North America highrise construction map

[Northern Light]

Originally Posted by Doady

Canada has more poor people, Americans are wealthier. Canadians are forced to live in high-rises because they can't afford to live in a proper house like people in a proper first-world country. That is also the reason Canada has higher transit ridership than the US. It's more Canadastan than Canada now, thanks to Justin "Diversity is our strength" Truedope.

Way over the top, not merely bordering on but well into ridiculous territory.

As noted by Isaidso, SFH housing is not the norm in much of the world; and multi-res housing was a common format in Canada pre-Trudeau the younger.

Do I think the current PM showed poor judgement in vastly increasing the numbers of foreign students and temporary foreign workers far faster than housing builders could or did keep pace? Absolutely. By all means roast him over that.

But suggesting multi-res housing is a developing world phenomenon and Canada is dire poverty is just so distant from the truth as to merit scorn.

[Northern Light]

Originally Posted by isaidso

Good grief. Where does one even start. There are many reasons why a lower % of Canadians buy SFHs and you seem to know none of them. Most Americans couldn't afford a SFH in Canada either.

Canadian Urban planning policies encourage Transit Oriented Development because its a more sustainable long term strategy, severely restrict cities from endlessly sprawling out on to rural land (also good), Canada has a far higher % of its population than the US concentrated in pricey real estate markets (people in Manhattan don't buy SFHs either), and there's far more societal interest in urban living in Canada than the US.

Yes, the population boom has exacerbated the housing crisis but Canada had a housing crisis LONG before Trudeau came along.

I'm in pretty much complete agreement up to this point. But I think you run off track below.

I'm no fan of Trudeau either but this has VERY little to do with him

Uhh, certainly the crisis has worsened noticeably since 2015, widespread encampments were not a thing pre-Trudeau.

This is very much related to the vast increase in temporary residents, largely foreign students and temporary foreign workers, both approved by his government. More than doubling the the percentage of the population that are 'temporary' (neither citizens nor permanent residents). He certainly has to own that much.

and NEXT to nothing to do with Canadian income levels. Canada actually has one of the highest median income figures in the world if you bothered to look.

I'm going to disagree here too. While there is no doubt that imbalance of housing supply to demand and the correlated increase in housing prices is a critical factor, and likely the most critical factor......incomes do matter.

Real GDP per Capita in Canada is now below 2019 levels........that's stunning. While there has been wage growth, it has certainly lagged the United States, and has also lagged real inflation (properly factoring in housing costs, which CPI does not).

While you can't house people with housing you don't have, at least a portion of the crisis is people who can't afford various life necessities because their housing (rental or ownership) is eating 50% or more of their income.

This would be at least slightly lessened had wage growth been more substantial. Which it would have been but for all the cheap labour imported by the Trudeau government which has had the effect of suppressing wages.

Were wages for argument's sake ~20% higher, there would still be a housing crisis, but it would certainly be less acute than it is currently.

[Zapatan]

Canada has more poor people, Americans are wealthier. Canadians are forced to live in high-rises because they can't afford to live in a proper house like people in a proper first-world country. That is also the reason Canada has higher transit ridership than the US. It's more Canadastan than Canada now, thanks to Justin "Diversity is our strength" Truedope.

If true, this surprises me a bit. I always assumed Canada was the richer country. Even if not I'm sure there's more income equality unlike the USA where it's totally bipolar.

I know this is goes against the mission statement here, but I don't see why the US should strive to build skyscrapers at the same rate as Canada or Australia.

To combat urban sprawl mostly, and they can make a city look cool when designed well.

I guess USA loves its big suburban homes though. To each their own.

Originally Posted by mhays

The "feds" (federal government) have nothing to do with interest rates. That's the purview of the Fed, i.e. the Federal Reserve.

I was referring to the Federal Reserve, should've written Fed.

[wwmiv]

Income inequality is slightly worse in America than Canada, but the effect is not driven by a difference in wealth held by the upper 40% versus the lower 60%, but rather the internal distribution of wealth within the 40% being more top-heavy in America than in Canada.

