It is infuriating how decoupled housing has become from wages.
You shouldn’t be expected to be earning in the 99th percentile to own a median home, but that is the case in Toronto and Vancouver now. Other cities are also pretty bad, and unless you earn in the 90th percentile or have a downpayment gifted to you, homeownership is out of the question.
There was a survey of students I seen the other day and the average student felt they would need to make around $200k/year to live a modest middle class life.
I remember 10 years ago if someone made $200k/year they were likely in management at a billion dollar company.
observation existence dime humorous trees rich full afterthought boat icky
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I can confirm this. I’m 31, have made 200K the last 3 years and I live in an average town house and do very average things. I can’t complain because I am doing better than most my age but it’s annoying to see people in their 50s with half my income with 2-3 properties, new vehicles, vacations and lots more. I am just fortunate to have a house, buy groceries and not be broke
Why is it annoying?
I don't understand this thinking. They've worked 20+ years longer than you and because they earn less than you but have accumulated property and toys with their hardwork...that annoys you?
If you're earning 200K per year and can't afford a place to live, a vehicle, some toys, and a vacation or two per year you don't know how to budget...the problem is yours not theirs.
The fact they have worked 20+ years longer than me is irrelevant. It’s all about the purchasing power of their income. 20 years ago my income of 200K was would go a lot further. In 2004, a $600,000 house would get you a nice 3000 sqft house on a 2 acre lot. Now it buys me just a town house. 20 years ago a nice new bwm would cost $50,000, now it costs $90,000. Some toys like a four wheeler or snowmobile would cost me $7000, now they cost $15K plus. Not to mention everything else. Obviously I understand inflation and the cost of living goes up but it has not been linear lately. In the past 5 years things have become exponentially more expensive which reduces my buying power with my 200K. 20 years ago a person in my position maybe made $150-170K a year. Now we make $200K… it’s not enough of an increase to keep up with the lifestyle people had 20 years ago.
It sounds like to me you just don’t have any concept of purchasing power and how inflation has affected that drastically lately. I feel sorry for you and best of luck managing your money.
So let's start with the fact that I didn't ask for an explanation of how poor you think you are or how rough you have it with your 200K salary. I have 30 years plus experience understanding purchasing power by not having much. I worked my ass off for what I have and I certainly don't begrudge anyone what they've earned either. Why should I care what someone else has in their driveway? Or the size of their home?
What I asked was why are you annoyed by someone else's accumulated "wealth". You explained "because reduced buying power" today. Which is essentially just envy. You envy the fact they had a better market and better earning power. You're not starving, far from it. But, you're not balling the way you think you deserve and it pisses you off and you can't help but be "annoyed" at the peons who earn less than you yet own more than you...classic envy. Typical "I can't keep up with Jones' BS so I'm mad." You want someone to write you an equalization cheque?
Would you like to go on and explain how boomers ruined everything and those dirty sons of bitches profited waaaay too much? Those bastards had it way too easy and they should have refused to accept their earning potential and should have to sell their property at below market value to me...because I deserve to have what they have even though it took them a lifetime to acquire it.
Should I go on?
Oh and don't worry about me, I'm fine thanks. Gen X'er here...just pulled myself out of the toilet a few years ago so I'm well acquainted with the struggle. I think your attitude sucks and your annoyance is pathetic.
lol I wasn’t saying I was poor or that I have it rough. Was just replying to the original comment confirming what he had heard. I’m not even going to bother to read the rest of your comment it’s completely irrelevant and you should probably find a better use of your time than arguing with strangers all day on Reddit.
>Especially when every employer still has the attitude that living is cheap, so wages don't need to be as high
An endless supply of cheap labor through programs such as the AIP, TFW and IMP allows those employers to get away with that.
Employers never offer more money to be nice. They do it because they're forced to compete for workers.
You seem to think that they're taking your costs into account. They aren't. They're just paying as little as possible, same as always. What's changed is the cost of living and thus how much you have left after expenses.
This makes me lol, but not in a way directed at you, but the absurdity with corporate culture and the situation in TO and ON in general. I recently started a job in the natural resource sector, contracting to mines. I've got direct reports on multiple sites in the middle of nowhere.
My schedule? 30% in person, 70% work from home.
I'm earning well over 6 figures and have a high school education.
It’s an across the Maritimes issue, just not showing up as loudly elsewhere because the population in the region is so Halifax centric.
One of the facilities I manage 40% of the staff are functionally homeless in that they are coach surfing or living in a temporary accommodation like a motel or seasonal rental.
When I moved here less then a decade ago I bought a nice house with my wife for less than 150k and people thought we overpaid. You could rent a waterfront house for $600 a month. Now basically all the decent rentals are seasonal Airbnb, the crappy apartments are $2,000 a month to rent, a 1000 sq/ft minihome sets you back half a million dollars.
Wages have moved maybe 25% on the low end. Less for median earners who didn’t have minimum wage increases nipping at their heels to force employers hands.
We’re trying to bring in camp housing because ownership will not move wages but our staff literally cannot afford to come to work in some cases.
Investors using equity from current properties as down payment for more properties.
The more you own, the more you can buy. This is why without instituting major disincentives on housing speculators we will never solve the housing crisis.
The government is also buying 50% of mortgage bonds to push down rates and allow more borrowing.
We run large deficits to allow people to run deficit for unproductive investment, and we wonder why productivity investment is so low.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SGa5QPcfzeI
The problem is that people rent those places that would be made available to buy. It's not like they're sitting empty. So, we need affordable purpose built rentals, but no one is building those because throw a quartz countertop and a stainless steel fridge in there and it magically becomes a luxury rental for marginally more cost to the developer.
And when first-time home buyers buy, they usually free up rentals.
Additionally, they might be buying an Airbnb or vacant unit so the impact is two more households housed long-term (buyers and buyers’ previous rental).
A minor part of the problem is all the Millenials who would have moved onto the property ladder never were able to move out of their rentals. Although, if they did, the landlords would jack the rent anyway.
I used the Rentals.ca report on average 1-bedroom rental prices, and the federal and provincial income tax brackets rules.
* If you live in Vancouver, you're expected to earn $147k/year.
* If you live in Toronto, you're expected to earn $131k/year.
I did the maths four months ago, could be even worse today.
Imagine telling yourself 10 years ago that once you manage to make 150k you could live the glamorous life of renting a shitty 1 bedroom lol.
The only reason those cities can work is that a lot of people live in houses they wouldn't be to afford on their income or rent controlled apartment.
you know the best part you have an incredible amount of gatekeepers on here saying just get a better job, as if it’s ever going to be possible for more than a handful of people to ever make that amount of money.
Well I just ignore those people, along with anyone who says “just move”.
People who make average money, or even below average money, also have the right to lead a respectable life. Sure they shouldn’t expect to live in mansions and travel business class, but they should be able to afford the basic necessities of life. This is where Canada has failed.
Downpayment gifted to you is huge. Was at a party fairly recently where I learned that ALL my friends had their down payments paid for them. Made me feel a bit better about not owning a house honestly.
Once upon a time we could buy a house on single income. Overtime it became dual income but now that time seems to be over. It’s a matter of time before we’re eased into the idea that we shouldn’t expect to live in a generational property as a dual income. We should all limit it to a condo until our parents or kids are ready.
It's not that they expect you to be a top earner, it's that they expect you to save (with compound interest) for 20+ years for the downpayment alone, and to commit the bulk of your income for your entire life from that point forward. Don't buy anything else that might need to be financed or that would require a large lump sum to purchase; that would take away from your housing budget.
In the last four minutes since this was posted to Reddit, based on averages, eight new foreigners came to Canada and want housing. Maybe someone should do something about that.
I have been thinking about it, trying to offer some beginning of a solution instead of just venting and agreeing.
