Canada's 'housing bubble' deemed close to bursting

[casper]

Originally Posted by whatnext

You'll quickly learn as we all have that std7860 doesn't know what he is talking about.

Rents in Vancouver are low because the Chinese don't rent. Property prices are high because they are pouring money into real estate, for the purposes of speculation and stashing money away from the prying eyes of government.

The mayor won't do anything about it because he is funded by developers who make money off this real estate ponzi scheme. Plus his Chinese squeeze has a mother who was just busted on corruption charges in China. It would be interesting to see if either appear on Vancouver's tax rolls.

Christy Clarke won't do anything about it because: 1) she's incompetent b) her chief backer is condo pusher extraordinaire Bob Rennie.

I am not of Chinese origin, however the traditional Chinese value of buying vrs renting is a good one. I lived in Ontario and Saskatchewan before coming back to BC. One of my regrets was in renting instead of buying. In Ontario I rented for 7 years (should have bought) and in Saskatoon only bought after being there for 8 years when rent started to go out with the latest boom.

I don't invest in real estate, however if I did not certain it would be in Vancouver, from an ROI perspective I think there are other places in Canada that have better short term returns. What Vancouver does have going for it is the underlying value of the property appreciates over time at a pretty good rate.

I think your suggesting that Vancouver property is being purchased with illegal gains from China. Not certain how you can come to that conclusion without knowing the business and saving pattern of the specific individual.

I have seen the odd Walll Street Journal article that says China limits the amount of money an individual is allowed to take out of the country to $50,000 per person per year. There have been a number of people who have been caught smuggling money out of China because of that law. That does not mean that those funds were not legitimately made. If I owned a business in China, with all of its tights restrictions on what I can and can't do with the money I make I would move the $50k per year per family member every year into a more business friendly economy such as Canada.

I had the opportunity to sit in on one of Christy Clarke talks up in Prince George in the winter. I am impressed, I think she understands just how much of the BC economy is still driven by natural resources exploration (including many of the jobs in Vancouver) and the important of diversifying the economy. An enormous amount of the wealth in Metro Vancouver is created outside the City and a lot politicians don't get that. She does.

[casper]

Originally Posted by st7860

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1371306-vv-pre-election-disclosure.htm
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-co...ed-by-vision-vancouver-and-npa-1.2827760

A mixture of individuals, organized labour, and companies. Nothing unbalanced here..

Pretty broad mix.

What we should be asking is any vote that comes up on a specific development if any of the council members received more than $5k from the developer they should abstain from voting.

We should also ask that any council member who received more than $5k from organised labour abstain from voting on any matter associated with labour contracts or labour relations.

That type of restriction will very quickly remove all the labour union donations.

Not certain what it is under BC labour law, under federal labour law if you don't like the political activates of your union you have the right to have your dues donated to a charity of your choice instead of going to the union. Also a good way of having checks-and-balances in that system.

[st7860]

Originally Posted by casper

I am not of Chinese origin, however the traditional Chinese value of buying vrs renting is a good one. I lived in Ontario and Saskatchewan before coming back to BC. One of my regrets was in renting instead of buying. In Ontario I rented for 7 years (should have bought) and in Saskatoon only bought after being there for 8 years when rent started to go out with the latest boom.

I don't invest in real estate, however if I did not certain it would be in Vancouver, from an ROI perspective I think there are other places in Canada that have better short term returns. What Vancouver does have going for it is the underlying value of the property appreciates over time at a pretty good rate.

I think your suggesting that Vancouver property is being purchased with illegal gains from China. Not certain how you can come to that conclusion without knowing the business and saving pattern of the specific individual.

I have seen the odd Walll Street Journal article that says China limits the amount of money an individual is allowed to take out of the country to $50,000 per person per year. There have been a number of people who have been caught smuggling money out of China because of that law. That does not mean that those funds were not legitimately made. If I owned a business in China, with all of its tights restrictions on what I can and can't do with the money I make I would move the $50k per year per family member every year into a more business friendly economy such as Canada.

I had the opportunity to sit in on one of Christy Clarke talks up in Prince George in the winter. I am impressed, I think she understands just how much of the BC economy is still driven by natural resources exploration (including many of the jobs in Vancouver) and the important of diversifying the economy. An enormous amount of the wealth in Metro Vancouver is created outside the City and a lot politicians don't get that. She does.

