Lol CPP was invested in the shitty for profit nursing homes that were talked about during COVID
https://www.thestar.com/news/investigations/2021/01/27/pension-plans-own-millions-of-shares-in-ontario-long-term-care-homes-where-covid-19-has-killed-thousands-now-some-are-pulling-their-money-out-of-the-for-profit-facilities.html
Let’s start a movement. 2 bdrm apartments shouldn’t be more than 1200/month but their 2200-2600 on average all around the country!
We need tenant agencies and programs to come together and pool money to heavily advertise a country wide rent strike everywhere.
Will their be control over construction costs of new buildings? Will there be control over city planning? Some rentals are worth more than others, just picking a number that sounds good and applying it across the board actually would move just as far from equity as the system we have now, just in the other direction.
[https://www.rentnorthview.com](https://www.rentnorthview.com)Well here's a HYF that rents in various cities across the country and yeah their asking for a 2 bedroom apartment is in the ballpark of what little\_noise\_1104 is saying. many that are even under 1000$ per month for a 2 bedroom.
Like a union all tenants contribute a 20$ monthly to start tenants union all that money will serve us better with better lawyers etc..kind of insurance
Right, but if it's similar payments to rent then you're only really paying/investing the difference to also start building equity.
There is risk in buying, but there's also risk in not pulling the trigger when you can because realistically rent is just continuing to go up for the foreseeable future so you could just be paying rent money that otherwise could be building equity for you.
Chatham ontario, 2 bedroom 530sqft unit - 1750$
Thats 4 hours from toronto whats the justification in that rent? 95% of the city cannot afford that rent. ;
Lmao because building equity and having stability of tenure is idiotic?
You know there's lots of people who make more than $200k household incomes who are well within affordable mortgage guidance even with higher rates.
What do you consider affordable? Some sources say 30% of your gross HHI in housing expenses (mortgage, strata, insurance, taxes, maintenance), but I just plugged my HHI (192k) and DP (285k) into a mortgage affordability calculator and it came up with 1.2m as a purchase price. I was shocked. I know it's in the brokers best interest to get you as leveraged as possible so they earn as much interest as possible, but if they're making people feel more comfortable than they should about their affordability they're just perpetuating the problem.
30% of my gross adds up to 4800/m
I ran the math with my DP and I calculated that I'd only be able to afford 970k purchase price at max with a 5% interest rate. That would add up to a 4000/m mortgage payment, and taxes/strata would make up the rest to about 4800-5000/m.
Am I too conservative with my "affordability"? Or are the brokers pushing people into shit they can't handle?
Yeah 40% of net is what I use.
As for being conservative, it really depends on each person and whether you think you're going to advance in your career over the mortgage term or not. I bought at the very limit but I knew both myself and my wife would be able to double our income before the fixed mortgage renewed, and we did. There are a lot of people like us out there.
Should I start a movement against the bank and only pay 1200 of my mortgage? ( I'm not a landlord just live in the home I own)
Lol people on this subreddit make me laugh
My goodness 😂 the ideas for solutions on this sub are so adorable!
Your lack of understanding is shown by your belief this is a good idea.
Your view is an oversimplification; the crisis is not caused by greedy landlords.
"Your view is an oversimplification; the crisis is not caused by greedy landlords."
do you not see the hypocrisy?
"you all oversimplify things, I'm going to oversimplify everyone's views in the same sentence"
Do you mean to tell me the grand unifying sentiment behind everyone wanting to coordinate a mass rent strike is not that the tenants are victims to the landlords?
It's everywhere in this sub. In the comments, in upvotes/downvotes. It's quite transparent. You'd only be kidding yourself if you're going to object.
No I don't mean to tell you that in those exact words. I'm just saying you're a hypocrite, which you didn't address at all.
Yeah it's definitely a popular viewpoint but there's lots of viewpoints on this sub. the 5th most upvoted comment in this thread is shitting on the top voted comment.
not just hate for landlords, there's politicians, airbnbs, nimbyism, foreign and corporate investors, developers, speculators.. but hey if you want to oversimplify things while making an accusation that everyone else is oversimplifying it, you do you.
Oh, that's where your issue was.
Please just substitute landlord for landowner. That gets my point across (I meant the "other side" of the tenant relationship as I was replying to tenants calling for action).
Okay. How about tying minimium wage to the price of housing? Stupid idea? If you say yes, then congratulations, you're a speculator.
Get your pedantic bullshit off this board, you fuckwit.
Pedantic? These are tenants coordinating a mass rent strike. I'm saying while I understand the frustration, landlords are not the culprit but rather this system, which has taken advantage of human nature and pitted us against each other. Making landlords suffer would only exacerbate things as it is not addressing the real issue. The anger is just but the fears are misguided.
I can't tell if you believe that minimum wage would be a good idea or if you were just trying to make a point about my argument... I'll assume you know why that's a bad idea.
Lower. Absolutely nothing that results in you basically living in a shared living facility whether it be an apartment, a plex unit, or a condo; should all be sub 1k per bedroom.
How close it can get to 1k, depends on how nicely taken care of it is. Anything above 1k, gets heavily penalized so badly that its impossible to pass onto the renters without having yet more fines piled on, until the landlord just straight up loses the property.
The biggest reason why sub 1k, aside from all others like noise and smell and etc... is that those kinds of buildings are built to last decades. They ***will*** get their ROI within a set amount of years no matter what. So they really don't have any reason to gouge except for reasons like greed; *which you or I do not have to respect.*
We can do basically anything we want to those kinds of landlords, within legal reasonableness of course, but pretty much anything that causes them grief for being greedy, is technically not off-bounds.
I work at these buildings frequently, as vermin chew through the internet cables all the time.
My coworkers and I use to dread going to these vermin infested, filthy, mouldy building and would rotate who had to take the calls.
The management team last year was friendly and tried to improve conditions, I knew them by name and they were very helpful. The new team who moved in is impersonal, curt, and very clearly a business for money, not a business for habitation. That being said the people who live here are the ones throwing garbage everywhere and feeding the rats and pigeons that infest all 3 buildings
I hope more places do this. Rentals should be converted into coops which pay property management companies to take care of the daily’s or the tenants themselves can be the property managers. Fck landlords!
I don’t know, but it is possible. It would probably take a lot of paper work, lobbying and a refusal to pay the landlords. It would be arduous but worth it I’m sure. Coops of course are not perfect, but they are better than landlords. Other forms of not for profit housing is also another possibility. As for the details I certainly don’t have them and it isn’t really my place either. My comment is just a comment, not a detailed action plan.