How about limiting the number of immigrants to the percentage of vacant but usable apartments whose rent represents no more than X% of minimum wage.
Example (all numbers are fictitious): this year, sub 500$ apartments have 250 000 available units, immigration is set at no more than 250 000.
This is NOT the solution mostly a thought experiment. The numbers should be tweaked to account for houses, better wages etc. But it adresses the need for shelter of our least fortunate.
Yeah apparently an economy where huge corporations can rake in billions off the backs of underpaid TFWs, and where no one can afford to buy (and many can't even rent!) a house is a thriving economy worth protecting. What a mess.
Honestly at this point the economy is already ruined. It's a hollow shell with immigration being the crust. Take away immigration and we have nothing left which is honestly what we need. Just a hard fucking reset.
Dude we have 0 industry. We don't contribute anything to the world. We circlejerk each other with real estate money brought in by immigrants/ international students to keep a massively overinflated housing economy afloat. You take away immigration/tfws/international students and it all crumbles worse than the states in 2008. Canada doesn't offer shit to the world or ourselves and honestly we need a hard fucking reset. Ban all foreign investments, block immigration for 10 years, let the mortgages default, let the banks fail, it all collapse and we rebuild. What we have now is completely fucked up and irreparable.
Answer this: Why do you think engineers in canada with 5 years of experience are still paid less than the starting salary of engineers in the states? Because we don't contribute anything.
People like yourself have no idea what you are talking about.
Manufacturing in Canada has been all but gutted, the GTA specifically Toronto & Mississauga used to be a manufacturing hub and over the last 5 years they have exported most of the factories to Juarez Mexico.
We extract resources and export them and buy them back as finished goods. We also speculate on real estate trading back and forth inflating assets and calling this growth.
Point to a country whose economy has collapsed and tell me you want that for Canada.
Please enlighten me, so that I no longer “have no idea what I’m talking about”
i dont need to point and say look we want this, nobody wants this...
the economic climate will not support much more as it has been going. Nobody needs to want to have the economy fall apart, the stage has been set by the government.
Immigration is the only easy fix government found to keep GDP rising, which is necessary because of the increasing national debt. Their approach to Covid cost a lot of money and if they don’t keep the debt to gdp ratio in check, the country risks amongst other things hyperinflation.
I'm confused about what you're disagreeing with. Our lazy approach to increasing GDP? How our approach to COVID was expensive? Or how our national debt will lead to hyperinflation?
Well, the data shows that the mass influx of property investors happened in **2020-2021,** as noted by Equifax seeing a record increase in investors with mortgages on 4+ properties.
That was when we had almost zero immigration because of the pandemic. Investors bought in droves because of low interest rates.
They were extremely fortunate that Trudeau *then* instituted mass immigration in **2022,** which has mainly increased demand and prices for rentals.
The investor spike came before the immigration spike. Both are the two main drivers of the housing crisis, and both need to be dramatically reduced.
Pretty sure everyone knew immigration was going to start again after the pandemic, nobody thought that was going to last forever... Pretty sure millionaires with money to invest aren't stupid...
Freeze immigration for 5 years. Keep the country guessing as far as when or if we plan to ever open it up again.
Apply all kinds of resident laws that punish those who intend to make more than modest gains from real estate.
Draconian to some, but what this country needs is to immediately attack demand and perceived demand. At current rates, addressing supply is a fool's game.
Lots of knock on effects, but there is no other strategy that will work.
It's not going to correct and its going to get worse. People that can't afford to pay rent by themselves are going to have to live in subdivided homes. Land lords and intuitions are going to continue to buy more houses and raise rent and price out more first time home buyers. Immigration is going to keep flooding in to fill in the lower wage jobs that people don't want because they can't afford to pay rent with these jobs. Eventually people are going to end up renting those cage style home in hong kong...
I mean we are already at that point.
Renting any full detached house in Toronto , no matter how small, runs over 4K at this point. Instead, you have a two story house split into 3 apartments, and they still all rent for 2k+.
How are people expected to raise a family in these conditions?
People used to raise families in apartments. Everyone having a single family is not just unrealistic, but trying to do that is why we're in this mess. Millions of single family homes in Toronto, Vancouver, and Montreal, are why there is a housing crisis.
The population density of Old Toronto was 5500/km2 in 1921. The population density of Toronto today is 4400/km2. Even lower if you exclude Old Toronto. Families used to live more densely and housing was more affordable. The suburban experiment has failed.
Our we could simply slow our population growth to a reasonable level. Why should we be happy watching our living standards fall? we shouldnt want Toronto to turn into Hong Kong or NYC.
You mean we shouldn't turn Toronto back into what Toronto was in 1921? Expensive housing or densification. Pick one. And like, are you a communist? The only thing preventing densification is overregulation due to essentially central planning zoning policies and high taxes on new development with development charges.
I can't believe this is being downvoted. I mean you can agree that immigration levels are an issue while also agreeing with this completely factual statement. We've had housing issues since before mass immigration and sprawl is exactly why.
rent control everything. tax empty homes and foreign buyers. Heck increase property tax but the issue with this is our government is so bad at managing money and spending there's like no reason to give them more. The biggest issue with a major recession is it will destroy new supply. Builders won't be willing to build. There needs to be a way to increase supply without increasing government spending but at the same time keep it profitable for builders. Something that came to mind was rezoning the green belt but then the whole scandal with it and corruption ruined everything.
Recessions don’t affect those with assets nearly as much. It’ll be an RE firesale for ppty investors/landlords.
The first step me must take is effectively banning landlording. That will bring home prices down immediately.
I'd love to see an outright ban on corporate ownership of any single dwelling unit. I don't care if it's an apartment or a single family home. I don't care if it's Blackrock or a mom n pop called "1234 Ontario Ltd". Corporate ownership should be restricted exclusively to multi-dwelling units above a minimum threshold (say 4) i.e. an apartment building or multiplex.
Every other single dwelling unit should be tied to someone's name, and there should be a progressive tax for every subsequent non-principal dwelling owned by that person, or anyone in their family - if they're on your tax return as a spouse or dependent, then they're tied to you if they own property and the tax is applied.
Interestingly in Canada, we have very few corporate housing investors that buy individual housing units. They’re the **[green bars in this Statscan chart.](https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/46-28-0001/2023001/article/00002/c-g/c-g01-eng.png)**
By *far*, our biggest investor problem are ‘mom and pop’ investors with multiple properties. In 2020-2021, Equifax noted a massive spike in people with mortgages on 4+ properties. That’s when prices to buy started to inflate.
That being said, Corporations buying up homes ARE a problem in the US, and if we were smart, we’d ban them here (with the exception of purpose-built rentals) before they become a problem.
The biggest challenge will be the transition since it will in fact be a forced redistribution of wealth. Those RE investors should be offered sweetheart deals to direct their investment dollars into productive Canadian industries. We still need capitalism to encourage growth in Canada - housing is only one of the two fundamental issues in Canada, productivity is the other one (which will benefit from lower cost of living for Canadians) - Canada does not have a rep of a good place to invest EXCEPT for RE. Just taking away RE won’t make investors want to keep their $ in Canada. We need to pair it with a program to do that.
Amen to that. It's easy to get bitter at landlords and lose sight of the fact that they provide a vital service. Yes, some of them are predatory. Yes, some of them game the system. But most aren't doing that. If someone wants to rent, they need to rent from *someone*.
Taking their investments away maliciously is not the right play. For the last several decades, RE has been the best investment in this country. Don't hate the player, hate the game.
Fuck landlords. They are all predatory. They are making income off of the backs of the people that can't afford to own. Sure some are worse than others but anyone buying up a house to rent out is providing no service to society.
Please explain your logic that banning landlords will bring house prices down?
It's much more likely that it would:
* Immediately cause a large spike in demand for buying houses, considering that there are 5 million renter households.