You got that right. They will typically scrape and save, and even live house poor, to be able to live in something they own. Like you, I do not make accusations against a specific visible minority buying up properties in Canada. The provincial and federal governments have said that it is not considered an issue. The issue is Canadians going for low down payment mortgages, or conventional mortgages but with a 35 year amortization. I've seen people go to great lengths to say there is dirty money from somewhere. If anything,. dirty money comes across 0 avenue in southern BC in duffle bags. YVR has dogs(real animals, not an insulting term for officers) that sniff out undeclared money.

Its normal in politics for people to throw things around. That happened last year during the Vancouver municipal election, but the incumbent Mayor still won. There is no doubt of the natural resources outside of Vancouver and the local staff that support those industries.

Vancouver has this issue with heritage homes and classic architecture, as do many people on this board. In other words, since preservation of the character(single family homes) of many places is considered important, Vancouver is going higher, since other than in limited areas such as the Norquay Development Zone and the Cambie Corridor, there isn't a whole lot of upzoning being allowed in Vancouver, thus limiting supply

[st7860]

Originally Posted by casper

Pretty broad mix.

What we should be asking is any vote that comes up on a specific development if any of the council members received more than $5k from the developer they should abstain from voting.

We should also ask that any council member who received more than $5k from organised labour abstain from voting on any matter associated with labour contracts or labour relations.

That type of restriction will very quickly remove all the labour union donations.

Not certain what it is under BC labour law, under federal labour law if you don't like the political activates of your union you have the right to have your dues donated to a charity of your choice instead of going to the union. Also a good way of having checks-and-balances in that system.

The thing about charitable donations is interesting. I am pretty sure though that it isn't permitted in BC. BC has many special labour laws such as no replacement workers among other things.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by st7860

It is inappropriate to name specific visible minorities

It's perfectly appropriate, ESPECIALLY when the only plausible explanation for Vancouver's low rents is a certain minority's cultural preference for owning. Being several thousands km away, and only familiar with the general data, I used to be very puzzled at Vancouver's abnormally wide rents-to-property-prices gap, totally unable to find a satisfying explanation to the phenomenon, but now that I know the reason it's crystal clear and very logical.

Which is fine, BTW. It's possible to point out a fact without automatically implying that it's a negative trait.

[casper]

Originally Posted by st7860

The thing about charitable donations is interesting. I am pretty sure though that it isn't permitted in BC. BC has many special labour laws such as no replacement workers among other things.

Wikipedia has a short article on the process that exists under federal labour law. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rand_formula

Personally I think federal labour law and occupational safety regulations are better in being less prescriptive and putting the responsibility on employees and employees to do the right thing more so than an inspector. The number of industries under federal law is fairly limited (aviation, railways, banking, ports, nuclear and telcos). It use to be around 10-20% of employees were under federal rules ad the majority were under provincial rules. Not certain what it is today.

[st7860]

Originally Posted by casper

Wikipedia has a short article on the process that exists under federal labour law. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rand_formula

Personally I think federal labour law and occupational safety regulations are better in being less prescriptive and putting the responsibility on employees and employees to do the right thing more so than an inspector. The number of industries under federal law is fairly limited (aviation, railways, banking, ports, nuclear and telcos). It use to be around 10-20% of employees were under federal rules ad the majority were under provincial rules. Not certain what it is today.

10 years ago in BC the Government changed the rules and cut down the number of inspectors etc but that's just basic law, nothing related with organized labour

http://thetyee.ca/News/2004/03/03/Ripe_for_Abuse/
"There wasn't the same appetite to enforce labour standards," he says. "We went from being enforcers of labour standards to being wage dispute resolvers. The self-help kit, introduced in July 2002 basically said we're not here for you."

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by st7860

https://www.biv.com/article/2014/11/conference-torpedoes-vancouver-housing-myths/
"Metro Vancouver housing is affordable. The market is stable. There is no glut of new condominiums looming. And foreign investors are not driving sales and prices higher." - It is inappropriate to name specific visible minorities

Seriously, you're quoting an article that is using chief condopusher Bob rennie as an unbiased source?

And you apparently missed this very important line in the piece: "While conceding that there is no definitive data on the scale of foreign buyers..."

[lio45]

Originally Posted by st7860

You got that right. They will typically scrape and save, and even live house poor, to be able to live in something they own.

"They"? May I ask for clarification? Who exactly is "they"?