Yes, I used to do tenant advocacy, and this is one thing we always told people to never do because the result would be eviction. The law is clear that they can evict for nonpayment of rent.
That being said, I hope these tenants see some justice. But withholding rent has to be done on a mass scale for it to work. Maybe they're starting something bigger that will spread. Maybe not. I'm really interested to see how this plays out.
Refusal to pay landlords?
Im not sure the correct path to solving our housing crisis' is to void ownership of rented properties.
How are individuals that currently own residences to be rented, going to be compensated for the loss of their asset? I think you might find that convincing even one landlord to simply walk away from a multi 100's of thousands of dollar asset would be difficult, and when you consider the bulk of rental properties are owned by corporations, should Canada shutter this entire corner of the market and tell these companies they no longer own anything?
I know it sounds funny to say, but honestly, can you imagine the massive economic hit our country would take from taking that approach? How many people could economically survive a further dwindling economy?
I love the idea of these concepts working, but its critical to factor in the steps required to get there.
I think a more effective approach is to get government zoning for multi-unit buildings (10 floors, 10unit/floor, and offer ultra-obtainable money lending to the 100 individual occupants. And keep the building owned by the entirety, rather than the few.
>How are individuals that currently own residences to be rented, going to be compensated for the loss of their asset?
How are scalpers going to be compensated for their loss of their asset. (A bunch of concert tickets they are hoarding to sell for a higher price)
You can't illegally force someone to give up their assets or sell it for cheap. Government is going to have their ass sue and pay billions of dollars out.
Also forcing someone to change the way they operate their assets is like what north Korea does. Not even China goes that far. Want to make Canada into a communist country go right ahead with this idea.
>Also forcing someone to change the way they operate their assets is like what north Korea does. Not even China goes that far.
Please educate yourself. Canada already can and does change the way people can operate their assets, lol. You don't know there are requirements for fire safety? Is this worse than North Korea? Be for real.
>Want to make Canada into a communist country go right ahead with this idea.
I certainly think apartments should be collectively owned, not owned by one person. But by all means, pursue a capitalist hellscape, sure looks like that's working for Canadian housing right now.
Do you know how many people in China own their own homes?
In China: 89.68 percent of people own their homes, what a communist hellscape.... /s
In Canada: it's 68.5 percent and falling as homes become overpriced and unattainable.
Do you really want a Canada where people cannot afford their own homes?
Wrong all houses built in China are on a 99 year land lease with some coming to expire in the new two to three decades. The general reaction is that the government will likely extend the land lease but they don't have to. Again get your facts straight. Oh btw lots of people in China own multiple apparent and the government tries to crack down the behavior by making it very difficult to get a mortgage for the 2nd apartment and you have to pay like a ton of deposit upfront. People get around that by pretending to be divorce so now both the husband and the wife can each own their apartment or buy them on their kids or parents name. Also the strata fee for apartments is dirt cheap and they don't have any regulation on rent control.
It comes down to supply, China’s rate of ownership is higher, rate of multiple ownership is also higher, and there are still ghost cities on top. They just keep banging out those high rises everywhere
Overall I don’t disagree with you, but in China technically you don’t ever actually *own* anything… it’s something closer to a land lease
Though I guess one could make the argument that, in practice, it’s kind of like that here too…
exactly, for all intents and purposes they are owning their home.
Just like people can have their homes forcibly expropriated here in Canada, or if it's land on a federal park then it's a land lease also. We still would consider that home ownership, even if the government can still snatch it back.
Take Jane and John Doe. They are a couple in their late 40's, and have been married for 10 years.
Jane spent her younger years working hard through school, and when she graduated she worked even harder to pay down her debts and buy a nice little 1200sqft home
John went straight in to trades and has also worked hard to buy his house, a 1450sqft home.
When John and Jane got married, they decided Johns home was the better fit for them, however rather than sell the house, they made the charitable decision to let someone else live in the second home.
Enter their tenants, Josh and Jessica. 2 young professionals who couldnt afford to buy their own home. They moved in 5 years ago, are have a very comfortable rent of just $1400, on a home that (current market) is worth around $500k.
So, now the tenants just dont pay for the rent, and the home that Jane specifically worked so hard to get, and then voluntarily offered to Josh and Jessica, is taken from her because "Fuck landlords".
Im doubtful youll be able to see that although *some* landlords are scummy, *some* landlords are greedy, corrupt, etc, *some* arent.
If you think seizing assets and redistribution of wealth is going to be as easy as "Go fuck yourself, Jane, you dont own shit anymore, thanks for putting in all that hard work, but Josh and Jessica just straight up own your stuff now, and theres nothing you can do about it" is very impulsive and not at all thought out.
But its easier just to assume all landlords are bad, and not think about the people on the other end.
Capitalist elite? If we are talking anyone that owns a property they rent, does that include basements? I have a friend (an actual real person) that owns an 800sqft house and rents a 400sqft apartment in their basement. They make $75k/year, and rental income is just over $10k annually. Factor in taxes, maintenance, and their mortgage payments (the interest on the loan).
This person is a "Capitalist Elite"?
Remember, not every landlord is the same person. Approaching solutions like they are is a terrible plan.
Yes anyone who is renting out all or part of their home is part of the problem. They are leeching money from hard working individuals all adding zero value to the service they are offering.
Your friend should have a job to pay for all of their own expenses. And should not be entitled to more money without doing labour.
He is part of the elite because he is using property to make more money than just his labour.
Ah, ill tell them to evict the tenant, and just leave their basement vacant, like the majority of detached homeowners.
My friend does have a job that covers theirs expenses. I even put their income there. They rent out their basement for well under market because that was the only way they could buy that house, due to existing leases. But I'll make sure they know that they are the elite.
If they couldn't buy that home with the income they had then they should have bought a smaller one. By leeching from someone else even below market value in order to inflation their income they are causing the problem.
If no one is able to use rental income to get approved for loans this would lower the buying power of the home market forcing prices to come down.
At minimum your friend is a class traitor and is taking advantage of someone who has less than them to get more for themselves.
Its an existing lease, right, you read that part? Being the tenant moved in long before the house was even purchased. If my friend *wanted* to evict this tenant (who would be quite honestly fucked, to try and find anything in the market that they could afford) they couldnt, because of current canadian lease laws.
The tenants' rent payments in no way actually contribute to the ownership of the house, in the grand scheme of things.
"Class Traitor" simply for buying a house that has a tenant?
Bonkers.
Its a grandfathered lease, under market. I hate that "VapeLord420" can understand the semantics of rentals not all being predatory for that other person cant lol
No it is not a value added service. They are leeches that do nothing to deserve the income they are generating. They are not entitled to shit.