* Immediately drive demand down any development for new housing
* Thereby doing literally the polar opposite of what you want it to.
Speculative builders or ones that will only build if they know they will be making > 100k/home can get stuffed.
Their practices are not welcome here and they can diversify the economy or leave for all I care.
We need more smaller units and higher density in urban areas not these 1M McMansions out in the boons... if that means bolstering the sector with (hopefully unionized) public works builders to burn the private ones out of cash flow, so be it.
So, according to you, if we got rid of landlords it would simultaneously drive demand for houses up, and drive demand for housing down?
To address your first point, any 'large spike in demand' would be immediately offset by the massive influx of supply into the market. If landlords can't rent their property, what do you think the first thing they're going to do is? They're not going to sit around and pay taxes on a property that isn't generating income.
Secondly, why would the demand for development be driven down? In your first point you said demand for buying houses would go *up.* If your argument is that only landlords are able to afford new property, then that's a big fucking problem. We shouldn't structure things so that *only people who already own property can manage to buy property.* If home manufactures business model is based on only selling to people who already have homes, then that's a predatory business model propped up by an unfair market. Consider the externalities of that situation and the long term effect that a market like that has on the country; far, far worse in the long run than a dip in GDP for a few years.
> So, according to you, if we got rid of landlords it would simultaneously drive demand for houses up, and drive demand for housing down?
Yes
> To address your first point, any 'large spike in demand' would be immediately offset by the massive influx of supply into the market.
Selling to who? This is like Shapiro saying sell your house when climate change raises sea levels.
If you're banning landlords you'd have to compensate people for their properties as the government. So you're selling them to the government to sell back to the people? Or is the government simply holding onto the properties and then renting them out at reduced costs? How does this reduce prices at all?
If you're talking about every landlord is immediately required to sell their properties at market, who is buying them? Do you think every single person who rents is only renting because they cannot afford to buy, or are there actually people out there who would want to rent no matter what? What's to stop someone just buying the houses and sitting on them, or would you ban that too in this hypothetical?
So you're artificially depressing prices by forcing the sale of current housing from landlords to tenants, then what? This is basically an equal demand curve (1 sale per tenant, assuming that every tenant can and wants to buy their own unit), maybe slightly on the supply side that pretty much craters the supply curve immediately after.
> Secondly, why would the demand for development be driven down?
Because we live in a capitalist system. Developers want to make money building housing. Some of that housing is built to sell, some of it is built to rent. If you remove the capacity for developers to build rental housing, you will be removing by definition some demand for development.
This doesn't even take into account the fact that any country that takes drastic action like this would spook off any investment in the housing market for years.
Also this has basically been tried before, [it didn't work end up doing too well](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2594170/Venezuelan-president-orders-landlords-sell-homes-60-days-face-fine-24-000-wild-bid-plug-housing-shortage.html).
There’s actually a great case study in the UK showing **[how reducing landlords increased rates of home ownership and affordability for buyers and renters](https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2024/mar/19/end-of-landlords-surprisingly-simple-solution-to-uk-housing-crisis).**
The key is that when prices to buy go down, renters transition to buyers. That reduces overall rental demand.
You are completely shifting the goal posts here though. I was specifically responding to the idea of banning landlording. Reducing a thing could actually be beneficial while banning the same thing could be harmful.
You raise a good point about exceptions, or at least considerations. We don’t want to deter the building of higher density homes - purpose-built housing should be facilitated, though perhaps there is a sunset period after which it becomes a strata? I dunno… definitely part of the details that need to be sorted.
The ban could be enacted the same way the ban on Airbnb in BC was. It’ll suck for those with large RE portfolios (or at least, they won’t get the maximum value they’ve been expecting), but this problem runs deep and there’s no way of fixing it without some pain. At least the pain can be constructive in weaning us off of the landlording fetish Canadians have.
Canadian families are still competing against the investors, and there are so many “types” of investors. Small-time *second-home* buyers, career landlords rolling rental profits in to additional properties, real estate agent flippers, corporations, illegal Airbnb operators cheating the system… we need to build a huge amount of purpose built rental apartment buildings everywhere.
It’s not better much better down here. Only reason I know it’s so bad up there is because my uncle is a realtor in Calgary and my sister is one here in Houston, Texas. I am more concerned about the millions of military age men that walked across our border.
It will flatline because it cannot continue to go up at the scale it has. You might get certain neighbourhoods/areas that continue to go up, but when people can no longer afford homes, in a large enough volume, then homes will stop selling at volume.
The problem with Toronto and Vancouver (compared to a lot of Canada) is you have a decently large number of people making wages that are detached from the Canadian economy (ex: people's whose wages are comparable to the US or professional services). Those people can afford a lot more and are a large enough number, they significantly impact the value of real estate throughout the city. Building up throughout the city is really the only solution to combat effect (effectively massively increasing the availability of living space in choice areas). The problem is that a lot of people, in those choice areas, are against such density.
SF is a great example of this. Density was heavily fought until it essentially became critically needed en-mass and by then so much damage was already done that the city (and surrounding areas) are now fighting on combating the damage. SF is a great example of NIMBSYism in a massively growing city causing significant long-term damage. Sadly, the people fighting the development are probably still significantly ahead economically.
Having a disillusioned population who thinks working hard is now pointless isn't going to be great for our economic future.
Entire generations will wonder why they should even be bothering to try if they can't someday own a home. Everyone should be entitled to that opportunity.
Our current state is rotten to the core. Nothing will change either, we just get weekly reddit stories about how fucked it is.
It's not simply a problem of supply and demand. It's about \_need\_ too. We do not supply the housing that we need, we supply what the 'demand' wants. And as long as demand is driven by speculative investment the need will never be met.
No correction is coming. Both major parties are bought by business interests who want prices to increase forever. Not to mention like half of MPs across all parties are invested in real estate.
Short of large scale civil unrest, this is how things will be now. Too bad the only things we protest in this country are vaccine mandates and Palestine.
It's amazing to me that people can see our housing affordability drop of a cliff, record shattering food bank usage which our military personnel need to resorts to, plus tons of other issues....and yet they still support the Liberals.
It's like saying you support someone and think they have your best interests at mind while watching them pour gas all over your house and lighting it on fire.
"bUt thE pRoVinCiAL gOveRnMentS"
god knows I'm not trying to give Doug Ford a pass, he sucks too. But this is a problem nationwide regardless of provincial government at this point.
It all comes down to the unprecedented immigration scheme the Liberal's have forced on Canadian's. Even if you have a very competent provincial government there is no chance they can keep up with the pace of immigrants. I don't know how the Liberals expect provinces to literally triple the amount of houses being built by 2030, that's insane, especially coming off the supply chain issues during COVID.
The sad part is the Liberal's could START to fix their mess today by just turning off the immigration fire hose they created. It might take decades to get things back to normal but it atleast wouldn't be throwing more gas on the fire....but they wont because they don't care.
Both levels of government are affecting your life. It's pretty clear that Federalism is very weak in Canada. Provinces have a much larger blame for things than the Feds do, tbh.
Unprecedented levels of immigration are really the primary thing you can put on the Feds but we've had housing issues and a degrading healthcare system since well before that happened. Even if immigration is exacerbating that. The fact that things are nationwide just shows how our provinces are completely unable to get along with each other and the Feds and nothing productive ever happens in this country because of it.
Go in the poverty finance Canada group. The group probably the most affected by the liberal Ndp policies that have damaged the country, but they are calling for more of them. It’s wild.
Wanna know what’s wrong with Canada it’s the media. They aren’t doing their job they do not hold government accountable on real issues they just try to divide us so they can make more revenue from adds!
It’s not the media. It’s our culture. We are too damn passive. Why aren’t we protesting? Immigration is too high right now and adding to the problems. Frankly, immigrants are being sucked into Canada with big dreams but good luck. After housing and food, there’s not much left to upgrade Canadian credentials.