I.E. there is a relative (within America compared to other groups and compared to Canada) hollowing out of the upper middle class in America and it is being replaced with a concentration of wealth among a small group of ultrawealthy elite.

https://www.bankofcanada.ca/wp-conte...sdp2022-16.pdf

[Northern Light]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

Income inequality is slightly worse in America than Canada, but the effect is not driven by a difference in wealth held by the upper 40% versus the lower 60%, but rather the internal distribution of wealth within the 40% being more top-heavy in America than in Canada.

I.E. there is a relative (within America compared to other groups and compared to Canada) hollowing out of the upper middle class in America and it is being replaced with a concentration of wealth among a small group of ultrawealthy elite.

https://www.bankofcanada.ca/wp-conte...sdp2022-16.pdf

Albeit more modest, there is a difference on the low income side as well.

The bottom quintile (20%) of income earners in the U.S. have 6% of the income vs 7.6% in Canada.

There is also somewhat greater wealth redistribution in Canada, notably in the form of healthcare and generally much lower post-secondary tuition rates.

[chris08876]

Originally Posted by Zapatan

If true, this surprises me a bit. I always assumed Canada was the richer country. Even if not I'm sure there's more income equality unlike the USA where it's totally bipolar.

To combat urban sprawl mostly, and they can make a city look cool when designed well.

I guess USA loves its big suburban homes though. To each their own.

I was referring to the Federal Reserve, should've written Fed.

The thing with the U.S. is that in theory, you do get the most bang for the buck in terms of how much one can have compared to say a SIMILAR lifestyle in other lands. Factoring in the wages, the currency, the rates. Much easier to climb the luxury and housing ladder here than elsewhere if luxury and top-notch quality is seeked.

The lifestyle, the house size, the amenities... if one was to get that same package in Canada or even Europe, pound for pound, would be much MUCH more dollar or CAD or Euro wise.

Luxury in other words is much more accessible in America than in other places. Try getting a 4000 sq-ft home in Germany, near a city... almost inaccessible for most of the masses or one in Vancouver. Try getting that same high powered Benz in Brazil or even in Europe of all places, same model, same S class... double the price and that's factoring in the currency conversion.

Single Family homes are much more accessible in the U.S.. High rise living, not as accessible in terms of bang for the buck. Sucks... and let's hope that changes if the U.S. builds more units and more high-rises to not make the lack of supply so crippling!

[mhays]

...That's if you only count personal space in your "bang for the buck." If you count public space, local amenities, and accessibility to both via transit, sidewalks, etc., it can be easier to live a good life in other countries.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by isaidso

Good grief. Where does one even start. There are many reasons why a lower % of Canadians buy SFHs and you seem to know none of them. Most Americans couldn't afford a SFH in Canada either.

Canadian Urban planning policies encourage Transit Oriented Development because its a more sustainable long term strategy, severely restrict cities from endlessly sprawling out on to rural land (also good), Canada has a far higher % of its population than the US concentrated in pricey real estate markets (people in Manhattan don't buy SFHs either), and there's far more societal interest in urban living in Canada than the US.

Yes, the population boom has exacerbated the housing crisis but Canada had a housing crisis LONG before Trudeau came along. I'm no fan of Trudeau either but this has VERY little to do with him and NEXT to nothing to do with Canadian income levels. Canada actually has one of the highest median income figures in the world if you bothered to look.

Warehousing people in skyscrapers around transit station is a far cry from what Transit Oriented Development is meant to be. It's vertical suburbia. It does pad the transit usage number when you have to take a train to do just about anything.

The powers that be in Canada are all supporters of the Century Initiative but, under Trudeau's administration the greed to meet targets have gone to a whole another level. There's no pent up societal desire to live in narrow sub-400 square foot shoe boxes in 600 unit towers exceeding 20 times lot coverage. It's what can be afforded and is turning everyone, new to the country and old, against the doctrine. Trudeau will probably be worth a half billion dollars when he retires from government. I don't think he cares about anything else.