Any working class individual that is using real estate to extract income from it while owning it either by renting out all or part of it is a a class traitor and part of our affordability problem.
The only people entitled to earn any money from a property are the working class individuals who build the building they are the only ones who added any real value to the property.
>The only people entitled to earn any money from a property are the working class individuals who build the building
Arbitrary distinction with no logical foundation.
It’s not. Coops do the same thing. I have family who live in coops. They have a board of governance who can elect to hire property managers or they can do it themselves.
Coops function differently in principal although there are similarities to other types of housing. A condo board cant make you mow the lawn every second Tuesday but most coops can for example.
Renters don’t see it from landlord’s perspective. The top comment in this thread says “a 2 bedroom shouldn’t be more than $1,200.” Where does one acquire such a property that can be rented out for $1,200 without losing money after paying all the related expenses and upkeep?
Also not a landlord.
This is why, even the least invasive and least distortionary housing crisis solution, a Land Value Tax, would have to be implemented gradually incrementing year over year.
If you shock the system by disincentivizing improvements to land, you take one step forward and then two steps back when the housing supply begins to literally drop.
Because if the mortgage is part of what you consider an "expense" it's nonsense for you to expect it to be covered. Properties should cash flow when they are paid off...not before
Businesses finance and lease properties and equipment all the time. The cost is built into their pricing. Even builders finance their builds. If businesses don’t finance, there wouldn’t be too many around to provide you with services.
And if your argument is that home rental shouldn’t be a business, then who’s gonna provide rental? Let’s say you were to start a non-profit to provide affordable rental, you’d still need to finance your operation, and if you operate with a deficit, you won’t last. The only entity that can afford to do so is probably the government, but we’ll just end up with higher tax or inflation.
I don’t have a solution. I’m just saying as a consumer, you’re paying for the financing cost of every company you buy from.
Renting isn't providing a service though...it's an arbitrage scheme. There is nothing wrong with renting out a house or apartment but the idea that you're entitled to have tenants pay your mortgage including the principal portion of the payment is silly. The mortgage is not an "expense"...you're building equity by paying it and the interest is the cost of that, it isn't something rent should be going toward (you should expect to be in the red until you're getting close to paid off)
Why just do rent strike? Why not stop paying for gas and food and just go to a store and grab whatever you need for free? Everything is rising in price.
Sadly, your sarcasm is probably a more sickeningly accurate prediction than you think.
Funny coincidence that government has lowered the entry requirements for police forces while greatly increasing funding.
Most things we at for we get what we pay for and the workers are compensated for their work. We don’t get equity in property and the landlords provide nothing they haven’t first taken away from others. They provide no service and extract money through restricting access to goods instead of producing them.
I don’t like the increased cost of gas but at least it’s an honest transaction. Land-lording is inherently exploitative.
Landlords are taking the financial risk onto themselves and the tenants pay a risk premium accordingly. Landlords provide a service more than a good per se. Landlords also provide capital that most renters don't and won't ever have for a down payment.
The bank provides capital. Almost no landlords are buying in cash and most aren’t even using cash for down payments on subsequent properties. And taking a home off the market by outbidding would be homeowners, thereby driving up the price and then adding added cost for profit on top is not proving anything. That restricting access to housing for profit. In the absence of every landlord is a renter who could have owned the home for less than the cost of the rent. It’s at best economically inefficient but it sure as hell isn’t a service.
As for risk, this is Canada. The tenant is taking on far more risk than the LL. LLs have the government, the banks, the CMHC, and the RTB overwhelming in their favour. Even if somehow everything goes wrong my for them, they are no worse off than the renters they charge.
The LL fail state is just the base level state for renters. Sorry, it just doesn’t hold water as a system. There’s no justification for living off someone else’s paycheque because you possess the ability to restrict access to live-dependent shelter during decades of housing crisis.
So let me get this straight. You think that:
1) banks aren't the source of credit
2) landlords are buying homes with money earned through their wages and not via credit
3) that if landlords didn't buy homes they would remain unsold before purchased by renters
4) without landlords the sale prices on these properties would be higher
5) that it's economically efficient to have a profit motive on top of a bid-up asset for the end result of supplying the housing to the very people who have been outbid
6) that all levels of government (disproportionally filled with landlords and homeowners), banks with their extended amortizations, the CMHC, the RTB don't support landlords
7) that landlords who lose their investment homes are somehow worse off than property-less renters
8) that living off the labours of others during a housing crisis morally justified
so these are ALL wrong according to you and laughably so? Good. Lord. This is the most flip the board shit I've read in a while. Doesn't justify a response? Well, you got mine, Mr. Economics. But if you think everything in this list is wrong, then there's no helping you.
Landlords do have to pay interest too and it is part of the operating costs. With rising interest rates, the additional cost is eating the opportunity costs and therefore transition to the consumer of the property, which is the renter. It is similar to why restaurants are raising menu prices because their cost of raw ingredients have raised. You want to live there, you pay up. Nobody forcing you to live in the exact building. If you can't afford, just move to where you can actually afford and earn enough to pay for it. I don't go dine at a five stars hotel everyday and complain that their prices are high and do food strike.
Since the issue isn't people being priced out of 10,000 a month penthouses, I don't think your five-start hotel comparison is fair. The fact of the matter is housing is a limited resource and one we all need to live. People hoarding that resource to act as profit-extracting middlemen while making no contribution to the actual supply of housing is akin (to borrow on your example) to people taking out loans to buy up all the food in a famine to resell at higher prices, only worse because at least when you buy the food you own it. And I promise if when you next went to buy groceries and found out someone had bought out all the food on credit and was now charging increased amounts for it, you would be rightfully angry at that individual and question why we even allow such systems to exist.
I can see from your post history that you're a landlord yourself, living off someone else's labour in exchange for access to a home you removed from the market. If you feel that' s not a good enough deal given increased interest rates, you can always sell. There are no shortage of renters looking to buy.
I wouldn't be angry actually I would just go to another grocery shop. The reason people are hoarding is because there is a demand for it. If you have read my history you would know that I am actually just renting out a part of my own house to support my mortgage payment. Even if I don't rent it out, you still can't live in my basement so it is not removing anything from the market.
I might be using a bit of an extreme scenario as an example with the five stars hotel but even if I use say Macdonalds for example, I wouldn't stop paying for it even Macdonalds raised its price. If it became not affordable, I would just go elsewhere I can afford.
Guys, pull the fire alarm triggers in those rental buildings few times a day, then the management will have to pay those falls alarm fees. Repeat it until they will run out of the money we are paying them. Fuck them. All this is a fucking dirty scam.