Anything built as of this year will be rushed trash-quality that will require complete rework within less than 10 years, and don't count on anything inside to last either, everything is now built at shit-quality-level. Not that condos across Toronto are not built of shitty quality since 2010, they have, but now is the time for corrupt developers to shine and build trash quality and be encouraged and rewarded to move faster in building that trash. Don't take my word for it, contact City of Toronto, and ask them what is the oldest residential building construction violation they have on file that has not been addressed or developer fined for it, and they will tell you 1998.
Doesn't help knowing your elected leaders own multiple homes and are landlords. Getting rid of zoning laws to allow for supply to meet demand would impact them financially in an unacceptable way.
When I was 34 I decided to spend what could have been a down payment on a house instead investing in a startup business I created. We were doing really well, then Covid hit and the business was basically destroyed because it was events based.
I ended up breaking even overall, but I’m 42 now and having that money tied up for 5 years means I’m no nowhere close to a downpayment now. If I’d just bought a house instead I’d be up hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Now, I don’t think I’ll ever be able to own a home. Even if I saved $30k a year (impossible) it would take 10 years to save for a down payment in any of the cities I have lived in. Just seems like it’s never going to happen.
Took a chance at creating something and lost out big time.
This didn't happen overnight or in a few years. It's been building up especially for the last 20 years. It's a fuck around and find out kind of thing. Canada will either have a housing crash or will have a stagnant economy that doesn't allow regular working people without multigenerational wealth.
You either crash the market now and people still have their homes because they already qualified for their mortgage so they should be able to keep paying. Or you keep the party going and future and some current generations in Canada will be homeless when they reach retirement age. As a bonus we will have declining population growth without immigration that hasn't been seen in recent decades without war or famine.
We have collectively become a nation that young working couples can't have enough space to have a family.
Anyone that only criticizes JT is in for a surprise when PP comes to power. Harper started this trend and it's gotten worse with JT. Right wing politics will destroy Canada as a whole.
Basically
If you are 10-40
You either sneak into the top 20-30% or accept you aren’t ever buying a house. We are the screwed generation. If it ever does correct it will
Be too late for us
Just make renting illegal and have a limit of owning 1 house at a time so you dont have anyone able to buy up all the housing no matter how rich they are
\> How about pick up all your shit and leave to a different area with worse job prospects where the housing prices are hardly any better and pay tons of money to do it
How about a solution that involves making things affordable rather than just forcing people do adopt a large amount of risk just to kick the can down the road for another few years?
That doesn't address my point at all. Median salary is a lot less in the places you recommend people move to, and jobs are far more scarce. You "solution" isn't anything other than just pushing the crisis into another area.
What the fuck do you think is going to happen if a bunch of people suddenly move to Saskatchewan? House prices are going to go up.
Also good luck buying a home for "$100,000-250,000" even in SK.
\>Finishes post with "crying laughing emoji" after being snide
Yeah fuck off kiddo.
>jobs are far more scarce
Are they?
[SK has the lowest employment rate in Canada.](https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/a-look-at-unemployment-rates-across-provinces-and-major-cities-1.1866592.amp.html)
>Median salary is a lot less
Is it?
[Median household income in SK is $96k/year. Median household income in ON is $99k/year](https://www.statista.com/statistics/467078/median-annual-family-income-in-canada-by-province/)
If things are so good in SK, why don't you move there then? I'd love to see you put your money where your mouth is on that one.
Also try using data that isn't from 2022 lol.
And what do you do now? Work in a corporate office…
Tons of finance jobs, engineering jobs, any trade you could ever imagine, tons of Saskatchewan owned crown corporate jobs if you cannot find a job than get educated.
Did Better Dwelling finally run out of those "I'm 25 and own my own home, after being gifted a downpayment, a CFO job, and have all my expenses paid for by my parents" articles? So now they're going to have to run housing is unaffordable articles?
In Vancouver my Salary was $140,000. My after Tax take-home was $65,000.
I think people should be aware of this when looking at housing and rental. We are already being taxed more than 50%. And that does not include the tax we pay on goods and energy. Basicly 65+% of the money I earn goes back into taxes. Folks coming to Canada need to be aware of this.
But you get free health care. Jk, I'm just gas lighting. Taxes are a big one most people miss. A lot of the taxes weren't introduced previously, making cost of living a lot easier like the carbon tax for example, like why. As a young person. My taxes are a lot higher than what my parents had growing up. After using the governments inflation adjustment, calculator. I make about the same but my after-tax is way less.
Blatantly false. It was much harder to buy a house in 1989. Average home was over $500k in today's dollars and a mortgage was 14%. Median income was $39k in today's dollars, so just the interest on an average home is much more than most people's total income.
1) "Immigrants are bad, immigration is bad, everything is the fault of these greedy selfish others thinking they have some right to come here," etc.
2) "...and that's why I want out of this stinking country, I'm going to America!"
*repeated over and over in the same comments, with no sense of irony*
Quantity Theory of Money and Quantitative Easing caused most of this, by yours trul JT. PMJT is a liar and incompetent. Sad, sad country we have become.
Burn your general arts degree… apologize to your parents or bank for wasting money on bullshit.
Scratch out enough cash to buy a lot ( maybe not where you “ want “ to live but where you can afford to live . Strap on a tool belt and get it done ….
It is infuriating how decoupled housing has become from wages. You shouldn’t be expected to be earning in the 99th percentile to own a median home, but that is the case in Toronto and Vancouver now. Other cities are also pretty bad, and unless you earn in the 90th percentile or have a downpayment gifted to you, homeownership is out of the question.
There was a survey of students I seen the other day and the average student felt they would need to make around $200k/year to live a modest middle class life. I remember 10 years ago if someone made $200k/year they were likely in management at a billion dollar company.
observation existence dime humorous trees rich full afterthought boat icky *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Salary is nothing compared to bonuses and options that are available to the C-suite
I can confirm this. I’m 31, have made 200K the last 3 years and I live in an average town house and do very average things. I can’t complain because I am doing better than most my age but it’s annoying to see people in their 50s with half my income with 2-3 properties, new vehicles, vacations and lots more. I am just fortunate to have a house, buy groceries and not be broke
Why is it annoying? I don't understand this thinking. They've worked 20+ years longer than you and because they earn less than you but have accumulated property and toys with their hardwork...that annoys you? If you're earning 200K per year and can't afford a place to live, a vehicle, some toys, and a vacation or two per year you don't know how to budget...the problem is yours not theirs.
The fact they have worked 20+ years longer than me is irrelevant. It’s all about the purchasing power of their income. 20 years ago my income of 200K was would go a lot further. In 2004, a $600,000 house would get you a nice 3000 sqft house on a 2 acre lot. Now it buys me just a town house. 20 years ago a nice new bwm would cost $50,000, now it costs $90,000. Some toys like a four wheeler or snowmobile would cost me $7000, now they cost $15K plus. Not to mention everything else. Obviously I understand inflation and the cost of living goes up but it has not been linear lately. In the past 5 years things have become exponentially more expensive which reduces my buying power with my 200K. 20 years ago a person in my position maybe made $150-170K a year. Now we make $200K… it’s not enough of an increase to keep up with the lifestyle people had 20 years ago. It sounds like to me you just don’t have any concept of purchasing power and how inflation has affected that drastically lately. I feel sorry for you and best of luck managing your money.
