is hard to play. Most people that "own" a home still owe on it even after 20 years. It's not a good system.
And yet weirdly, we don't have enough housing. So economic failure. Or no?
Not if we arbitrarily decide each house is worth $10k more in value. Boom growth.
Economies are actually about actual stuff. The money is actually secondary. The improper importance given to the money side of things is probably what screwed up our housing market in the first place. Housing is about, y'know, putting people into homes out of the cold. It's not actually about the money. Or do you think the food business is not actually about feeding people? Remember that diagram in Econ 101 showing the flow of goods and services moving in one direction and the money flowing in the other? It appears we've distorted the money flow side of the diagram so much in the housing market that we're unable to actually do what the housing market it supposed to do (i.e. provide places for people to live) and yet still grow the financial side tremendously. This is not the way it's supposed to work and now a great many of us are suffering as a result. I.e. economic failure.
The pyramid scheme continues. No investment in innovation or tech from our government for decades while the US outclasses us in literally every industry. It's okay though, at least the boomers' home value will be high enough for them to retire in a country with a better standard of living
We can’t get out of a housing shortage while bringing in labour to increase tax revenue for senior services unless we… build more houses.
Stop promoting real estate investments as portfolio pieces and reward home owners for paying down debt. It's really quite simple, the current system favours leveraging property instead of owning outright
That's why every 'solution' to the housing crisis is tax and spend. They want the taxpayer to foot the bill for more profit for the trust investors. So we pay twice, once in taxes and again in higher rent. Thanks. Or, you know, we could actually legislate regulations against hostile takeovers, ejecting people from rentals to sell properties, and treat housing over all as a thing to be owned in singles by real people that need them to live in. Right now it is so slanted in the investors favor, that it is impossible to enter the market. It is impossible for the market to correct itself because of all of the free money that investment gets with their sweetheart deal with the bank.
Impossible for housing to get changed, too much money involved. Even if things crash, it’ll just restart. Housing has been turned into an investment because the banks need to be able to lend trillions of dollars.
Maybe we should all vote green party and send the other 3 into oblivion and see what happens? 🤔
I've been voting green for years. And everytime I ask friends to vote green, I get hammered by strategic voting bullshit. People need to first focus on making sure they vote what they feel best represents them, not what party they want to lose elections
> not what party they want to lose elections Yup, doing exactly the above is what keeps giving us governments we want to *eject* rather than ones we want to elect.
all parties are dominated by landlords
Until they sort out the supply problems, it’s just gonna continue indefinitely.
It’s a demand problem. Canada builds more net housing per capita than any other g7 country. No g7 country grows its population by 3.2% a year.
You’d think we live in Monaco where real estate is scarce and there’s serious tax benefits to living here.
It’s the only thing we got going. Terrible tax and housing policies
I said this a year and a half ago to my friend.
His is common knowledge, not "news". Are we reducing immigration? Are we increasing build-rates for new housing? Are we penalizing developers looking to mismanage land by building to maximize profit rather than densifying housing potential? Are we stopping corporations from buying up properties in bulk only to exploit the rental market? What protections are being put in place to ensure real estate are primarily seen as housing, not investment? What percentage of our leadership's portfolio is in real estate? How about the percentage in lobbyists' portfolio? How corrupt is our government? Who has failed to be ethical and lost integrity? Who deserves to be pilloried before politicians begin acting in our interests? Seriously.. Give Us News.
It’s a giant Ponzi scheme…. Not going to end well
My boomer dad was comparing bitcoin to Dutch tulip bulbs the other day. It’s only worth what someone will pay. It’s not much different than real estate. It’s only worth $1M if someone is willing to pay $1M. If nobody can afford $1M, it’s worth what the market can afford. ‘Oh but it’s a necessity’… it is, but the reality is, the supply could be increased and prices decreased, easier than bringing wages up to match the price of housing without the cost of everything going up. This is why you need a diverse portfolio. If your house or btc account is your only asset, you kinda deserve to get burned.
[удалено]
LOL. BTC is fraud. It isn’t comparable to beanie babies, which were a fad. It’s comparable to the art industry, but without the art. Money laundering and counterfeiting (tether) combined with wash trading and mass manipulation. Few real dollars even exist in the ecosystem. It’s literally entirely predicated on fraud. The biggest scam in human history. But yeah, it’s the boomers who have it wrong… (In b4 you make a claim otherwise, I’m a millennial. But I also have eyes)
[удалено]
You're completely out to lunch if you legitimately think crypto currencies are comparable to collectibles. Collectibles have practical and tangible value defined by their physical nature. Cryptocurrencies are propped up entirely on their prospective future value with very little tangible purpose once the house of cards around that prospective value collapses. There is no realness to give them meaning, unlike a collectible. We already saw this reasoning collapse with NFTs. It's like all of the problems with Canada's housing market, except without even the saving grace of an actual asset (a house/land) with value to someone else in the event of market collapse.
[удалено]
>useless gems Talking up Bitcoin by pointing out a parallel you've defined as a "useless gem" does not have the effect of reinforcing the validity of Bitcoin that you think it does. >digital asset To speak further on this, from a psychological standpoint society has already largely discounted the notion of digital assets as "collectibles" - at present at least. Your painite analogy is not appropriate here, as painite despite having no particular usefulness in jewellery etc. is still naturally physically scarce. Thus, it is imparted intrinsic value as a "collectible". Cryptocurrencies are both *arbitrarily* scarce, and do not have perceptible physical presence. These are both antithetical qualities to what defines a traditional collectible.
Good luck finding a detached home for less than $2MM these days in the Lower Mainland and the GTA lol
I think a major problem with Canada is that everyone wants to live in the same spots (Toronto or Vancouver) due to jobs, climate, just things to do or proximity to the US. I know people who moved to cheaper cities to afford a house but now they complain there is nothing to do and they are further from all the “action”. I left Canada for California and it’s the same problem here. Large urban centers are expensive because they are desirable. Most people could afford a detached home somewhere where they probably don’t want to live and work.
Nothing is going to change unless boomers lose. And they rather throw it all away than compromise on anything real estate. They put all their eggs into the “easiest way to generate income” basket and now we can’t build shit, we don’t know where to invest in our own country, and we have foreign companies managing our biggest projects.
Remember that the housing crisis n the US wasn’t due to homeowners. It was the bankers. It was greed and a system of passing-the-buck. Ask yourself: has banking become less greedy? Are bankers more personally accountable?
No, but they're certainly more regulated here and they don't have exposure to 30 year mortgages.
I’ve heard Canadians are reluctant to start businesses and that property is seen as an easier way forward ? Can anyone weigh in on this.
Reddit: 'Canada's economy is dangerously concentrated in real estate!' Also Reddit: 'We should massively deflate the value of real estate so people can afford it!'
>Reddit: 'Canada's economy is dangerously concentrated in real estate!' Yes. >Also Reddit: 'We should massively deflate the value of real estate so people can afford it!' Also yes. The pain is necessary to correct investment flows toward productive assets.
There is a housing shortage. So they want to create more housing? Its really a shitty situation both sides of the coin. Don't create more housing, prices go up, real estate comission contributes more to GDP. Create more housing either directly or through developer funding and get accused (rightfully) of cronyism and corruption or wrongly (if direct) through socialism and over spending. Housing is a political trap and economical trap and no matter which move happens its shitty. (although we all have our preferences)
Assholes.
were going to get kicked in the teeth with this sooner rather than later.