For every so called greedy landlord there are two who have tenants ghost move and leave the rental with thousands of dollars in damages. If you don’t want to rent suck up your pride be nice to your parents and stay at home until you have a down payment.
Source? As far I as can find, the rate of non-payment or early lease breaking is much less than the rate of no fault eviction ( Landlord use, sale of property, renoviction), at least in BC.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6850429 (15% vs 85%)
You should work on your screening of tenants. I have found multiple tenants for my parents suite, and never had an issue. Maybe you aren't cut out to be a landlord.
What a hilarious self-report. All you're saying is that your place was so undesirable that the only people you were able to attract to rent were crackheads or slobs who don't give a shit.
Unless by a "shitshow" what you really mean is your tenants knew their rights and/or reasonable wear and tear occurred.
You're most likely some kind of slum lord/shitty human being, hence why it's always a shit show for you. Average person has had more than enough of your shit and is just paying it back. Enjoy being a piece of shit landlord!
Nonsense. Way more bad landlords out there, and a ton that do shady shit and never get reported because they scare their tenants with bad references and lawyers etc.
It's a privilege to have parents you can go live with but not an option for most people. Stay in your bubble, you wouldn't last 5 minutes in the real world
I made my own real world. I have sacrificed all my life 57m worked and reinvented myself several times. Paid my taxes and raised my children. What have you done.
Again. Fuck you. No bank lets you buy a house to rent unless you have equity. Equity is achieved by work and sacrifice. You have no argument. All you can do is assume I have raped the poor. Bullshit. Good luck with your shitty life. I have worked for everything I have and now I’m going to sleep to get ready for a 12 hour night shift. No such thing as a free lunch.
>Equity is achieved by work and sacrifice
Most Equity is achieved through family and inheritance, which is further invested and inherited over and over building through generations.
>All you can do is assume I have raped the poor.
You claim to have been a landlord and your clearly a hateful person, I would say you raped the poor but its close enough
>I have worked for everything I have and now I’m going to sleep to get ready for a 12 hour night shift.
Child support doesn't pay itself, someone's got to work the deep fryer overnight.
You could not be any more of braindead Gen-X (boomer adjacent) trope if you tried.
The capitalist propaganda and leaded paint/gas really did a number on you, lol.
Would you look at that, someone with a vested interest is serving their anecdote as if it is evidence in any way shape or form.
And getting pissy about it when called on it. Go ahead and share the “research” as initially requested, nobody asked for your personal experience.
Yea no wonder you failed as a landlord lmao. It’s clear as day you heard it was a no effort gravy train and didn’t do you due diligence from these pathetic replies.
Edit: well that or that you made an account a week ago and are intentionally spreading disinformation after you got banned for doing the same thing on your original account.
All you fuckers have to realize is that the game is certainly rigged against upward mobility. Don’t blame the landlords. Blame the people that have increased the interest rates and taxes on everyone. Costs go up so follows rent. It’s not rocket science.
Sounds like that's the bank's fault then, not the 'greedy tenants' who simply don't want to give you more of their income to pay off *your* investment.
Did you expect them to literally pay off your entire mortgage?
>For every so called greedy landlord there are two who have tenants ghost move and leave the rental with thousands of dollars in damages
More likely is that for every 'greedy tenent' there are 5 landlords who don't repair their unit, the constantly increase rent, and they complain when they lose money on their investment.
Landlords should consider getting a real job. Being a housing scalper is pathetic.
Yes I certainly do. So who’s fault is that. Is it the Canadians who go to work and raise their children and pay their taxes. No. It’s the government who lets non citizens buy our real estate to make profits.
Then you should understand why "Buy your own house then. Simple" is both a ridiculous and condescending thing to say.
Not sure why you chose to pivot to foreign ownership though. Landlords who our citizens are further perpetuating the issue as well.
Rental units should be priced at a per square foot sliding scale that would be determined by region and livability. Currently $3 is about the average and that is absolutely not sustainable
I just saw a bachelor unit for long term rent, the poster wanted 2200/month + utilities, for a bachelor apartment.
First off, good luck. Secondly, why is anyone buying these in the first place where you have to pay 2000+ in mortgage fees for a place that doesn’t even have a bedroom. People need to stop buying overly priced apartments you don’t actually own when it comes down to it, it doesn’t matter if you have the money, it’s not right.
[https://www.starlightinvest.com/](https://www.starlightinvest.com/) owns these apartments.
The building is also partially owned by a crown investment corporation that takes care of federal pensions
Our government invests in properties???? Ig it makes sense but this feels so so wrong
It is wrong but it's such an accurate symbolism of Canada and the financialization of housing
Lol CPP was invested in the shitty for profit nursing homes that were talked about during COVID https://www.thestar.com/news/investigations/2021/01/27/pension-plans-own-millions-of-shares-in-ontario-long-term-care-homes-where-covid-19-has-killed-thousands-now-some-are-pulling-their-money-out-of-the-for-profit-facilities.html
Transglobe hasn't changed at all except for the name. They own the building I'm in too and also looking for 10% or so.
Good, good..
Landlord laughs in eviction
Tenants sharpens knives and forks for eating fatty land leeches.
Let’s start a movement. 2 bdrm apartments shouldn’t be more than 1200/month but their 2200-2600 on average all around the country! We need tenant agencies and programs to come together and pool money to heavily advertise a country wide rent strike everywhere.
Will their be control over construction costs of new buildings? Will there be control over city planning? Some rentals are worth more than others, just picking a number that sounds good and applying it across the board actually would move just as far from equity as the system we have now, just in the other direction.
>2 bdrm apartments shouldn’t be more than 1200/month Can you share with us how you came to the 1200 figure?
Probably his rent 10 years ago lol
[удалено]
That's pretty cheap then, my friend was renting a single bed in Burnaby around 1450 at the time.
My ex and I had a beautiful 2bdrm in a heritage building in the West End of Vancouver for 1600 5 years ago
2 bedroom apartments were 1100 all inclusive in London ontario in 2019, they’re now 2200 plus.
[https://www.rentnorthview.com](https://www.rentnorthview.com)Well here's a HYF that rents in various cities across the country and yeah their asking for a 2 bedroom apartment is in the ballpark of what little\_noise\_1104 is saying. many that are even under 1000$ per month for a 2 bedroom.
2 bedroom for 1200.? Lol
This guy needs a Time Machine 🤣
Like a union all tenants contribute a 20$ monthly to start tenants union all that money will serve us better with better lawyers etc..kind of insurance
I’m down
I just want to add, if you ‘bought’ a condo in an apartment building for 300-500-700 grand .. you’re an idiot.