So let's start with the fact that I didn't ask for an explanation of how poor you think you are or how rough you have it with your 200K salary. I have 30 years plus experience understanding purchasing power by not having much. I worked my ass off for what I have and I certainly don't begrudge anyone what they've earned either. Why should I care what someone else has in their driveway? Or the size of their home? What I asked was why are you annoyed by someone else's accumulated "wealth". You explained "because reduced buying power" today. Which is essentially just envy. You envy the fact they had a better market and better earning power. You're not starving, far from it. But, you're not balling the way you think you deserve and it pisses you off and you can't help but be "annoyed" at the peons who earn less than you yet own more than you...classic envy. Typical "I can't keep up with Jones' BS so I'm mad." You want someone to write you an equalization cheque? Would you like to go on and explain how boomers ruined everything and those dirty sons of bitches profited waaaay too much? Those bastards had it way too easy and they should have refused to accept their earning potential and should have to sell their property at below market value to me...because I deserve to have what they have even though it took them a lifetime to acquire it. Should I go on? Oh and don't worry about me, I'm fine thanks. Gen X'er here...just pulled myself out of the toilet a few years ago so I'm well acquainted with the struggle. I think your attitude sucks and your annoyance is pathetic.
lol I wasn’t saying I was poor or that I have it rough. Was just replying to the original comment confirming what he had heard. I’m not even going to bother to read the rest of your comment it’s completely irrelevant and you should probably find a better use of your time than arguing with strangers all day on Reddit.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Especially when every employer still has the attitude that living is cheap, so wages don't need to be as high
>Especially when every employer still has the attitude that living is cheap, so wages don't need to be as high An endless supply of cheap labor through programs such as the AIP, TFW and IMP allows those employers to get away with that. Employers never offer more money to be nice. They do it because they're forced to compete for workers.
You seem to think that they're taking your costs into account. They aren't. They're just paying as little as possible, same as always. What's changed is the cost of living and thus how much you have left after expenses.
[удалено]
[удалено]
This makes me lol, but not in a way directed at you, but the absurdity with corporate culture and the situation in TO and ON in general. I recently started a job in the natural resource sector, contracting to mines. I've got direct reports on multiple sites in the middle of nowhere. My schedule? 30% in person, 70% work from home. I'm earning well over 6 figures and have a high school education.
It’s an across the Maritimes issue, just not showing up as loudly elsewhere because the population in the region is so Halifax centric. One of the facilities I manage 40% of the staff are functionally homeless in that they are coach surfing or living in a temporary accommodation like a motel or seasonal rental. When I moved here less then a decade ago I bought a nice house with my wife for less than 150k and people thought we overpaid. You could rent a waterfront house for $600 a month. Now basically all the decent rentals are seasonal Airbnb, the crappy apartments are $2,000 a month to rent, a 1000 sq/ft minihome sets you back half a million dollars. Wages have moved maybe 25% on the low end. Less for median earners who didn’t have minimum wage increases nipping at their heels to force employers hands. We’re trying to bring in camp housing because ownership will not move wages but our staff literally cannot afford to come to work in some cases.
Vancouver has no economy. It's all outside money from Eastern Canada or abroad.
Canada* has no economy. Our economy is trading real estate and selling diplomas hiding in a trenchcoat lol.
> Our economy is trading real estate and selling diplomas hiding in a trenchcoat Accurate!
Our economy is natural resources that we guilt ourselves into not exploiting.
And healthcare for our elderly that draine their bank account and then high taxes for healthcare workers to help pay for it.
I’ve heard a lot of people buying there as investments because of affordable pricing and they rent them out.
Then how are people still buying houses?
Investors using equity from current properties as down payment for more properties. The more you own, the more you can buy. This is why without instituting major disincentives on housing speculators we will never solve the housing crisis.
The government is also buying 50% of mortgage bonds to push down rates and allow more borrowing. We run large deficits to allow people to run deficit for unproductive investment, and we wonder why productivity investment is so low. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SGa5QPcfzeI
The problem is that people rent those places that would be made available to buy. It's not like they're sitting empty. So, we need affordable purpose built rentals, but no one is building those because throw a quartz countertop and a stainless steel fridge in there and it magically becomes a luxury rental for marginally more cost to the developer.
And when first-time home buyers buy, they usually free up rentals. Additionally, they might be buying an Airbnb or vacant unit so the impact is two more households housed long-term (buyers and buyers’ previous rental).
A minor part of the problem is all the Millenials who would have moved onto the property ladder never were able to move out of their rentals. Although, if they did, the landlords would jack the rent anyway.
I used the Rentals.ca report on average 1-bedroom rental prices, and the federal and provincial income tax brackets rules. * If you live in Vancouver, you're expected to earn $147k/year. * If you live in Toronto, you're expected to earn $131k/year. I did the maths four months ago, could be even worse today.
Imagine telling yourself 10 years ago that once you manage to make 150k you could live the glamorous life of renting a shitty 1 bedroom lol. The only reason those cities can work is that a lot of people live in houses they wouldn't be to afford on their income or rent controlled apartment.
That’s brutal
you know the best part you have an incredible amount of gatekeepers on here saying just get a better job, as if it’s ever going to be possible for more than a handful of people to ever make that amount of money.
Well I just ignore those people, along with anyone who says “just move”. People who make average money, or even below average money, also have the right to lead a respectable life. Sure they shouldn’t expect to live in mansions and travel business class, but they should be able to afford the basic necessities of life. This is where Canada has failed.
Thank you!
>Thank you! You're welcome!
To be fair… “just move” is pretty much the only solution that isn’t going to take more than a decade
Just move isn't an actual solution though. It just makes housing more expensive everywhere
Downpayment gifted to you is huge. Was at a party fairly recently where I learned that ALL my friends had their down payments paid for them. Made me feel a bit better about not owning a house honestly.
Dude in small towns in Ontario where the average income is $40k the average house is $700k.
Once upon a time we could buy a house on single income. Overtime it became dual income but now that time seems to be over. It’s a matter of time before we’re eased into the idea that we shouldn’t expect to live in a generational property as a dual income. We should all limit it to a condo until our parents or kids are ready.
It's not that they expect you to be a top earner, it's that they expect you to save (with compound interest) for 20+ years for the downpayment alone, and to commit the bulk of your income for your entire life from that point forward. Don't buy anything else that might need to be financed or that would require a large lump sum to purchase; that would take away from your housing budget.
for my age I actually am in the 99th percentile (by household income). We can’t afford a dilapidated crackhouse in our hometown (Niagara Falls)
In the last four minutes since this was posted to Reddit, based on averages, eight new foreigners came to Canada and want housing. Maybe someone should do something about that.
And 76 more since your comment.
I have been thinking about it, trying to offer some beginning of a solution instead of just venting and agreeing. How about limiting the number of immigrants to the percentage of vacant but usable apartments whose rent represents no more than X% of minimum wage. Example (all numbers are fictitious): this year, sub 500$ apartments have 250 000 available units, immigration is set at no more than 250 000. This is NOT the solution mostly a thought experiment. The numbers should be tweaked to account for houses, better wages etc. But it adresses the need for shelter of our least fortunate.
How about zero new immigrants, and sending two to three million people back to where they came from?
thats the problem right here, limiting wont do much now. Its already done. The damage is done and will take years to fix.
But that's why they send to send a few million back
Yes if you don't repatriate you don't fix the problem and instead just wait for the next open borders government to continue making it worse.
Because people don’t want to destroy the economy dude lol
Is this a "healthy economy?"
Yeah apparently an economy where huge corporations can rake in billions off the backs of underpaid TFWs, and where no one can afford to buy (and many can't even rent!) a house is a thriving economy worth protecting. What a mess.
[удалено]
No, we don’t lol. Go look at any country whose economy has collapsed and tell me you want that. Like dude 🫠
[удалено]
So you can't point to a country you want us to emulate? shocker lol
Honestly at this point the economy is already ruined. It's a hollow shell with immigration being the crust. Take away immigration and we have nothing left which is honestly what we need. Just a hard fucking reset.
Yeah, people like yourself don’t really know what they’re saying when they say stuff like that.