[ssiguy]

Vancouver rents are certainly pricey but not ridiculously so. It's the real estate that is outrageous by any standard and bizarre when considering Vancouverites low income levels and Vancouver being a small and relatively unimportant city.

At this point, it's too late. The damage is done and now real estate developers have become so thick with out politicians and local media that it will never change. Vancouver has become addicted to real estate.............it's economy is completely dependent on it and the governments know it. Even politicians who are horrified by what they see know that putting the brakes on would devastate the economy.

The houses will continue to be torn down at around the current 1400 a year in the city alone {nearly none of which are replaced by anything but other houses}, the city's character and history will be destroyed and the city will continue to become even more economically and socially stratified than it already is.

[st7860]

I like heritage preservationists because keeping many older homes helps reduce the supply of new single family homes keeping the market rising.

http://www.vancitybuzz.com/2015/04/vancouver-ranked-8th-list-north-south-american-cities-future/
"Large North American Cities of the Future: Economic Potential
1. Vancouver, British Columbia"

[casper]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

....
The houses will continue to be torn down at around the current 1400 a year in the city alone {nearly none of which are replaced by anything but other houses}, the city's character and history will be destroyed and the city will continue to become even more economically and socially stratified than it already is.

If you want to avoid existing homes being "destroyed" and the high cost of single family homes, then lobby the government to abolish the agricultural land reserve. That will free up a lot of land in Richmond, Surry and the valley for residential development.

Please like Ontario don't have an agricultural land reserve. The end result is urban sprawl.

Personally, I think the lower mainland has some of the richest agricultural land in the country and the government needs to do more, not less to ensure a local food supply is protected.

[niwell]

Originally Posted by casper

Please like Ontario don't have an agricultural land reserve. The end result is urban sprawl.

Except you know, the largest protected greenbelt in the world. Which primarily protects agriculture.

[1overcosc]

Have they gotten around to expanding the Greenbelt's scope to go out to KW, Barrie, and Cobourg? I've heard about that a lot but I have yet to see any documents showing it actually happened.. That extension is necessary to stop leapfrogging.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by st7860

I like heritage preservationists because keeping many older homes helps reduce the supply of new single family homes keeping the market rising.

http://www.vancitybuzz.com/2015/04/vancouver-ranked-8th-list-north-south-american-cities-future/
"Large North American Cities of the Future: Economic Potential
1. Vancouver, British Columbia"

Do you honestly think house prices can rise faster than inflation/income/rent perpetually?

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Have they gotten around to expanding the Greenbelt's scope to go out to KW, Barrie, and Cobourg? I've heard about that a lot but I have yet to see any documents showing it actually happened.. That extension is necessary to stop leapfrogging.

Isn't the intention precisely to encourage leap-frogging? The Region of Waterloo has been working toward a more populous, denser future, although the OMB doesn't seem to have got the message.

[niwell]

Even without the greenbelt there are fairly robust provincial planning mechanisms to deter sprawl. Plus, those areas are within the scope of Places to Grow. That mandates where growth can occur, and municipalities are required to conform. There are still some hangovers from years ago that get by the OMB, but it's been relatively successful in directing growth. IIRC Waterloo has more than exceeded its intensification target, despite not having all portions of the regional OP approved.

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Have they gotten around to expanding the Greenbelt's scope to go out to KW, Barrie, and Cobourg? I've heard about that a lot but I have yet to see any documents showing it actually happened.. That extension is necessary to stop leapfrogging.

While sprawl control is a benefit, I think the main benefit of the Greenbelt is that it protects prime agricultural land and the Oak Ridges Moraine aquifer.

Beyond that, the agricultural land is "not so prime" and there's also not a major source of groundwater - or, at least, not a source that's as threatened and used as the Oak Ridges moraine.

So what I'm saying is that I think the Greenbelt is doing its job, and to expand it would be mostly to curtail a "sprawl" that I don't think is really happening. When new subdivisions are built in KW or Peterborough, those are really serving the KW and Peterborough labour market and commuter patterns, and not that of Toronto.

[TownGuy]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Have they gotten around to expanding the Greenbelt's scope to go out to KW, Barrie, and Cobourg? I've heard about that a lot but I have yet to see any documents showing it actually happened.. That extension is necessary to stop leapfrogging.

The Greenbelt already runs east of Cobourg. It doesn't wrap around south to Lake Ontario though which is interesting.

[TownGuy]

Found a more interesting and legible map.


http://www.greenbelt.ca/toronto_star_series_week6_future_2014