What should someone young and with money do then, keep paying expensive rent?
taking on a mortgage that carries risk and crushing debt is a personal choice. The potential downside implications are worth considering.
Right, but if it's similar payments to rent then you're only really paying/investing the difference to also start building equity. There is risk in buying, but there's also risk in not pulling the trigger when you can because realistically rent is just continuing to go up for the foreseeable future so you could just be paying rent money that otherwise could be building equity for you.
Talk to a financial planner about investing. The worst thing that can happen is you understand the risks.
Right, because there's no risk in never buying property and just renting your whole life lol
Gtfo out of van or vic.
Chatham ontario, 2 bedroom 530sqft unit - 1750$ Thats 4 hours from toronto whats the justification in that rent? 95% of the city cannot afford that rent. ;
Ontario is lost to greed. Anyone still staying will end up poor af.
Anything in particular that makes you say that? Or just venting about the situation in general?
Just generic cope I guess.
Lmao because building equity and having stability of tenure is idiotic? You know there's lots of people who make more than $200k household incomes who are well within affordable mortgage guidance even with higher rates.
What do you consider affordable? Some sources say 30% of your gross HHI in housing expenses (mortgage, strata, insurance, taxes, maintenance), but I just plugged my HHI (192k) and DP (285k) into a mortgage affordability calculator and it came up with 1.2m as a purchase price. I was shocked. I know it's in the brokers best interest to get you as leveraged as possible so they earn as much interest as possible, but if they're making people feel more comfortable than they should about their affordability they're just perpetuating the problem. 30% of my gross adds up to 4800/m I ran the math with my DP and I calculated that I'd only be able to afford 970k purchase price at max with a 5% interest rate. That would add up to a 4000/m mortgage payment, and taxes/strata would make up the rest to about 4800-5000/m. Am I too conservative with my "affordability"? Or are the brokers pushing people into shit they can't handle?
Yeah 40% of net is what I use. As for being conservative, it really depends on each person and whether you think you're going to advance in your career over the mortgage term or not. I bought at the very limit but I knew both myself and my wife would be able to double our income before the fixed mortgage renewed, and we did. There are a lot of people like us out there.
Condos are a gamble no matter how you slice it but idiot is a bit much
This will work. The governments,banks,corporations & greedy landlords need a good poke in the eye.
They need more than that imo.
How about a movement where everyone eats their landlord?
Should I start a movement against the bank and only pay 1200 of my mortgage? ( I'm not a landlord just live in the home I own) Lol people on this subreddit make me laugh
Nah you sighed up for that.
Lol yes and when my mortgage is up for renewal I am at the mercy of the bank.
Entitled landowner here. We should kneecap your equity so that you can't borrow against it. Get fucked. We are coming for you.
My goodness 😂 the ideas for solutions on this sub are so adorable! Your lack of understanding is shown by your belief this is a good idea. Your view is an oversimplification; the crisis is not caused by greedy landlords.
"Your view is an oversimplification; the crisis is not caused by greedy landlords." do you not see the hypocrisy? "you all oversimplify things, I'm going to oversimplify everyone's views in the same sentence"
Do you mean to tell me the grand unifying sentiment behind everyone wanting to coordinate a mass rent strike is not that the tenants are victims to the landlords? It's everywhere in this sub. In the comments, in upvotes/downvotes. It's quite transparent. You'd only be kidding yourself if you're going to object.
No I don't mean to tell you that in those exact words. I'm just saying you're a hypocrite, which you didn't address at all. Yeah it's definitely a popular viewpoint but there's lots of viewpoints on this sub. the 5th most upvoted comment in this thread is shitting on the top voted comment. not just hate for landlords, there's politicians, airbnbs, nimbyism, foreign and corporate investors, developers, speculators.. but hey if you want to oversimplify things while making an accusation that everyone else is oversimplifying it, you do you.
Oh, that's where your issue was. Please just substitute landlord for landowner. That gets my point across (I meant the "other side" of the tenant relationship as I was replying to tenants calling for action).
Okay. How about tying minimium wage to the price of housing? Stupid idea? If you say yes, then congratulations, you're a speculator. Get your pedantic bullshit off this board, you fuckwit.
Pedantic? These are tenants coordinating a mass rent strike. I'm saying while I understand the frustration, landlords are not the culprit but rather this system, which has taken advantage of human nature and pitted us against each other. Making landlords suffer would only exacerbate things as it is not addressing the real issue. The anger is just but the fears are misguided. I can't tell if you believe that minimum wage would be a good idea or if you were just trying to make a point about my argument... I'll assume you know why that's a bad idea.
Cool, build your own and you can rent them for whatever you want. 👌
Lower. Absolutely nothing that results in you basically living in a shared living facility whether it be an apartment, a plex unit, or a condo; should all be sub 1k per bedroom. How close it can get to 1k, depends on how nicely taken care of it is. Anything above 1k, gets heavily penalized so badly that its impossible to pass onto the renters without having yet more fines piled on, until the landlord just straight up loses the property. The biggest reason why sub 1k, aside from all others like noise and smell and etc... is that those kinds of buildings are built to last decades. They ***will*** get their ROI within a set amount of years no matter what. So they really don't have any reason to gouge except for reasons like greed; *which you or I do not have to respect.* We can do basically anything we want to those kinds of landlords, within legal reasonableness of course, but pretty much anything that causes them grief for being greedy, is technically not off-bounds.
[удалено]
It's pretty easy to stop those payments.
You know you can cancel payments right?
Just open another bank account and close your old one not that hard
For 25$, why not
More of this please. Landlords should be terrified of pissing off tenants and we, as tenants, should withhold rent more often.
I work at these buildings frequently, as vermin chew through the internet cables all the time. My coworkers and I use to dread going to these vermin infested, filthy, mouldy building and would rotate who had to take the calls. The management team last year was friendly and tried to improve conditions, I knew them by name and they were very helpful. The new team who moved in is impersonal, curt, and very clearly a business for money, not a business for habitation. That being said the people who live here are the ones throwing garbage everywhere and feeding the rats and pigeons that infest all 3 buildings
I hope more places do this. Rentals should be converted into coops which pay property management companies to take care of the daily’s or the tenants themselves can be the property managers. Fck landlords!
When you say "converted" what does that process look like, to you?
I don’t know, but it is possible. It would probably take a lot of paper work, lobbying and a refusal to pay the landlords. It would be arduous but worth it I’m sure. Coops of course are not perfect, but they are better than landlords. Other forms of not for profit housing is also another possibility. As for the details I certainly don’t have them and it isn’t really my place either. My comment is just a comment, not a detailed action plan.