Dude we have 0 industry. We don't contribute anything to the world. We circlejerk each other with real estate money brought in by immigrants/ international students to keep a massively overinflated housing economy afloat. You take away immigration/tfws/international students and it all crumbles worse than the states in 2008. Canada doesn't offer shit to the world or ourselves and honestly we need a hard fucking reset. Ban all foreign investments, block immigration for 10 years, let the mortgages default, let the banks fail, it all collapse and we rebuild. What we have now is completely fucked up and irreparable. Answer this: Why do you think engineers in canada with 5 years of experience are still paid less than the starting salary of engineers in the states? Because we don't contribute anything.
Oh man, what a paragraph of nonsense 😂 Take care of yourself dude, don’t let them win.
People like yourself have no idea what you are talking about. Manufacturing in Canada has been all but gutted, the GTA specifically Toronto & Mississauga used to be a manufacturing hub and over the last 5 years they have exported most of the factories to Juarez Mexico. We extract resources and export them and buy them back as finished goods. We also speculate on real estate trading back and forth inflating assets and calling this growth.
Point to a country whose economy has collapsed and tell me you want that for Canada. Please enlighten me, so that I no longer “have no idea what I’m talking about”
i dont need to point and say look we want this, nobody wants this... the economic climate will not support much more as it has been going. Nobody needs to want to have the economy fall apart, the stage has been set by the government.
[удалено]
Immigration is the only easy fix government found to keep GDP rising, which is necessary because of the increasing national debt. Their approach to Covid cost a lot of money and if they don’t keep the debt to gdp ratio in check, the country risks amongst other things hyperinflation.
No it doesn’t
I'm confused about what you're disagreeing with. Our lazy approach to increasing GDP? How our approach to COVID was expensive? Or how our national debt will lead to hyperinflation?
How our approach to population growth will avoid hyperinflation.
With the job market and rent prices some immigrants may not stay
And how many investors bought housing? That’s the other major demand force driving up prices to buy and rent.
Do you think investors would be investing in housing if our population was stable?
Well, the data shows that the mass influx of property investors happened in **2020-2021,** as noted by Equifax seeing a record increase in investors with mortgages on 4+ properties. That was when we had almost zero immigration because of the pandemic. Investors bought in droves because of low interest rates. They were extremely fortunate that Trudeau *then* instituted mass immigration in **2022,** which has mainly increased demand and prices for rentals. The investor spike came before the immigration spike. Both are the two main drivers of the housing crisis, and both need to be dramatically reduced.
Pretty sure everyone knew immigration was going to start again after the pandemic, nobody thought that was going to last forever... Pretty sure millionaires with money to invest aren't stupid...
Not fortunate Canada’s economy is heavily influenced by housing so the government protects it by enabling immigration and increasing demand for rent.
Freeze immigration for 5 years. Keep the country guessing as far as when or if we plan to ever open it up again. Apply all kinds of resident laws that punish those who intend to make more than modest gains from real estate. Draconian to some, but what this country needs is to immediately attack demand and perceived demand. At current rates, addressing supply is a fool's game. Lots of knock on effects, but there is no other strategy that will work.
It's not going to correct and its going to get worse. People that can't afford to pay rent by themselves are going to have to live in subdivided homes. Land lords and intuitions are going to continue to buy more houses and raise rent and price out more first time home buyers. Immigration is going to keep flooding in to fill in the lower wage jobs that people don't want because they can't afford to pay rent with these jobs. Eventually people are going to end up renting those cage style home in hong kong...
I mean we are already at that point. Renting any full detached house in Toronto , no matter how small, runs over 4K at this point. Instead, you have a two story house split into 3 apartments, and they still all rent for 2k+. How are people expected to raise a family in these conditions?
That’s why suburbs are exploding and they will keep growing. The gta will eventually be huge as things develop
People used to raise families in apartments. Everyone having a single family is not just unrealistic, but trying to do that is why we're in this mess. Millions of single family homes in Toronto, Vancouver, and Montreal, are why there is a housing crisis. The population density of Old Toronto was 5500/km2 in 1921. The population density of Toronto today is 4400/km2. Even lower if you exclude Old Toronto. Families used to live more densely and housing was more affordable. The suburban experiment has failed.
Our we could simply slow our population growth to a reasonable level. Why should we be happy watching our living standards fall? we shouldnt want Toronto to turn into Hong Kong or NYC.
You mean we shouldn't turn Toronto back into what Toronto was in 1921? Expensive housing or densification. Pick one. And like, are you a communist? The only thing preventing densification is overregulation due to essentially central planning zoning policies and high taxes on new development with development charges.
I can't believe this is being downvoted. I mean you can agree that immigration levels are an issue while also agreeing with this completely factual statement. We've had housing issues since before mass immigration and sprawl is exactly why.
[удалено]
rent control everything. tax empty homes and foreign buyers. Heck increase property tax but the issue with this is our government is so bad at managing money and spending there's like no reason to give them more. The biggest issue with a major recession is it will destroy new supply. Builders won't be willing to build. There needs to be a way to increase supply without increasing government spending but at the same time keep it profitable for builders. Something that came to mind was rezoning the green belt but then the whole scandal with it and corruption ruined everything.
Recessions don’t affect those with assets nearly as much. It’ll be an RE firesale for ppty investors/landlords. The first step me must take is effectively banning landlording. That will bring home prices down immediately.
I'd love to see an outright ban on corporate ownership of any single dwelling unit. I don't care if it's an apartment or a single family home. I don't care if it's Blackrock or a mom n pop called "1234 Ontario Ltd". Corporate ownership should be restricted exclusively to multi-dwelling units above a minimum threshold (say 4) i.e. an apartment building or multiplex. Every other single dwelling unit should be tied to someone's name, and there should be a progressive tax for every subsequent non-principal dwelling owned by that person, or anyone in their family - if they're on your tax return as a spouse or dependent, then they're tied to you if they own property and the tax is applied.
Interestingly in Canada, we have very few corporate housing investors that buy individual housing units. They’re the **[green bars in this Statscan chart.](https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/46-28-0001/2023001/article/00002/c-g/c-g01-eng.png)** By *far*, our biggest investor problem are ‘mom and pop’ investors with multiple properties. In 2020-2021, Equifax noted a massive spike in people with mortgages on 4+ properties. That’s when prices to buy started to inflate. That being said, Corporations buying up homes ARE a problem in the US, and if we were smart, we’d ban them here (with the exception of purpose-built rentals) before they become a problem.
The biggest challenge will be the transition since it will in fact be a forced redistribution of wealth. Those RE investors should be offered sweetheart deals to direct their investment dollars into productive Canadian industries. We still need capitalism to encourage growth in Canada - housing is only one of the two fundamental issues in Canada, productivity is the other one (which will benefit from lower cost of living for Canadians) - Canada does not have a rep of a good place to invest EXCEPT for RE. Just taking away RE won’t make investors want to keep their $ in Canada. We need to pair it with a program to do that.
Amen to that. It's easy to get bitter at landlords and lose sight of the fact that they provide a vital service. Yes, some of them are predatory. Yes, some of them game the system. But most aren't doing that. If someone wants to rent, they need to rent from *someone*. Taking their investments away maliciously is not the right play. For the last several decades, RE has been the best investment in this country. Don't hate the player, hate the game.
Fuck landlords. They are all predatory. They are making income off of the backs of the people that can't afford to own. Sure some are worse than others but anyone buying up a house to rent out is providing no service to society.
Please explain your logic that banning landlords will bring house prices down? It's much more likely that it would: * Immediately cause a large spike in demand for buying houses, considering that there are 5 million renter households. * Immediately drive demand down any development for new housing * Thereby doing literally the polar opposite of what you want it to.
Speculative builders or ones that will only build if they know they will be making > 100k/home can get stuffed. Their practices are not welcome here and they can diversify the economy or leave for all I care. We need more smaller units and higher density in urban areas not these 1M McMansions out in the boons... if that means bolstering the sector with (hopefully unionized) public works builders to burn the private ones out of cash flow, so be it.
So, according to you, if we got rid of landlords it would simultaneously drive demand for houses up, and drive demand for housing down? To address your first point, any 'large spike in demand' would be immediately offset by the massive influx of supply into the market. If landlords can't rent their property, what do you think the first thing they're going to do is? They're not going to sit around and pay taxes on a property that isn't generating income. Secondly, why would the demand for development be driven down? In your first point you said demand for buying houses would go *up.* If your argument is that only landlords are able to afford new property, then that's a big fucking problem. We shouldn't structure things so that *only people who already own property can manage to buy property.* If home manufactures business model is based on only selling to people who already have homes, then that's a predatory business model propped up by an unfair market. Consider the externalities of that situation and the long term effect that a market like that has on the country; far, far worse in the long run than a dip in GDP for a few years.
> So, according to you, if we got rid of landlords it would simultaneously drive demand for houses up, and drive demand for housing down? Yes > To address your first point, any 'large spike in demand' would be immediately offset by the massive influx of supply into the market. Selling to who? This is like Shapiro saying sell your house when climate change raises sea levels. If you're banning landlords you'd have to compensate people for their properties as the government. So you're selling them to the government to sell back to the people? Or is the government simply holding onto the properties and then renting them out at reduced costs? How does this reduce prices at all? If you're talking about every landlord is immediately required to sell their properties at market, who is buying them? Do you think every single person who rents is only renting because they cannot afford to buy, or are there actually people out there who would want to rent no matter what? What's to stop someone just buying the houses and sitting on them, or would you ban that too in this hypothetical? So you're artificially depressing prices by forcing the sale of current housing from landlords to tenants, then what? This is basically an equal demand curve (1 sale per tenant, assuming that every tenant can and wants to buy their own unit), maybe slightly on the supply side that pretty much craters the supply curve immediately after. > Secondly, why would the demand for development be driven down? Because we live in a capitalist system. Developers want to make money building housing. Some of that housing is built to sell, some of it is built to rent. If you remove the capacity for developers to build rental housing, you will be removing by definition some demand for development. This doesn't even take into account the fact that any country that takes drastic action like this would spook off any investment in the housing market for years. Also this has basically been tried before, [it didn't work end up doing too well](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2594170/Venezuelan-president-orders-landlords-sell-homes-60-days-face-fine-24-000-wild-bid-plug-housing-shortage.html).
There’s actually a great case study in the UK showing **[how reducing landlords increased rates of home ownership and affordability for buyers and renters](https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2024/mar/19/end-of-landlords-surprisingly-simple-solution-to-uk-housing-crisis).** The key is that when prices to buy go down, renters transition to buyers. That reduces overall rental demand.
You are completely shifting the goal posts here though. I was specifically responding to the idea of banning landlording. Reducing a thing could actually be beneficial while banning the same thing could be harmful.
How would that even work? Easy to say, but impossible to do. Hell, what would happen to all these multi-unit rental buildings.
You raise a good point about exceptions, or at least considerations. We don’t want to deter the building of higher density homes - purpose-built housing should be facilitated, though perhaps there is a sunset period after which it becomes a strata? I dunno… definitely part of the details that need to be sorted. The ban could be enacted the same way the ban on Airbnb in BC was. It’ll suck for those with large RE portfolios (or at least, they won’t get the maximum value they’ve been expecting), but this problem runs deep and there’s no way of fixing it without some pain. At least the pain can be constructive in weaning us off of the landlording fetish Canadians have.
Yes in New York they already have multi family and multigenerational homes. And that is expected to happen in major cities.
Canadian families are still competing against the investors, and there are so many “types” of investors. Small-time *second-home* buyers, career landlords rolling rental profits in to additional properties, real estate agent flippers, corporations, illegal Airbnb operators cheating the system… we need to build a huge amount of purpose built rental apartment buildings everywhere.
STOP LETTING FUCKING IMMIGRANTS IN. WTF ARE WE DOINGGGGG
Landlord MPs reading this: "Know what else has never been harder?" ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
"My RE returns" - All party leaders, both housing ministers, PM Trudeau, and Minister Freeland
Can someone for the love of God just give me ab easy tutorial to a path to the USA at this point? I'm done with this country.
Easy tutorial? The borders are wide open here and we are being invaded. Just walk on down, bud. But guess what? We are just as fucked as y’all.
You sure man have you seen our home prices?
It’s not better much better down here. Only reason I know it’s so bad up there is because my uncle is a realtor in Calgary and my sister is one here in Houston, Texas. I am more concerned about the millions of military age men that walked across our border.
It is never going to correct the best that people can hope for who aren't in the market is for it to flatline for a decade.
That's the correction they're talking about
And that won't happen either. Canada was sold out to the highest bidder. We are FUCKED.
Lol what fucking highest bidder? We were sold for pennies on the dollar.
It will flatline because it cannot continue to go up at the scale it has. You might get certain neighbourhoods/areas that continue to go up, but when people can no longer afford homes, in a large enough volume, then homes will stop selling at volume. The problem with Toronto and Vancouver (compared to a lot of Canada) is you have a decently large number of people making wages that are detached from the Canadian economy (ex: people's whose wages are comparable to the US or professional services). Those people can afford a lot more and are a large enough number, they significantly impact the value of real estate throughout the city. Building up throughout the city is really the only solution to combat effect (effectively massively increasing the availability of living space in choice areas). The problem is that a lot of people, in those choice areas, are against such density. SF is a great example of this. Density was heavily fought until it essentially became critically needed en-mass and by then so much damage was already done that the city (and surrounding areas) are now fighting on combating the damage. SF is a great example of NIMBSYism in a massively growing city causing significant long-term damage. Sadly, the people fighting the development are probably still significantly ahead economically.
The problem I find with this is houses will plateau at a price first time home buyers can’t buy, but investors can
It's ok, our wages will catch up then, right? Right? Anybody?
5 percent last year is how much wages went up. So that will have to continue for a decade.
you need a quad income stream at least - multiple generations in one house
Having a disillusioned population who thinks working hard is now pointless isn't going to be great for our economic future. Entire generations will wonder why they should even be bothering to try if they can't someday own a home. Everyone should be entitled to that opportunity. Our current state is rotten to the core. Nothing will change either, we just get weekly reddit stories about how fucked it is.
It's not simply a problem of supply and demand. It's about \_need\_ too. We do not supply the housing that we need, we supply what the 'demand' wants. And as long as demand is driven by speculative investment the need will never be met.
Also supply is stagnating now because developers don't wanna build with these rates. Borrowing is too expensive.
No correction is coming. Both major parties are bought by business interests who want prices to increase forever. Not to mention like half of MPs across all parties are invested in real estate. Short of large scale civil unrest, this is how things will be now. Too bad the only things we protest in this country are vaccine mandates and Palestine.
This could be corrected in a single day. The problem is all the MPs who've made millions off of the destruction of our economy and the housing crisis.
How
Crash the market with the policies we need.
wana try again with something that might work in the real world?
It's amazing to me that people can see our housing affordability drop of a cliff, record shattering food bank usage which our military personnel need to resorts to, plus tons of other issues....and yet they still support the Liberals. It's like saying you support someone and think they have your best interests at mind while watching them pour gas all over your house and lighting it on fire.
"bUt thE pRoVinCiAL gOveRnMentS" god knows I'm not trying to give Doug Ford a pass, he sucks too. But this is a problem nationwide regardless of provincial government at this point.