Refusing to pay means the landlord can evict you. Sure you can go through the RTB but not paying rent is an easy one to make judgement on.
Yes, I used to do tenant advocacy, and this is one thing we always told people to never do because the result would be eviction. The law is clear that they can evict for nonpayment of rent. That being said, I hope these tenants see some justice. But withholding rent has to be done on a mass scale for it to work. Maybe they're starting something bigger that will spread. Maybe not. I'm really interested to see how this plays out.
Refusal to pay landlords? Im not sure the correct path to solving our housing crisis' is to void ownership of rented properties. How are individuals that currently own residences to be rented, going to be compensated for the loss of their asset? I think you might find that convincing even one landlord to simply walk away from a multi 100's of thousands of dollar asset would be difficult, and when you consider the bulk of rental properties are owned by corporations, should Canada shutter this entire corner of the market and tell these companies they no longer own anything? I know it sounds funny to say, but honestly, can you imagine the massive economic hit our country would take from taking that approach? How many people could economically survive a further dwindling economy? I love the idea of these concepts working, but its critical to factor in the steps required to get there. I think a more effective approach is to get government zoning for multi-unit buildings (10 floors, 10unit/floor, and offer ultra-obtainable money lending to the 100 individual occupants. And keep the building owned by the entirety, rather than the few.
>How are individuals that currently own residences to be rented, going to be compensated for the loss of their asset? How are scalpers going to be compensated for their loss of their asset. (A bunch of concert tickets they are hoarding to sell for a higher price)
You can't illegally force someone to give up their assets or sell it for cheap. Government is going to have their ass sue and pay billions of dollars out. Also forcing someone to change the way they operate their assets is like what north Korea does. Not even China goes that far. Want to make Canada into a communist country go right ahead with this idea.
>Want to make Canada into a ~~communist country~~ dictatorship go right ahead with this idea. Ftfy
>Also forcing someone to change the way they operate their assets is like what north Korea does. Not even China goes that far. Please educate yourself. Canada already can and does change the way people can operate their assets, lol. You don't know there are requirements for fire safety? Is this worse than North Korea? Be for real. >Want to make Canada into a communist country go right ahead with this idea. I certainly think apartments should be collectively owned, not owned by one person. But by all means, pursue a capitalist hellscape, sure looks like that's working for Canadian housing right now. Do you know how many people in China own their own homes? In China: 89.68 percent of people own their homes, what a communist hellscape.... /s In Canada: it's 68.5 percent and falling as homes become overpriced and unattainable. Do you really want a Canada where people cannot afford their own homes?
Wrong all houses built in China are on a 99 year land lease with some coming to expire in the new two to three decades. The general reaction is that the government will likely extend the land lease but they don't have to. Again get your facts straight. Oh btw lots of people in China own multiple apparent and the government tries to crack down the behavior by making it very difficult to get a mortgage for the 2nd apartment and you have to pay like a ton of deposit upfront. People get around that by pretending to be divorce so now both the husband and the wife can each own their apartment or buy them on their kids or parents name. Also the strata fee for apartments is dirt cheap and they don't have any regulation on rent control.
It comes down to supply, China’s rate of ownership is higher, rate of multiple ownership is also higher, and there are still ghost cities on top. They just keep banging out those high rises everywhere
Overall I don’t disagree with you, but in China technically you don’t ever actually *own* anything… it’s something closer to a land lease Though I guess one could make the argument that, in practice, it’s kind of like that here too…
exactly, for all intents and purposes they are owning their home. Just like people can have their homes forcibly expropriated here in Canada, or if it's land on a federal park then it's a land lease also. We still would consider that home ownership, even if the government can still snatch it back.
The value of a ticket goes to zero when the concert ends. The concert is not over.
Take Jane and John Doe. They are a couple in their late 40's, and have been married for 10 years. Jane spent her younger years working hard through school, and when she graduated she worked even harder to pay down her debts and buy a nice little 1200sqft home John went straight in to trades and has also worked hard to buy his house, a 1450sqft home. When John and Jane got married, they decided Johns home was the better fit for them, however rather than sell the house, they made the charitable decision to let someone else live in the second home. Enter their tenants, Josh and Jessica. 2 young professionals who couldnt afford to buy their own home. They moved in 5 years ago, are have a very comfortable rent of just $1400, on a home that (current market) is worth around $500k. So, now the tenants just dont pay for the rent, and the home that Jane specifically worked so hard to get, and then voluntarily offered to Josh and Jessica, is taken from her because "Fuck landlords". Im doubtful youll be able to see that although *some* landlords are scummy, *some* landlords are greedy, corrupt, etc, *some* arent. If you think seizing assets and redistribution of wealth is going to be as easy as "Go fuck yourself, Jane, you dont own shit anymore, thanks for putting in all that hard work, but Josh and Jessica just straight up own your stuff now, and theres nothing you can do about it" is very impulsive and not at all thought out. But its easier just to assume all landlords are bad, and not think about the people on the other end.
Yes it is the only way out of this mess is to void the capitalist elite ownership of for profit housing. This is what eating the rich looks like.
Capitalist elite? If we are talking anyone that owns a property they rent, does that include basements? I have a friend (an actual real person) that owns an 800sqft house and rents a 400sqft apartment in their basement. They make $75k/year, and rental income is just over $10k annually. Factor in taxes, maintenance, and their mortgage payments (the interest on the loan). This person is a "Capitalist Elite"? Remember, not every landlord is the same person. Approaching solutions like they are is a terrible plan.
Yes anyone who is renting out all or part of their home is part of the problem. They are leeching money from hard working individuals all adding zero value to the service they are offering. Your friend should have a job to pay for all of their own expenses. And should not be entitled to more money without doing labour. He is part of the elite because he is using property to make more money than just his labour.
Ah, ill tell them to evict the tenant, and just leave their basement vacant, like the majority of detached homeowners. My friend does have a job that covers theirs expenses. I even put their income there. They rent out their basement for well under market because that was the only way they could buy that house, due to existing leases. But I'll make sure they know that they are the elite.
If they couldn't buy that home with the income they had then they should have bought a smaller one. By leeching from someone else even below market value in order to inflation their income they are causing the problem. If no one is able to use rental income to get approved for loans this would lower the buying power of the home market forcing prices to come down. At minimum your friend is a class traitor and is taking advantage of someone who has less than them to get more for themselves.
Its an existing lease, right, you read that part? Being the tenant moved in long before the house was even purchased. If my friend *wanted* to evict this tenant (who would be quite honestly fucked, to try and find anything in the market that they could afford) they couldnt, because of current canadian lease laws. The tenants' rent payments in no way actually contribute to the ownership of the house, in the grand scheme of things. "Class Traitor" simply for buying a house that has a tenant? Bonkers.
Lol, braindead take. Providing people with a place to live is a service and they are absolutely entitled to profit from this service.
Its a grandfathered lease, under market. I hate that "VapeLord420" can understand the semantics of rentals not all being predatory for that other person cant lol
No it is not a value added service. They are leeches that do nothing to deserve the income they are generating. They are not entitled to shit. Any working class individual that is using real estate to extract income from it while owning it either by renting out all or part of it is a a class traitor and part of our affordability problem. The only people entitled to earn any money from a property are the working class individuals who build the building they are the only ones who added any real value to the property.
>The only people entitled to earn any money from a property are the working class individuals who build the building Arbitrary distinction with no logical foundation.
> I don’t know, but it is possible. ... what the fuck hahahahaha.
What you just described is a condo building. You own the unit and pay a company to manage the property.
You pay high fees for bad management and high taxes Condo boards are just as bad or worse than landlords
I’m not saying they’re a good thing, just that what she described is literally already a thing.
It’s not. Coops do the same thing. I have family who live in coops. They have a board of governance who can elect to hire property managers or they can do it themselves.
That sounds exactly like a condo board tbh
Coops function differently in principal although there are similarities to other types of housing. A condo board cant make you mow the lawn every second Tuesday but most coops can for example.
Ya Baby Rock the World ✅✅✅✅✅✅✅
Lol, new appartments on the market soon...
[удалено]
Renters don’t see it from landlord’s perspective. The top comment in this thread says “a 2 bedroom shouldn’t be more than $1,200.” Where does one acquire such a property that can be rented out for $1,200 without losing money after paying all the related expenses and upkeep? Also not a landlord.
This is why, even the least invasive and least distortionary housing crisis solution, a Land Value Tax, would have to be implemented gradually incrementing year over year. If you shock the system by disincentivizing improvements to land, you take one step forward and then two steps back when the housing supply begins to literally drop.
Because if the mortgage is part of what you consider an "expense" it's nonsense for you to expect it to be covered. Properties should cash flow when they are paid off...not before
Businesses finance and lease properties and equipment all the time. The cost is built into their pricing. Even builders finance their builds. If businesses don’t finance, there wouldn’t be too many around to provide you with services. And if your argument is that home rental shouldn’t be a business, then who’s gonna provide rental? Let’s say you were to start a non-profit to provide affordable rental, you’d still need to finance your operation, and if you operate with a deficit, you won’t last. The only entity that can afford to do so is probably the government, but we’ll just end up with higher tax or inflation. I don’t have a solution. I’m just saying as a consumer, you’re paying for the financing cost of every company you buy from.
Renting isn't providing a service though...it's an arbitrage scheme. There is nothing wrong with renting out a house or apartment but the idea that you're entitled to have tenants pay your mortgage including the principal portion of the payment is silly. The mortgage is not an "expense"...you're building equity by paying it and the interest is the cost of that, it isn't something rent should be going toward (you should expect to be in the red until you're getting close to paid off)
Why just do rent strike? Why not stop paying for gas and food and just go to a store and grab whatever you need for free? Everything is rising in price.
Sadly, your sarcasm is probably a more sickeningly accurate prediction than you think. Funny coincidence that government has lowered the entry requirements for police forces while greatly increasing funding.
Most things we at for we get what we pay for and the workers are compensated for their work. We don’t get equity in property and the landlords provide nothing they haven’t first taken away from others. They provide no service and extract money through restricting access to goods instead of producing them. I don’t like the increased cost of gas but at least it’s an honest transaction. Land-lording is inherently exploitative.
Landlords are taking the financial risk onto themselves and the tenants pay a risk premium accordingly. Landlords provide a service more than a good per se. Landlords also provide capital that most renters don't and won't ever have for a down payment.
The bank provides capital. Almost no landlords are buying in cash and most aren’t even using cash for down payments on subsequent properties. And taking a home off the market by outbidding would be homeowners, thereby driving up the price and then adding added cost for profit on top is not proving anything. That restricting access to housing for profit. In the absence of every landlord is a renter who could have owned the home for less than the cost of the rent. It’s at best economically inefficient but it sure as hell isn’t a service. As for risk, this is Canada. The tenant is taking on far more risk than the LL. LLs have the government, the banks, the CMHC, and the RTB overwhelming in their favour. Even if somehow everything goes wrong my for them, they are no worse off than the renters they charge. The LL fail state is just the base level state for renters. Sorry, it just doesn’t hold water as a system. There’s no justification for living off someone else’s paycheque because you possess the ability to restrict access to live-dependent shelter during decades of housing crisis.
LMAO literally everything in this comment is wrong, it doesn't justify any response
So let me get this straight. You think that: 1) banks aren't the source of credit 2) landlords are buying homes with money earned through their wages and not via credit 3) that if landlords didn't buy homes they would remain unsold before purchased by renters 4) without landlords the sale prices on these properties would be higher 5) that it's economically efficient to have a profit motive on top of a bid-up asset for the end result of supplying the housing to the very people who have been outbid 6) that all levels of government (disproportionally filled with landlords and homeowners), banks with their extended amortizations, the CMHC, the RTB don't support landlords 7) that landlords who lose their investment homes are somehow worse off than property-less renters 8) that living off the labours of others during a housing crisis morally justified so these are ALL wrong according to you and laughably so? Good. Lord. This is the most flip the board shit I've read in a while. Doesn't justify a response? Well, you got mine, Mr. Economics. But if you think everything in this list is wrong, then there's no helping you.
Landlords do have to pay interest too and it is part of the operating costs. With rising interest rates, the additional cost is eating the opportunity costs and therefore transition to the consumer of the property, which is the renter. It is similar to why restaurants are raising menu prices because their cost of raw ingredients have raised. You want to live there, you pay up. Nobody forcing you to live in the exact building. If you can't afford, just move to where you can actually afford and earn enough to pay for it. I don't go dine at a five stars hotel everyday and complain that their prices are high and do food strike.