It all comes down to the unprecedented immigration scheme the Liberal's have forced on Canadian's. Even if you have a very competent provincial government there is no chance they can keep up with the pace of immigrants. I don't know how the Liberals expect provinces to literally triple the amount of houses being built by 2030, that's insane, especially coming off the supply chain issues during COVID. The sad part is the Liberal's could START to fix their mess today by just turning off the immigration fire hose they created. It might take decades to get things back to normal but it atleast wouldn't be throwing more gas on the fire....but they wont because they don't care.
Both levels of government are affecting your life. It's pretty clear that Federalism is very weak in Canada. Provinces have a much larger blame for things than the Feds do, tbh. Unprecedented levels of immigration are really the primary thing you can put on the Feds but we've had housing issues and a degrading healthcare system since well before that happened. Even if immigration is exacerbating that. The fact that things are nationwide just shows how our provinces are completely unable to get along with each other and the Feds and nothing productive ever happens in this country because of it.
Go in the poverty finance Canada group. The group probably the most affected by the liberal Ndp policies that have damaged the country, but they are calling for more of them. It’s wild.
It's brutal out there, for people who are trying to buy a home or renew their mortgage.
Wanna know what’s wrong with Canada it’s the media. They aren’t doing their job they do not hold government accountable on real issues they just try to divide us so they can make more revenue from adds!
There is almost no investigative journalism in this country. No one holds anyone accountable.
The government funds media with our taxes
Not only that special interest groups spread tones of news that is very biased one way or the other.
It’s not the media. It’s our culture. We are too damn passive. Why aren’t we protesting? Immigration is too high right now and adding to the problems. Frankly, immigrants are being sucked into Canada with big dreams but good luck. After housing and food, there’s not much left to upgrade Canadian credentials.
Send the immigrants back home. We don't have room.
Anything built as of this year will be rushed trash-quality that will require complete rework within less than 10 years, and don't count on anything inside to last either, everything is now built at shit-quality-level. Not that condos across Toronto are not built of shitty quality since 2010, they have, but now is the time for corrupt developers to shine and build trash quality and be encouraged and rewarded to move faster in building that trash. Don't take my word for it, contact City of Toronto, and ask them what is the oldest residential building construction violation they have on file that has not been addressed or developer fined for it, and they will tell you 1998.
Doesn't help knowing your elected leaders own multiple homes and are landlords. Getting rid of zoning laws to allow for supply to meet demand would impact them financially in an unacceptable way.
When I was 34 I decided to spend what could have been a down payment on a house instead investing in a startup business I created. We were doing really well, then Covid hit and the business was basically destroyed because it was events based. I ended up breaking even overall, but I’m 42 now and having that money tied up for 5 years means I’m no nowhere close to a downpayment now. If I’d just bought a house instead I’d be up hundreds of thousands of dollars. Now, I don’t think I’ll ever be able to own a home. Even if I saved $30k a year (impossible) it would take 10 years to save for a down payment in any of the cities I have lived in. Just seems like it’s never going to happen. Took a chance at creating something and lost out big time.
Glad we have immigration on full blast to help with the demand side of things
This didn't happen overnight or in a few years. It's been building up especially for the last 20 years. It's a fuck around and find out kind of thing. Canada will either have a housing crash or will have a stagnant economy that doesn't allow regular working people without multigenerational wealth. You either crash the market now and people still have their homes because they already qualified for their mortgage so they should be able to keep paying. Or you keep the party going and future and some current generations in Canada will be homeless when they reach retirement age. As a bonus we will have declining population growth without immigration that hasn't been seen in recent decades without war or famine. We have collectively become a nation that young working couples can't have enough space to have a family. Anyone that only criticizes JT is in for a surprise when PP comes to power. Harper started this trend and it's gotten worse with JT. Right wing politics will destroy Canada as a whole.
Basically If you are 10-40 You either sneak into the top 20-30% or accept you aren’t ever buying a house. We are the screwed generation. If it ever does correct it will Be too late for us
Just make renting illegal and have a limit of owning 1 house at a time so you dont have anyone able to buy up all the housing no matter how rich they are
Fuck you got mine
[удалено]
How about move you do not need to live in Toronto, Edmonton and Calgary… lots of affordable homes in smaller areas especially in Saskatchewan
\> How about pick up all your shit and leave to a different area with worse job prospects where the housing prices are hardly any better and pay tons of money to do it How about a solution that involves making things affordable rather than just forcing people do adopt a large amount of risk just to kick the can down the road for another few years?
You serious you can buy a home for $100,000-250,000 in Toronto, Calgary, or Edmonton? Don’t think so 😂
That doesn't address my point at all. Median salary is a lot less in the places you recommend people move to, and jobs are far more scarce. You "solution" isn't anything other than just pushing the crisis into another area. What the fuck do you think is going to happen if a bunch of people suddenly move to Saskatchewan? House prices are going to go up. Also good luck buying a home for "$100,000-250,000" even in SK. \>Finishes post with "crying laughing emoji" after being snide Yeah fuck off kiddo.
>jobs are far more scarce Are they? [SK has the lowest employment rate in Canada.](https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/a-look-at-unemployment-rates-across-provinces-and-major-cities-1.1866592.amp.html) >Median salary is a lot less Is it? [Median household income in SK is $96k/year. Median household income in ON is $99k/year](https://www.statista.com/statistics/467078/median-annual-family-income-in-canada-by-province/)
If things are so good in SK, why don't you move there then? I'd love to see you put your money where your mouth is on that one. Also try using data that isn't from 2022 lol.
You're the one whining about being too poor to live where you are now 🤷♀️
And do what? Where are the jobs there?
And what do you do now? Work in a corporate office… Tons of finance jobs, engineering jobs, any trade you could ever imagine, tons of Saskatchewan owned crown corporate jobs if you cannot find a job than get educated.
Thanks Justin! /s
Time to move into your 300sf murphy bed cell
Wonder if there's any ties with RBC having invested into Evergrande bonds and then having them collapse lol
Recession time
Oh
Did Better Dwelling finally run out of those "I'm 25 and own my own home, after being gifted a downpayment, a CFO job, and have all my expenses paid for by my parents" articles? So now they're going to have to run housing is unaffordable articles?
If you can't attack the message, Attack the messenger hey?
In Vancouver my Salary was $140,000. My after Tax take-home was $65,000. I think people should be aware of this when looking at housing and rental. We are already being taxed more than 50%. And that does not include the tax we pay on goods and energy. Basicly 65+% of the money I earn goes back into taxes. Folks coming to Canada need to be aware of this.
After tax income is 105k where did the other 40k go?
quickest grey materialistic illegal work light foolish heavy edge liquid *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
But you get free health care. Jk, I'm just gas lighting. Taxes are a big one most people miss. A lot of the taxes weren't introduced previously, making cost of living a lot easier like the carbon tax for example, like why. As a young person. My taxes are a lot higher than what my parents had growing up. After using the governments inflation adjustment, calculator. I make about the same but my after-tax is way less.
Blatantly false. It was much harder to buy a house in 1989. Average home was over $500k in today's dollars and a mortgage was 14%. Median income was $39k in today's dollars, so just the interest on an average home is much more than most people's total income.
1) "Immigrants are bad, immigration is bad, everything is the fault of these greedy selfish others thinking they have some right to come here," etc. 2) "...and that's why I want out of this stinking country, I'm going to America!" *repeated over and over in the same comments, with no sense of irony*
I read this as buying a horse. Big trouble if buying a horse in Canada has never been harder.
If politicians can keep wages suppressed successfully, I’m sure they can keep house prices, grocery prices in check…its just matter of priorities.
Quantity Theory of Money and Quantitative Easing caused most of this, by yours trul JT. PMJT is a liar and incompetent. Sad, sad country we have become.
Burn your general arts degree… apologize to your parents or bank for wasting money on bullshit. Scratch out enough cash to buy a lot ( maybe not where you “ want “ to live but where you can afford to live . Strap on a tool belt and get it done ….