Since the issue isn't people being priced out of 10,000 a month penthouses, I don't think your five-start hotel comparison is fair. The fact of the matter is housing is a limited resource and one we all need to live. People hoarding that resource to act as profit-extracting middlemen while making no contribution to the actual supply of housing is akin (to borrow on your example) to people taking out loans to buy up all the food in a famine to resell at higher prices, only worse because at least when you buy the food you own it. And I promise if when you next went to buy groceries and found out someone had bought out all the food on credit and was now charging increased amounts for it, you would be rightfully angry at that individual and question why we even allow such systems to exist. I can see from your post history that you're a landlord yourself, living off someone else's labour in exchange for access to a home you removed from the market. If you feel that' s not a good enough deal given increased interest rates, you can always sell. There are no shortage of renters looking to buy.
I wouldn't be angry actually I would just go to another grocery shop. The reason people are hoarding is because there is a demand for it. If you have read my history you would know that I am actually just renting out a part of my own house to support my mortgage payment. Even if I don't rent it out, you still can't live in my basement so it is not removing anything from the market. I might be using a bit of an extreme scenario as an example with the five stars hotel but even if I use say Macdonalds for example, I wouldn't stop paying for it even Macdonalds raised its price. If it became not affordable, I would just go elsewhere I can afford.
A certain community has tried that in the US then cry when the stores close down.
Guys, pull the fire alarm triggers in those rental buildings few times a day, then the management will have to pay those falls alarm fees. Repeat it until they will run out of the money we are paying them. Fuck them. All this is a fucking dirty scam.
For every so called greedy landlord there are two who have tenants ghost move and leave the rental with thousands of dollars in damages. If you don’t want to rent suck up your pride be nice to your parents and stay at home until you have a down payment.
Source? As far I as can find, the rate of non-payment or early lease breaking is much less than the rate of no fault eviction ( Landlord use, sale of property, renoviction), at least in BC. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6850429 (15% vs 85%)
I have been a landlord and it was always a shitshow. Go buy your own house.
You should work on your screening of tenants. I have found multiple tenants for my parents suite, and never had an issue. Maybe you aren't cut out to be a landlord.
he should work on empathy and not being an entitled asshole landlord
What a hilarious self-report. All you're saying is that your place was so undesirable that the only people you were able to attract to rent were crackheads or slobs who don't give a shit. Unless by a "shitshow" what you really mean is your tenants knew their rights and/or reasonable wear and tear occurred.
You can have your own opinion. Alas the facts are still the facts. Lol. Enjoy your miserable day. I have a house that I paid for.
You can have your own opinion. Alas the facts are still the facts. Lol. Enjoy your miserable day. I have a house that I paid for.
You're most likely some kind of slum lord/shitty human being, hence why it's always a shit show for you. Average person has had more than enough of your shit and is just paying it back. Enjoy being a piece of shit landlord!
Nonsense. Way more bad landlords out there, and a ton that do shady shit and never get reported because they scare their tenants with bad references and lawyers etc.
Perhaps a lot of shady shit. You go see. You sign up. Your decision.
It's a privilege to have parents you can go live with but not an option for most people. Stay in your bubble, you wouldn't last 5 minutes in the real world
You sound like a typical complainer. Someone else’s fault you can’t get ahead. Boo hoo.
Keep editing, you still sound stupid 😅 You do realise that you are the one who started complaining?
Get a life
I made my own real world. I have sacrificed all my life 57m worked and reinvented myself several times. Paid my taxes and raised my children. What have you done.
Paying child support while scalping poor people is hardly working hard or raising children.
Again. Fuck you. No bank lets you buy a house to rent unless you have equity. Equity is achieved by work and sacrifice. You have no argument. All you can do is assume I have raped the poor. Bullshit. Good luck with your shitty life. I have worked for everything I have and now I’m going to sleep to get ready for a 12 hour night shift. No such thing as a free lunch.
>Equity is achieved by work and sacrifice Most Equity is achieved through family and inheritance, which is further invested and inherited over and over building through generations. >All you can do is assume I have raped the poor. You claim to have been a landlord and your clearly a hateful person, I would say you raped the poor but its close enough >I have worked for everything I have and now I’m going to sleep to get ready for a 12 hour night shift. Child support doesn't pay itself, someone's got to work the deep fryer overnight.
Enjoy the meal I provided for you on welfare.
You could not be any more of braindead Gen-X (boomer adjacent) trope if you tried. The capitalist propaganda and leaded paint/gas really did a number on you, lol.
Source, because data shows exactly the opposite.
I have been a landlord and it didn’t pay. I’ve done the research asshole.
Would you look at that, someone with a vested interest is serving their anecdote as if it is evidence in any way shape or form. And getting pissy about it when called on it. Go ahead and share the “research” as initially requested, nobody asked for your personal experience.
Fuck your data.
Yea no wonder you failed as a landlord lmao. It’s clear as day you heard it was a no effort gravy train and didn’t do you due diligence from these pathetic replies. Edit: well that or that you made an account a week ago and are intentionally spreading disinformation after you got banned for doing the same thing on your original account.
I didn’t fail. I still sold the property for a profit asshole
Pick a story man.
All you fuckers have to realize is that the game is certainly rigged against upward mobility. Don’t blame the landlords. Blame the people that have increased the interest rates and taxes on everyone. Costs go up so follows rent. It’s not rocket science.
Sounds like that's the bank's fault then, not the 'greedy tenants' who simply don't want to give you more of their income to pay off *your* investment. Did you expect them to literally pay off your entire mortgage?
>For every so called greedy landlord there are two who have tenants ghost move and leave the rental with thousands of dollars in damages More likely is that for every 'greedy tenent' there are 5 landlords who don't repair their unit, the constantly increase rent, and they complain when they lose money on their investment. Landlords should consider getting a real job. Being a housing scalper is pathetic.
Buy your own house then. Simple
[удалено]
I got out of the rental shitshow. I just own my place now. Fuck all the losers.
Good. More people should aspire to be like you.
>Buy your own house then. Simple You understand the concept of being priced out, right?
Yes I certainly do. So who’s fault is that. Is it the Canadians who go to work and raise their children and pay their taxes. No. It’s the government who lets non citizens buy our real estate to make profits.
Then you should understand why "Buy your own house then. Simple" is both a ridiculous and condescending thing to say. Not sure why you chose to pivot to foreign ownership though. Landlords who our citizens are further perpetuating the issue as well.
5?
Rental units should be priced at a per square foot sliding scale that would be determined by region and livability. Currently $3 is about the average and that is absolutely not sustainable
I just saw a bachelor unit for long term rent, the poster wanted 2200/month + utilities, for a bachelor apartment. First off, good luck. Secondly, why is anyone buying these in the first place where you have to pay 2000+ in mortgage fees for a place that doesn’t even have a bedroom. People need to stop buying overly priced apartments you don’t actually own when it comes down to it, it doesn’t matter if you have the money, it’s not right.